Higher Taxes Coming to Crest Hill

At the last work session concerning the City budget at the end of June, the budget as it stood after all the adjustments made during the weeks of hearings was presented.  Mayor Soliman then followed with questions of the council members regarding their opinions on various budget issues.  The final budget was approximately $300,000 in deficit even after every fix was made.

The Mayor kicked off the questions by asking each Council member individually if they would support increasing the utility tax on electricity and natural gas or the sales tax.  The City Administrator and the Mayor discussed the rates in surrounding communities to justify that Crest Hill is below average in taxes and should catch up.  The majority of Council members supported doubling the utility tax to bring in a little of $100,000 of additional revenue annually.  This will be enacted in the near future since the Mayor got the support he needed to raise it.  The Council was also open to raising the sales tax, but recognized that it would be years before any additional revenue would be seen, since the tax would need to be approved by the voters and they would need to do a long educational campaign before there would be any chance of getting it passed at referendum.

The Mayor then asked each member if they were comfortable with the budget being in deficit as it stood.  A number were comfortable with it either because they felt that it was the best that could be done under the current circumstances, felt that a great effort had been made and it was much better than it could have been, or recognized that a large part of the deficit is due to one time costs due to switching insurance.  Others were uncomfortable with it, but were challenged by the Mayor and council members who pointed out that there had already been weeks of discussion and that a budget had to get passed.  There seemed to be an attitude of this is the best that we could come up with so everyone should be comfortable with it.

The final question each alderman was asked was if they had any ideas to fix the budget.  A number of members advocated tightening on small expenses such as costs of conferences,  the purchasing coffee and disposable cups for City Hall, and the Mayor's gas and petty cash expenditures.  These items would not make a huge dent in the budget, but were looked at as every penny counts and making sure the Council was feeling some of the pain as well as the city staff.  Alderman Sternisha spoke on some of the suggestions he has made to the Council early on in the hearings regarding freezing salaries and not hiring more employees, but he did not have the whole list because the Council had not been expecting this line of questioning at this particular budget hearing.  Alderman Convery for some reason decided to attack Sternihsa's suggestion of not hiring more employees and kept asking him to be specific as to who not to hire.  Convery did not seem to grasp the idea that not hiring any additional employees did not mean to firing recently hired employees, but instead meant that from that point forward not hiring any more.  The Treasurer also spoke on some of his ideas for furlough days for city employees and creating an annual business license as opposed to the current license that is good forever.  He was pointing out that Menard's paid $25 for a business license that is good forever, while many households pay more than that each year just to get city vehicle stickers.  The City Clerk got quite upset at this since her office would have to issue the permits and she had not been consulted.

The Mayor gave everyone an insight into his thinking just in the order of the questions and how he presented them.  His first thought was to raise taxes, then to gauge comfort with being in deficit, and lastly to looking for other solutions.  This city needs leadership who put finding solutions and alternatives first and put raising taxes as last resort.  Unfortunately, Mayor Soliman looks to our pocketbooks first and makes it clear that higher taxes come before all else.

Soliman Looks to Appoint Wilkerson as Chief

In tonight's City Council work session, Mayor Soliman announced his intention to appoint Dwayne Wilkerson as Police Chief.  Mayor Soliman listed among his reasons, the excellent job Acting Chief Wilkerson has done over the past year, his desire to promote from within when possible, and the years of service that Acting Chief Wilkerson has already given to the city.  The City Attorney is reviewing a proposed employment contract, the City Council will be given a chance to speak further with Acting Chief Wilkerson, and the appointment will be on the June 15th agenda.  

This appointment will allow the city's police department to continue to function under a proven leader.  It will also finally end the long vacancy that has existed in the office of Chief of Police.  Mayor Soliman also expressed his belief that by appointing someone already in the department the message is being sent that any officer can work hard and be promoted within this city.  This is a valuable message and will help to build morale and hopefully also attract officers who are looking for stability and a career in Crest Hill.  Mayor Soliman also spoke of the difficulties that have been faced by communities bringing in outsiders who often have trouble dealing with the culture of a department with which they are not familiar.

New Beginnings

Crest Hill bills itself as the "City of New Beginnings" and tonight the City Council did its best to live up to that slogan.  The work session held tonight was long and contained a great deal discussion, as well as friendly ribbing.  The Council used it as a chance to discuss both immediate changes that are part of the new administration as well as longer range ideas.  It was a meeting that really looked at what the city is facing and tried to address those issues as well as continue to set a tone for how things will operate from now on.

The change in the feel of the meeting was what most stood out to me.  All Council members voiced their thoughts without attacking each other or taking sides.  In fact at times it was hard to figure out exactly where people stood on issues.  That is healthy though because it was a result of their asking questions and putting forth ideas of future consideration.  I am happy to see Council members not making up their minds at work sessions.  Where Mayor Soliman turned to myself and the other citizen in the audience and asked our opinions, I must admit I was absolutely shocked.  Few mayors would take such a step, but it definitely showed Mayor Soliman's commitment to inclusiveness.  I do not know if he will be able to do this every time, but hopefully it is a practice that will continue at least of issues of particular importance.  

The issues discussed were of great importance tonight and deserve to be addressed in depth individually.  Some of the items of discussion were a possible sales tax increase, appointment of a Police Chief, other mayoral appointments, city signs, City Hall modifications, and the long range plans for Public Works and City Hall. 

A New Day in Crest Hill

The voters of Crest Hill have spoken today and have made it clear that the era of unethical and scandalous government is over.  Mayor Churnovic was defeated in his bid for re-election and the City Council candidates he supported and funded were defeated as well.  This is a good day for Crest Hill.  Four years ago many people were happy to see change, but few realized that change was not always for the better.  Today though we have seen real change and that change is for the better.

Our city will be led by a Ray Soliman, a man who has spent years pushing for open government and calling on the city to follow the proper procedures.  I feel strongly that Mayor Soliman will lead the city with a strong sense of ethics and care for citizens.  I am sure I will disagree with some of his decisions and positions, but I look forward to having a Mayor who will treat all citizens with fairness.

Aldermen Dyke, Lelis, and Convery were re-elected.  Lelis and Convery have been very outspoken on pushing for city government to be more responsive and for the Council and Mayor to work together to improve Crest Hill.  They have also both been very strong advocates for the interests of their wards.  Alderman Dyke is a very level-headed and practical member of the Council.  He did not take on the corruption of the past four years head on, but he has always conducted himself independently of the disputes among other members of the Council.  These three aldermen will serve the city well for the next four years.

The third ward, where I live, elected a new alderman, Neal Sternisha.  I have had the chance to get to know Neal and talk with him on many occasions and look forward to having him as my alderman and also look forward to what he will bring to the Council as a whole.  In particular his professional background in the water and wastewater fields is of particular value to a city facing massive capital outlays to improve our own systems in those areas.  In addition, he is someone who has spoken out for the need for more ethical government in Crest Hill and stood up to a brutal campaign financed by Nick Churnovic.

This is truly a bright new day in Crest Hill.  I hope that all of those who won election tonight remember that it was the desire of the people of Crest Hill for a more ethical and open government that got them elected.  I will be looking forward to seeing a better government, but also will be looking to see Crest Hill move forward and continue to develop to its full potential.

City Awards Garbage Contract Without Bids

Last night the City Council voted to award a five year contract to Allied Waste for garbage, recycling and yard waste collection.  Bids from other companies were not sought before this contract for in excess of $5,000,000 was awarded.  I have written previously regarding why bidding makes good fiscal sense and is the financially responsible thing to do (http://cresthill-illinois.blogspot.com/2008/12/trashing-principles-of-good-government.html).  I have also written about the Committee to Re-Elect the Mayor accepting a large donation from Allied Waste and the ethical issues that poses (http://cresthill-illinois.blogspot.com/2008/12/mayoral-ethics-part-ii.html).  

Not only did Alderpersons Vershay, Oberlin, Brandolino, Dyke, and Inman vote as if they believed that bidding had no sound purpose and that there was nothing wrong with those seeking city contracts giving political contributions; they actually voiced such opinions.  It was shocking to hear such statements expressed by those who have been entrusted by the public to act in the best interest of the city and its citizens.  

Alderwoman Oberlin stated that to go out to bid would be like gambling that we have no way of knowing that we would get a better price by doing so.  She also stated that it would be irresponsible to gamble like that.  In fact, we would not be gambling as we know the outcomes so long as we can assume that Allied Waste is run by rational people seeking to make a profit.  We would get a price at least as good if not better by going out to bid because the addition of competition would drive prices down.  My previous post goes into this in greater detail.  The truth though is that there is nothing irresponsible about going out to bid, there is in fact something very irresponsible about not seeking the lowest cost for the citizens of Crest Hill.

Alderman Inman commented that there was no connection between the Mayor, the contributions by Allied Waste to his campaign, and this contract.  Well, the connection between the Mayor and the contributions is clear and direct.  It is also apparent that the Mayor spoke in work sessions supporting awarding the contract without bidding.  He also worked to negotiate this contract.  Alderman Inman may think that because the fuel surcharge was negotiated out, the Mayor did a good job and the city got a great deal.  Well, the truth is that in any negotiation the terms are on the table and to have negotiated out of new language that few other cities have ever agreed to is not a huge victory.  And even if t had been an amazing negotiation, considering only one company to the exclusion of all others is irresponsible.

Two of the men running for Mayor spoke up in opposition to awarding this large contract without going out for bid and should be commended for their efforts.  Alderman Soliman spoke to the point that I believe is central which is that any price given in these negotiations should be able to have submitted as a bid, if not an even lower price.  Mr. Semplinski brought up the very insightful point that if Allied Waste can afford to hold the price for the next year the same as it was this year, they must have been able to make a pretty good profit this year and probably had more room to offer a lower price.  I wish the incumbent Mayor had the wisdom to put forth such good thoughts and to encourage those who follow his lead to have done the right thing.

Mayoral Ethics, Part II

A few months ago it was revealed that the Committee to Re-Elect Mayor Nick Churnovic had accepted donations from two engineering firms that were actively seeking to do business with the City at that time.  A portion of the City Council at that time spoke out against his actions and publicly stated that they did not want to see pay-to-play politics become the way Crest Hill is run.  

Well, the Mayor has now reaffirmed his belief that pay-to-play is the means by which he is governing the City of Crest Hill.  His re-election committee has accepted money from Allied Waste.  This is the same company that is looking to get a five year garbage services contract from the City without bidding.  Mayor Churnovic expressed his strong support that the Council not go out for bid but instead consider only proposals from Allied Waste.  The reason for this is now very clear.

Apparently, there is no need to bid for contracts with the City if you contribute to the Mayor's re-election campaign.  This is a clear abuse of his office as Mayor and a betrayal of the public trust.  How many other instances are there of the Mayor accepting donations from those either doing business with or seeking to do business with the City?  After seeing how the State has been hurt by this type of corruption, do we really want this for Crest Hill?  

The time has come to demand better from our politicians.  We do not need a Mayor who trades city contracts for campaign contributions any more than we need a Governor who sells a Senate seat for campaign contributions.  Why would we want the shame of pay-to-play politics on a local level?  The Mayor has shown repeatedly that he desires to run the city in this manner though.  The voters need to send a clear message come April by voting to replace the Mayor and any other official that supports his way of running this city.

Upcoming Spring Election

I am looking forward to the 2009 Spring Municipal Election here in Crest Hill. It could be a chance to see real change come to this city and with it the idea that government should be responsible to the people. This will require good candidates to come out and stand for election. I can understand why many people would not want to subject themselves to being part of a City Council that has seen members yell at each other, the Mayor yell at members and cut them off short, the Treasurer refuse to provide requested information in a timely manner, and citizens treated as if their opinions and problems were trivial. This is not an ideal environment, but it is all the more reason why we need as many citizens as possible to step up and put themselves forward to serve this city. We need people to step up and run for all the offices that will be open. These offices will be Mayor, Treasurer, Clerk, and one council member in each of the four wards. There will be some good people who will hopefully chose to run for re-election, however I would still encourage everyone to get involved. Democracy is made healthier by having choices. If you have any interest in serving and making this a better city, please put yourself out there, talk to others in this city, and take the time to learn the steps necessary to run.

As some of you know, I made an effort to run for office in 2007 and was removed from the ballot for technical reasons due to an effort to limit the voters choice. I learned from that experience and would be happy to share my knowledge with others and to give my support and encouragement to anyone wishing to run.

Mayoral Ethics

Two weeks ago, it was revealed that the committee to reelect Mayor Churnovic had accepted donations from two engineering firms seeking to do business with the City of Crest Hill. It was certainly disappointing to find out that the unethical way of doing business that is so common in Springfield and Chicago as is how things work in Crest Hill. It is not clear if the committee solicited the donations knowing that the firms were looking to get city contracts worth hundreds of thousands of dollars. And it is not clear how much direct control the Mayor had over the actions of the committee.

Since that time, Mayor Churnovic has made donations to three local charities in the amount that the engineering firms had given to the committee to re-elect him. He seems to think that this solves the problem and relieves him of all ethical questions. That is simply not true. This is merely the first step that needs to be taken.

Next, he needs to publicly state if the committee solicited the donations or if the engineering firms gave them without being solicited in any way. And he needs to state what his involvement and knowledge of the committee's actions were. Then based upon those facts he needs to take further action.

If the donations were completely unsolicited, Mayor Churnovic should make it clear to his committee that no donations are to be accepted from any company or individual seeking to do business with the city. No further action would be needed beyond that as long as the committee acts ethically from that point forward.

If the donations were solicited, the Mayor needs to disavow himself of the committee and all those involved with it in any way. That means not accepting any of the funds they have raised, not including the members of the committee on his re-election campaign, and definitely not giving them appointments within city government.

And of course if the Mayor had prior knowledge that the committee was going to engage in pay-to-play politics and approved of their absolutely unethical activities, there is no reason why he should continue to lead the city. I have no reason to believe that is the case and definitely hope that it isn't. I would hope that Crest Hill and our Mayor is above such activities.

While accepting money from those seeking to do business with the city is not illegal, it is unquestionably unethical. Pay-to-play politics has greatly hurt the state government and local governments throughout the state. I do not want to see it introduced to Crest Hill. Especially at a time when the State is currently looking to outlaw such practices at the state level.

A New Tax and Lack of Citizen Involvement

At the July 7th, 2008 City Council meeting several citizens addressed the Council to ask about the proposed Utility Tax and specifically why more public participation was not sought. The Mayor and Council answered these questions with resounding silence. The Mayor is not one to let any comment go without a response even if his only response is to be dismissive to the citizens of Crest Hill. This time he and the other members of the Council sat silent because the only response that could have been given was that they did not want citizens to participate in the consideration of this new tax. Their hope is that the tax is silently implemented and no one notices.

This is simply the wrong attitude for our elected officials to have. The public deserves to be included in the making of all decisions, especially the enactment of a new tax. Regardless of how badly the city needs the revenue or how much better this new tax might be than the alternatives, the public still deserves to be engaged. Tell us why this tax is needed, tell us what other options are out there, listen to our opinions, solicit our ideas for alternatives, and then make an informed decision and do what you believe is best for Crest Hill and its residents. That is all I and many of my fellow citizens ask of our Mayor and City Council.

A Mayor or a Dictator

At one point during the May 5th City Council meeting, I found myself thinking that maybe I had been too harsh on Mayor Churnovic in the past and that perhaps he did deserve some praise. This came after he had spoken on the successful efforts to keep Statesville open, his trip to the Philippines, and his upcoming trip to Las Vegas. These all seemed to show him to be an active and dedicated mayor. It took only moments though for those thoughts to quickly be shattered.

Mayor Churnovic explained his plan to circumvent the City Council and begin the process of hiring a new Police Chief. He then proceeded to scream at Alderperson Convery when questioned about this matter. It is just shameful that a mayor would not only ignore the desires of the City Council and the advice of the just retired Police Chief, but would then throw a fit when questioned.

This show was not enough for Mayor Churnovic though. He next was asked why he had held several events in different wards and not given the alderpersons for those wards a courtesy notice. Meeting with residents is definitely a positive thing to do, but the Mayor should show some courtesy and invite the alderpersons as well, especially if he is inviting other city officials. Instead of taking this constructive suggestion from 3 alderpersons, Mayor Churnovic defended his lack of consideration by being condescending and rude.

Crest Hill deserves a city government that can work together for the betterment of this city. That will not happen as long as we have a Mayor that yells at Council members and treats them with contempt. No matter how hard Mayor Churnovic works to develop Crest Hill, it is all for nothing if he allows his bad attitude and lack of self-control tear the City Council apart and make citizens afraid to question him.

Response to an Anonymous Critic, Part II

Here is part two of my response to Anonymous.

Anonymous stated:
P.S. one of the problems with the city is all the residents that have lived here less than 5 years that think the know the city. Maybe you need to go back and see how things were run in this city prior to Churnovic. All of the aldermen/alderwomen under Randich were "yes" people. Nothing got done and if Randich didn't want it it didn't get passed. No matter how good it was for the city.

My response:
In a city in which the majority of its residents have lived here for less than five years this type of comment has no place. I will admit that I do not know how the city was run under Randich. However, the most important thing is not if I know about the Crest Hill of yesteryear, but if I know what good government is. I do know what good government is and I do know what I should expect from a well run local government. That is what I want. If Randich did not deliver good government then, I wish to thank all of you who voted him out of office. However, that does not mean that we should stop demanding better government.

As for my opinions about Mr. Churnovic.... I honestly think that he dominates Crest Hill government in a way that is not healthy for the city and that he is often very dismissive of residents who questions him. However, I think that this comes from the fact that he faced a lot of opposition when first elected and that he feels that he can overcome opposition by using his powers as Mayor. That being said, he is an intelligent man who truly believes that he is doing his best for Crest Hill. I do not think he has ever done anything that he did not fully believe was right and in the public interest. I admire his dedication and determination. I do disagree with some of the things that he has done. However, I have never called for him to be ousted from office, I would prefer to see him focus on making city government more inclusive and open. And I would like to see more moves towards good government in Crest Hill. I do not see any reason why the current Mayor and most of the City Council cannot be the ones to move in that direction. I am neither for or against changing the faces at the head table, I am for changing some of their actions though.

Response to an Anonymous Critic, Part I

I have previously responded to some comments by posting comments myself and I have corresponded with some readers by e-mail. However, there have been some recent comments that I feel should be addressed in their own postings. This first one is being split in half because then last shot that the writer took at me and others deserves to be a subject on its own and in fact is of greater importance than this first item I will respond to. It would be interesting to know who the anonymous commenter was, however he/she did not feel confident enough to leave a name or e-mail address.

Anonymous stated:
You are partially right in regards to the opens meeting act, however, I believe you need a hearning aid because they do say why they are going into a closed session. They may not list each item prior to adjourning to closed session but during the course of the meeting it is mentioned that a executive session is needed. Second - if your truly read the law then you know it is permissable to have an executive session for personnel. Would you like your employer to discuss you in front of everyone, whether it was your evaluation, medical condition for a medical leave or a discpline problem. I think not so get off it. I don't think you mentioned that by "law" you can hold an executive, or closed, session for personnel, litigation, and/or land acquisition. I also belive that by law the minutes from said closed session are available for review after 6 months by filing a freedom of information act. So file away!

My response:
The intent of the law is that the reasons for the closed session are to be part of the motion for the closed session. Off-hand comments during the meeting as to issues on which a closed session is needed are not sufficient.

I never said that it was not permissible to hold a closed session for personnel reasons. I simply stated that not every issue that can be connected to personnel has to be in closed session. I do not think it would be appropriate to discuss an employees medical condition in open session, in fact that may run afoul of medical privacy laws. And I would strongly recommend that discipline and evaluations be done in closed session. However, pay and hours should be in open session. And that does mean that the question of why Employee X is not getting a raise could come up and the answer could be poor performance. And performance issues that are not related to a specific disciplinary action usually should be subject to open discussion.

I certainly do not think that closed sessions are without merit or proper usefulness. I just believe that they should be used sparingly and only when necessary for reasons of protecting key privacy of employees, protecting the city in ongoing legal and financial negotiations and where required by law.

Closed Session = Secret Government

Anyone who watches Crest Hill city council meetings has certainly noticed that there seems to be a closed session at every meeting and that when some council members ask questions the response is that it is a matter for closed session. Well, I am very uncomfortable with closed sessions and feel that government should be as open and transparent as possible. So I decided to read the actual law and to read legal opinions interpreting it. As should be expected the first thing I learned was that Crest Hill does not follow the law.

The motion for a closed session MUST state which of the specific exclusions in the Open Meetings law covers the matter that will be discussed in closed session. If they are meeting to discuss employee contracts, they must say that. If they are meeting to discuss a pending lawsuit, then they must say that. They cannot simply state that a closed session is needed without any further information.

A closed session is never required. The city council can discuss any matter they wish to in open session. If Alderman Vershay wants to know who worked overtime, when they worked, and for how many hours, the City Treasurer can and should answer that question instead of deferring it to closed session. The Open Meetings law states a limited number of topics than MAY be discussed in closed session, but does not limit what can be discussed in open session. In addition, there is no obligation of city council members to keep secret what happens in closed session. The law does not prohibit anyone in a closed session from disclosing any matter discussed and specifically states that there is no penalty or retribution for disclosure.

It is time for our city government to comply with the letter and the spirit of the law. I call upon the Mayor and the City Clerk to ensure that all future closed sessions are properly held and to inform the Council and the public that any subject may be discussed in open session if so desired. I also call upon the City Clerk to release full transcripts of all illegally held closed sessions. And finally, in order to fulfill the spirit of the law, I ask any City Council member who believes in open government to speak publicly about anything that occurs in closed session that should not be secret.

Citizen Action

The situation with water rates has motivated local residents to get active and be heard. Not only are they making their voices heard on the issue of astronomically higher water and sewer rates, but they have also brought the issue of water quality to light. People are posting on the internet, going door-to-door talking to neighbors, compiling surveys, and packing city council work sessions. This is democracy in action and I hope to see it continue until these issues are resolved and beyond that until Crest Hill once again is run for and by the citizens. This city is not going to get better overnight, but it can get much better.

I am curious though as to how Mayor Churnovic next plans to stifle citizen involvement. I am looking forward to seeing quite a crowd at the next City Council meeting. Of course, I am willing to bet that they will not even consider moving it to a location with adequate parking and seating. That would allow the citizens to observe and participate in the meeting and we can be sure that Mayor Churnovic and certain others on the council do not want to allow that to happen.

An Horrifying Meeting

I attended a portion of the Monday, May 7th Crest Hill City Council meeting and was simply amazed at how badly citizens are treated by the Mayor and some members of the City Council. I have never seen local leaders be so dismissive of citizens.

The Mayor especially took it to a whole new level. He suggested that residents who have had their homes flooded by human waste because of deficiencies in the city's sewer system should take out home equity loans to pay to install overhead sewers in their homes. As an alternative he also suggested finding a plumber who would arrange a payment plan. The obvious solution is for the city to take responsibility for their deficient sewer system and for the damage caused by its failures. He also suggested to a resident that they park in their neighbor's driveway because the city will not allow them a driveway.

The city seems to have an excuse for everything. They do not have enough money because they do not have riverboats. That was definitely a good one. I hope you do not wish to look at the city's finances to see if that is true because they do their best to hide those facts. After having seen them, I could understand why. Revenues have exceeded the budget and expenses have been below budget. Most governments would publicize such a good financial position, however Crest Hill is afraid that if people knew they would come to expect better city services. Their other excuse is that portions of the city were built before the city was incorporated. Never mind that these existing neighborhoods formed the basis for the creation of Crest Hill or that the city has had over four decades to make improvements. These excuses are outdated, it is time for our city leaders to realize that it is 2007 and not 1967.

The real proof of just how poorly Crest Hill citizens are treated can be seen in the parking lot after any council meeting. There are large groups of people milling about talking about their many problems with the city. Crest Hill would be a nice progressive city with happy residents if not for the council and some of the staff they have hired. It is too bad. Hopefully, the two new faces on council will improve the situation. And maybe the mayor will be reigned in someday.