Gottemoller Appoints Township Consolidation Committee

Carolyn Schofield

Carolyn Schofield

McHenry County Board Chairman Joe Gottemoller has appointed three County Board members and two township officials to a committee to consider township consolidation.

Chairing the committee will be Crystal Laker Carolyn Schofield.

The other two County Board members are

  • Michele Aavang, rural Woodstock
  • Donna Kurtz, Crystal Lake

One of the initiators of the idea, Nunda Township Trustee Mike Shorten, will join Coral Township Supervisor Roger Naylor to round out the committee.

= = = = =
I am still waiting for proponents to come up with a cost-benefit study showing where savings could occur.

So far, no such study has been presented.


Gottemoller Appoints Township Consolidation Committee — 14 Comments

  1. Keep asking for that study Cal, numbers and facts speak louder than wishing and political power grabbing games.

  2. I respectfully suggest that a Township Road Commissioner be added to the committee.

    Most citizens do not realize the separation of responsibilities between the Supervisor and the Road Commissioner.

    The Supervisor acts as the treasurer of the road district but has no authority or power over the road district.

  3. Seems a little biased with three people from the east side of the county where the townships don’t really matter as much and only two from the rural areas were townships really seem to help the people.

  4. everybody will find out how stupid mike shorten is, just let me talk

  5. Mike Shorten is a very nice fellow.

    He is a good person.

    He was promised the County Board Chairmanship.

    If He led this initiative.

    But he is just being used.

  6. I am hoping that the task force does not get down in the weeds with this and try to decide for the voters if consolidation is a good idea or not.

    The legislature has provided one of the few mechanisms that we have in Illinois to allow the voters to make a binding decision on governance.

    I think it was their intent that the county boards would be facilitators of this effort, and not try to sit in judgment on the merits of the issue.

    I really don’t see the purpose of a task force.

  7. The county board should get the numbers and facts together, if there is a savings to be had they should then inform the general public of there findings and only then put what they found to a vote.

    Why Mike Walkup waste more $$$$ on lawyers and printing to put something on a ballet when the numbers prove there will be no savings?

    I’m wonder why the county board is even considering this request when there is no petition with the proper number of signatures like everybody else seem to have?

    You still haven’t answered the question with numbers and facts from McHenry Co of how any $$$$ can be saved when historically big gov cost more?

  8. Donna Kurtz already made it known she is bias and supports this consolidation dealy.

    Bad pick Joe!

  9. To Mike Walkup: The statute calls for the County to formulate a specific plan for the proposed mergers and the bigger government they will create.

    Implicit in this requirement is tasking specific people to come up with the plan.

    The statute also calls for public hearings.

    Perhaps you should read up on state law sometime..?

  10. I hope the commission’s first job is to require those favoring consolidation to prove their claims of cost savings, and if they can’t, then reject the whole idea.

    Otherwise, I’m afraid that most voters will go to the polls, see the word “consolidate” and vote for it without knowing what the whole thing’s about.

  11. Obviously there is one county board member that doesn’t care for what the law says, the procedures required, and seems to not care what the costs are.

    Wow Presidential material.

  12. Mike Walkup you need to learn the county board does not even understand their place now as policy makers rather they are trying to micro manage that is what they will do here

  13. There are two separate statutes, Bill Gaines.

    One allows the County Board to simply draw up new township boundaries on it’s own (60 ILCS 1/10-5), with no subsequent referenda, and the other calls for a referendum in the townships affected with the voters of each township having to vote in in favor in order to effectuate (60 ILCS 1/10-25).

    The first one requires public hearings and a statement of the reasons, etc.

    The second does not.

    We are proceeding under the second statute.

    All we do under 1/10-25 is “adopt a plan”.

    The consolidation group has already put a plan forward as to which townships could be consolidated.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *