Police Looking to Install GPS Tracking

At this past City Council meeting, Chief Wilkerson requested funds to install GPS trackers in the squad cars and spoke about Canadian National installing them on their trains as well.  The purpose would be so that the dispatchers could see the locations of all the squad cars when sending officers out to respond to incidents.  Also they would be able to know if a train was blocking on of the at-grade crossings or would be by the time a squad car needed to get through.  This would allow them to let the officers know if they needed to take an alternative route.  This is a great use of technology and helps to offset effects of additional trains.  There is also the benefit of knowing where officers are if they need assistance, but cannot radio their location to the dispatcher.

There are other uses for this technology though that the police department may not be as excited about.  This technology could create a record of where the officers have patrolled on each shift, including how long they spent at City Hall, sitting in parking lots talking to each other, and other less productive activities.  It could also be used to see where they actually patrol and determine if they are where they are most needed as well as if they are neglecting some areas.  This would be a valuable tool for the Chief and any supervisors in the department to use, but I can imagine that the officers would not like that sort of scrutiny and oversight.  Although based on some of the stories I have heard about the department, it might be warranted.

I would be concerned about the liability issues it could raise though.  I envision lawyers walking into court and now having evidence that no officers had patrolled an area all night despite known problems in that area.  Or were all sitting at city hall and were slow to respond to a call across town.  I am not saying that such arguments might not be justified, I am just concerned about the potential liability this city would have if practices were not improved.  Hopefully, this technology can be put to good use to improve our current practices and actually become more effective than would have otherwise been possible.  Then the liability issues would be of far less concern and we would all benefit from better policing.

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.

TIF District Follow-Up

The work session tonight did not shed much additional light on the proposed TIF district.  The Mayor introduced the idea of TIF districts by saying that he has seen them used by surrounding communities and that there are consultants who are willing to meet with the city without charge to discuss the matter.  No indication was given of what areas were being considered for inclusion in a TIF district.  A work session is planned for next month when consultants will come and discuss TIF districts in greater detail.  The superintendents of both elementary school districts were invited to tonight's meeting and have asked to continue to be involved in all discussions.  This is an important step since TIF districts can have significant impacts upon the schools.  One citizen stood up to voice his opposition to TIF districts that are used improperly because of the tax impacts that they can have on the rest of the city.  This was a very healthy start to the discussions of a TIF district even if no specifics were offered.  I hope that the Council keeps the schools as well as the citizens involved and do not just listen to the consultants who have a financial interest in creating TIF districts.  As more information becomes available, I will share it as well as giving my analysis of any proposals.

TIF District Under Consideration

The City Council will be discussing Tax Increment Financing (TIF) districts at tonight's work session.  TIF districts are a tool that has been used by cities to promote economic development of depressed areas.  Such districts are not without controversy though because the benefits they provide come at a cost to other areas and taxing bodies.

A TIF district is a defined area encompassing all the properties within the boundaries that are created for it.  The amount of property taxes received by each of the taxing bodies is frozen for 23 years.  Over those years as the property values increase, the taxes paid also increase; but the increased amount is paid to the city and goes to a designated TIF fund.  That increased amount is the tax increment.  This money is then used to pay for improvements within the TIF district that are meant to attract new development to the TIF district.  These improvements can be anything from streetscaping to parking garages to even providing incentives directly to businesses.  The funds are not supposed to pay for ordinary operating expenses such as filling potholes, plowing streets, or providing police protection.  The area encompassed within a TIF district are meant to be properties that are currently blighted and are not reasonably expected to be able to be improved otherwise.

Many cities have used TIF districts to create new economic development and have seen them as very useful tools.  They feel that without the TIF districts redevelopment of blighted areas would not have been possible.  TIF districts are able to provide large amounts of money for redevelopment especially in cases where the improvements are put in early on using borrowed money and then paid back over the 23 years as the increased tax increment dollars are collected.  This of course exposes the city to the risk that the increase is not sufficient to pay back the debt.

TIF districts are opposed by some because of the effect they can have on other taxing bodies, their long life, and their misuse in some cities.  The amount that other taxing bodies receive in property taxes from a TIF district are frozen for 23 years.  The reasoning behind this is that these are blighted properties that would not otherwise have increased in value if not for the improvements.  However, this is a false notion because one would be hard pressed to find any property in this area, even the most blighted, that is today paying less in taxes than they were in 1986.  A rising tide lifts all boats.  This means that the schools, parks, and fire districts are losing out on revenue they otherwise would have collected even if no new development had happened. 

TIF districts can also create new costs for other taxing bodies that did not previously exist.  If a TIF district is developed to include condos and other residential uses in an area that previously had none there are no more students to be educated, but no additional funds to pay for that education.  The rest of the taxpayers outside of the TIF district would have to pick up that cost.  The same would be true of increased need for policing if the TIF contained additional commercial uses such as bars, restaurants, and shopping.  Many proponents of TIF districts claim that they do not increase anyone's taxes.  However, the additional costs created that cannot be paid using TIF funds must be paid for by someone and that someone will be all the taxpayers outside of the TIF district.

The third concern raised is the misuse of TIF districts.  They are meant for blighted and depressed areas that would not otherwise be able to be redeveloped into a higher, better use.  There are certainly cities that have found areas that this applies to.  However, others have taken areas that are already improving and used TIF districts to speed the process along or to be able to provide even greater economic incentives to developers.  TIF districts were not meant to be used as a common economic development tool in all situations, they are instead meant for specific circumstances.  This is a concern because of the costs that TIF districts can impose upon other taxing bodies and on the taxpayers.  That cost may be worthwhile if it leads to development that would not otherwise be possible, but it would be a high price to pay for development that could have been brought about by other means.

I have been involved in the creation and administration of TIF districts in other cities and have seen the potential benefits they offer as well as the problems they create.  Before the city creates on, it is important that we all are educated and informed.  This means that we need to know exactly what properties will be included, what the money will be spent on, if financial incentives are being given to businesses, and what the impact on the schools and other taxing bodies will be.  Following tonight's work session, I will post details of what is being proposed by the city as well as my own analysis of the information presented.

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.

Wasting Money

Crest Hill has found yet another way to waste the taxpayers' money.  This time I had to look no further than my mailbox.  I received vehicle sticker applications for eight vehicles.  Of these only two were for vehicles currently owned.  

Four were for vehicles that had been registered to previous residents who have not lived at my address since at least 2005.  Yet, the City has seen the need to send applications each year.  The other two were for vehicles that I donated to charities in 2006 and 2007.  Neither of these were registered with the city in 2008.  Would it be so difficult for the City to purge its records of vehicles that were not registered last year? I could even see giving them an extra year in case some people overlooked getting a sticker for one year, but why send for vehicles last registered in 2005 or before?

Even more distressing is that the postcards were sent with first class postage as if they were letters and not post cards.  This means that every single application sent out was at an extra cost of 15 cents.  That may seem small, but it adds up when you think of how many thousands of vehicles are in Crest Hill and then add the thousands of vehicles that used to be in Crest Hill and still get postcards.

Once we figure the cost of printing and mailing all the applications, the cost of the actual vehicle stickers, and the time spent by city staff administering the vehicle sticker program; a significant portion of the revenue is spent on that.  It is wasteful to have in place a tax that has little purpose beyond raising enough revenue to continue to be administered and enforced.

The time as come to evaluate this program and determine if it is worth saving.  City Clerk Christine Vershay-Hall has stated previously that she thinks the vehicle stickers should be done away with.  And I agree that as long as the cost of the sticker is held so low, there is no reason to continue it.  And this does not seem to be a good time to raise the cost of stickers.  I would much rather see the stickers ended.  The loss of revenue will be minor because the cost savings would be significant.  If the stickers are not eliminated; the process of sending applications and issuing stickers needs to be made much more efficient.  

Trashing the Principles of Good Government

Public bodies typically put contracts for goods and services out to bid for a number of reasons.  The primary reason is to obtain the best price possible through competition.  Additional reasons relate to fairness to all businesses, eliminating discrimination, and reducing corruption.

The best price for a good or service can be obtained through competition, which is the basis of the bidding process.  As an example lets pretend that I am going to buy your car.  In one case, I ask you to tell me how much you will sell your car to me for and tell you that I want your car and will not buy a car from anyone else or even find out the price of a similar car from anyone else.  In the second case, I ask you how much you will sell your car to be for ad tell you that I will be getting prices from 5 other people with nearly identical cars and will buy the one with the lowest price.  In which case will you give me the lowest price?  I think the clear answer is that the lowest price will be given in the second case where there is competition.  Of course, some people may ask for the same amount in both cases, but it would seem pretty illogical for anyone to offer a lower price in the first case.

Well, most of the City Council has decided that Allied Waste is illogical and will offer the city the best price on garbage service if they are allowed to propose a 5 year contract without having to bid against other companies.  Instead of finding out what other companies would charge to provide service they have decided to seek a proposal from one company only.  Ray Soliman was that only Council member to speak up against this plan.  The rest of the Council and the Mayor decided that financial responsibility and good government are not of importance.

It is possible that Allied Waste will provide the best service at the lowest price.  However, we will never know if that is the case unless we allow all companies interested in providing garbage service to bid for the contract.  What is the Council's reason to oppose bidding?  Their publicly stated reason is that they believe that Allied Waste will bid a higher price if faced with competition than they would offer if only their proposal in considered.  That seems to run counter to logic, but we all know that there are members of this Council who would never let logic stop them from violating every principle of good government that they can violate.  As for the members who normally support the principles of good government and fiscal responsibility, I can only hope that they will realize their error before approving a contract without bids.  Ray Soliman was the lone voice on the right side of the issue at the work session on November 21, but I will be looking for others to join him when the issue comes up in a Council meeting.

Another item to be aware of besides the decision not to put the contract out to bid, is that the Council is looking for Allied Waste to hold rates flat for the first two years and defer the increases until the third, fourth, and fifth year of the contract.  I can assure you that the increases in the last three years of the contract will be considerable in order to make up for the lower rates the first two years.  On top of this they are looking to allow Allied Waste to add a fuel surcharge if fuel prices go above a set price.  The residents will be forced to help Allied Waste cover their fuel costs if diesel prices go up again, but we will not have our garbage rates go down if diesel prices fall.  The City Council sees no problem with this one sided proposal. 

The only possible positive is that they are looking to provide wheeled containers with lids to all the homes for trash and recyclables.  There some definite benefits to this idea and I know a number of people have been asking for this.  Of course there is no reason why this could not have been included in a request for bids from other companies.