A press release from Alex Wimmer:
Local Attorney Alex Wimmer Announces Candidacy for County Board District 5
Alex Wimmer
Woodstock, IL November 9, 2015 – Alex Wimmer, a longtime resident of Woodstock has announced his candidacy for McHenry County Board District 5.
Mr. Wimmer works as an attorney in Crystal Lake, and resides in Woodstock with his wife and three children.
Here’s what he has to say about his candidacy:
Alex and Amy Wimmer with four-year old Scarlett and twins Theodore and Clementine.
I grew up in this County and I have grown tired of seeing the same people elected with the same results each time.
The County is stagnant and new ideas and leadership are needed to move us in the right direction.
It is my goal to bring the community back to the County Board meeting room.
We must move away from electing the same type of politicians whose lives are centered on politics instead of finding solutions to the problems we face.
I am not a political insider, but I will no longer sit on the sideline to watch as my County, my family, my friends, and my neighbors suffer under poor leadership that is disconnected from the community.
The County needs a new direction and I believe I have the work ethic and abilities to put it back on the right path. I hope to win your support in my campaign for County Board District 5.
= = = = =
Wimmer graduated from Woodstock High School, received a bachelor’s degree from Loyola University in Chicago and a Juris Doctor from the University of Illinois.
He is running as a Democrat.
Below is what he is handing out as he goes door-to-door:
Alex Wimmer handout.
The back of Alex Wimmer’s door-to-door piece.
On his web site, Wimmer says the following, among other things:
He writes about the problem of finding affordable housing and notes,
“Others that had resided here for many years have left because they could not tighten their belt any more.
“As a result, the property tax burden has been spread among fewer and fewer people resulting in higher taxes.
“Not only that, but our schools have suffered due to under-enrollment and business has suffered as a result of less money and fewer people to spend it…
“The affordability of life in McHenry County is one of many examples of why a leadership change is needed. Inefficient government, unfair spending, nepotism, and bureaucratic slowdowns are all too common in our County leadership.
“This needs to change.”
Thank God for some new blood.
Alex, the voters really want to know if your family has lived in McHenry County since 1814.
I don’t think I could vote for you if they carpetbagged their way here in the twentieth or (gasp!) twenty-first century.
Could you stage some stupid photos of you and some old dudes huddled over a table intently looking at something seemingly important?
We also demand more baby pictures!
If he really wants to reduce taxes, shouldn’t he be running in the school district where the big hurt is?
I know Alex and know him to be a good man.
I believe him to be a true fiscal conservative and I think he would be a great addition to the board.
Good luck, Alex!
Nob, doesn’t he have to run where he lives?
If he’d run as a Republican he would win.
He sounds like he has Republican values.
Not the crap that’s running under the R name nowadays (i.e. the establishment Repubs)
YES we need new blood.
Tired of the old entitled establishment candidates and those the establishment puts up.
Clear misunderstanding of taxation.
If, as a district 5 rep, he magically eliminated the entire county government it would only save approx 10% of our tax bills.
@Nob you are right.
@raw…give the whole Cameron Hubbard thing a rest.
We get it.
You think his campaign based on family history is stupid.
I am very excited for our district and our county should Mr. Wimmer get elected.
I know him personally and he is the most intelligent, open minded, well researched, and hardest working individual I know.
He will serve the people of his district and the county with unique organization, research and bi-partisan efforts, and extreme passion.
Good Luck Alex!
@ Ted-
He is willing to start the conversation somewhere.
For goodness sake, what is with you people?
Good Luck Alex, trying to get these dead beats of townspeople out to even Vote out the carpet baggers & pick-pocketers who keep getting voted in year after year after year…is going to be a challenge, its not the fact we need new blood its getting the OLD Blood OUT!!!!
so the new has a chance!…. your gonna need more than a flyer!
Don’t you know they love high taxes and being taken advantage of… that is why they sit on their duffs and do nothing about it… sad but true… why do you think so many are leaving??
He’s a grade-A Libtard … in the Tina Hill tradition.
BEWARE!!!!!
Ask him how he delights in getting section 8 transfers out of Chicago for McHenry Co.!!!!
@OldManWinter:
That’s right, I forgot that he serves on the McHenry County Housing Commission.
He’s one of the main reasons why we have more and more Section 8 housing cropping up in McHenry County.
Isn’t a conflict of interest for a Democrat to ship in Democrat voters?
UH OH, that and the fact that he’s a Democrat will kill him.
Can’t someone else run.
We have a Dem Lib’tard’ (as you like to call Wimmer) responsible for all this section 8 housing in Mch Co. and the establishment kind of seedy guy, Calomino.
COME UP WITH ANOTHER CANDIDATE, PLEASE or else we will start heading down to the Good Ol’ Boys club again, and that’s not going to be pretty!
I am reading some confusion here from the above commentators and I would like to help clear some of the discussion up.
Some people are confusing the “Housing Commission” with the “Housing Authority”.
The “Housing Commission” has nothing to do with “Section 8 Housing”.
Additionally, all recommendations from the “Housing Commission” are approved or denied by all County Board Members.
Mr. Wimmer was on the “Housing Commission”, which has nothing to do with “Section 8”.
That is the “Housing Authority”.
Also, he isn’t a commissioner any longer.
Hope this helps!
“The McHenry County Housing Commission is a recommending body as related to HUD-funded projects authorized by the McHenry County Board, and an educational resource for housing policy and planning related initiatives. The Commission reports directly to the McHenry County Board Planning and Development Committee.”
Source: https://www.co.mchenry.il.us/county-government/departments-j-z/planning-development/divisions/community-development/cd-commissions
If not Section 8, what HUD-funded projects does the Housing Commission oversee?
Herb, he doesn’t live in district 5?
If he is so fiscally responsible as Ralphie says, he should be County Superintendent of schools.
“The establishment”!!!
AHHHH!! LOL
Wait facts?
What are those?
Let’s look objectively at what Mr. Wimmer says and what Mr. Wimmer DOESN’T say.
Mr. Wimmer sees the problem with our schools as “under enrollment”.
Now, that’s scary because it implies the solution is that the County government should have more programs to encourage “growth”.
But I don’t want to put words in Mr. Wimmer’s mouth, so, Cal, why don’t YOU ask Mr. Wimmer EXACTLY what he thinks the County government should do about “under enrollment” in our schools.
Mr. Wimmer says NOTHING about the fact that our schools increase taxes by the maximum permissible under law each year despite declining enrollment.
Because the problem isn’t spending, it’s “under enrollment”.
So, again, Cal, please ask Mr. Wimmer if he thinks the schools should be cutting their taxes or not.
Mr. Wimmer says business has suffered from the decline in population, but does not propose a solution.
Now the cause of the loss in population is that our taxes are so high.
But I am fearful that Mr. Wimmer thinks we need more government programs to “encourage” growth and “encourage” business, i.e., more subsidies.
Again, though, I don’t want to put words in Mr. Wimmer’s mouth, so, Cal, please ask Mr. Wimmer exactly what he thinks the County government should do to encourage population growth so business can grow.
Having dealt with the “issues” Mr. Wimmer wants to talk about, although not in detail, let’s look at the issues Mr. Wimmer fails to address.
What does Mr. Wimmer say about the situation at Valley Hi, where the board has over taxed for many years?
He says nothing.
What does Mr. Wimmer say about the overspending by MCCD?
He says nothing.
What dos Mr. Wimmer say about the gold-plated road projects that are being proposed by the County staff and championed by certain County board members?
He says nothing.
So, Cal, please ask him his exact position on the important County issues.
Or perhaps Mr. Wimmer would be kind enough to respond to my questions right here on your blog, Cal.
That would be even better.
Mr. Wimmer: if you read Cal’s blog, and I assume you do since you sent your press release to him, please answer my questions above?
As I have said many times, I am always willing to be convinced by evidence and reasoning, so, please, Mr. Wimmer, tell us your position on each of the issues I’ve raised, and explain your justification for your positions.
We all look forward to your response.
I’d like to know where Steve Willson and Alex stand on present Township Consolidation effort or possible elimination of Townships?
Nob, I do enjoy the way you seek to change the topic of conversation when it’s touching on areas you find uncomfortable.
First of all, I ask reasonable questions of people who are running for office, questions that I think voters have a legitimate interest in because the issues are material.
But I’m not running for office, so my opinion on the topics you mention provides the voters with zero useful information for making a decision.
Wimmer IS running for office, so his opinions are material.
Second, I regard the whole township consolidation issue as immaterial to the voters.
It’s not going to happen, so who cares?
And there are issues of much greater monetary impact.
Let’s consider those issues:
Wimmer’s explanation on what proposals he has for the County government to take in order to increase school enrollment is a fair question specifically because he brought it up.
If he wants to start expensive new programs to “encourage growth” or to subsidize new businesses, the voters deserve to know.
The other questions I ask are fair game because they are material issues.
Valley Hi has collected $40 million in property taxes they don’t need.
THAT is material.
And Wimmer never mentioned it.
The County wants to “fix” the Randall-Algonquin intersection at an enormous cost, although the number keeps shifting so we can never accuse them of planning to spend any specific amount.
THAT is material.
And Wimmer never mentioned it.
MCCD has, literally, eight times the land it should have according to standards established by their own national organization.
They spent $2 million building a bike bridge over Rakow Road for “safety”.
The bike bridge is unsafe because it is too steep and ends on the south side in a sharp 90 degree turn.
And no one had died or even been in a serious accident at the corner of Pyott and Rakow, so they spent $2 million to fix one of a dozen intersections on that trail and increased safety by zero.
THAT is material.
And Wimmer never mentioned it.
It is impossible to get figures from MCCD about usage at all the parks they have, so we can’t say which are under utilized and should be closed.
And the only people on the MCCD board are cheerleaders who refuse to even consider that MCCD might be spending too much.
Their attitude is that it’s not possible to spend too much on their sacred purpose.
These problems at MCCD are material.
And Wimmer never mentioned it.
So, let’s stick to asking important questions of candidates for public office.
So again, Mr. Wimmer:
“Under enrollment” in the schools is the result of too much residential growth in too short a time resulting in construction of more and more schools, coupled with demographic changes now that are causing there to be fewer younger children as the adult population ages.
This has combined with a decrease of out migration from the cities and closer suburbs as the younger people have learned the downside of remote suburban living with it’s long commutes and high taxes and are opting to remain in closer in locations.
Study after study has shown that residential growth does not pay for itself, costing $1.25 or more for every $1 in additional tax revenues raised.
This is one of the reasons that McHenry County is in the top one percent of all the counties in the entire nation in property taxes.
Almost all of this, by the way, was the result of actions by municipalities in annexing unincorporated lands and installing large residential developments without corresponding attraction of businesses besides row on upon row of retail stores that depend on more and more roof tops to sustain them.
Recreating this pattern will do nothing and will create further problems.
“Those who do not study history are condemned to repeat it”.
Steve, your comments are often quoted by others, in fact in this blog your comments often get special mention, as you should.
Yes you’ve opted not to run, but your does influence those that do run.
I added to the questions, not necessarily tried to change the subject a such.
With anti township Mike Walkup running for county board chair and the fact that since the economic turn down we have more people screaming about the number of gov units and their costs, how can you say consolidation or elimination of township will not still happen?
I remember your comments on school consolidation, well done facts, but facts don’t stop people with political agendas all the time now do they?
MCC, MCCD, Jack Franks Consolidation, they are like a virus that never goes away.
I’d prefer to control the amount of taxes we give them and levy increases with our vote.
Surely you’ve read my rant.
I’d also like to know how Alex would feel about reducing the size of the county board?
I’d suggest representation of about 20k population per board member and single rep districts.
About 16 at this time, and if growth occurs, add more board members at 20k each.
Based on your post Mr. Walkup, you would vote against any grant that encourages residential growth but your voting record and the voting record of the majority on the County Board does NOT indicate that.
Residential development is only occurring (in western McH County, anyway) in the form of housing/apartment units (developers are heavily subsidized) which will not pay enough in property taxes into the system to cover the costs of social service provision they engender.
Everyone should perform these break-even calculations before cheerleading ‘residential growth’:
1. Determine cost per pupil per year charged in property taxes.
In Woodstock D200 that is: $59 million levy/ divided by student enrollment.
$59,000,000/6500 students= $9077*
2. So each new student will engender a new expense to be borne by property taxpayers, beginning at $9077 and rising annually at rates well above inflation (based upon 10 year D200 budget history).
How many students will be produced per new housing unit on average?
Based upon stats on U.S. Census Quick Facts:
2.8 persons per household, 22% of persons between 5-18 years of age.
2.8 x .22= .61 school-aged new population produced per new housing unit.
3. (.61 x $9077)= $5537. Each new housing unit that does not pay at least $5537 in property taxes is placing additional burden on current taxpaying citizens in the school district
(and remember, this is just the school tax burden. All other taxing bodies must be paid annually as well).
4.This new annual (and rising) cost burden is not addressed by impact fees, that is a red herring.
*Note this number is artificially low due to low cost ($2,200/year) pre-k enrollment padding)
This is all we need.
Another self-entitled lawyer in local government.
Also, running as a Democrat and a tax-cutter?
There goes your Teachers’ Union vote.
Susan does outstanding research.
Her research is persuasive that “growth” results in higher taxes for existing residents.
Susan, keep trumpeting this argument, here and in the Herald, every chance you get.
The voters need to understand that “growth” is a fantasy and that politicians who want “growth” really just want bigger government with more programs no matter what the cost to current residents/taxpayers.
And the only way voters will learn is through repetition.
There is strong objective evidence on communication that shows ideas only become accepted when they are heard over and over.
It doesn’t matter that the ideas are right or even persuasively documented.
That helps, but repetition is the key.
Please take your comments are write LTEs to the Herald (and the other local papers) regularly.
It will work!
Nob, you’ve written a lot of good things on this blog.
I don’t always agree, and sometimes I think you are off the mark.
But overall you have added value to these discussions.
So I withdraw my comments and I hope you accept that in the spirit in which it is offered.
If you want to add your questions to the list and not redirect attention to the township issue, I have no problem with that.
However, while I appreciate the compliment you made, my goal here is to advance rational discussion by presenting facts and reasoning so the voters can make their own informed choice.
So I continue to contend that my position on an issue, especially one I consider to be small beer versus other major issues, is simply irrelevant to the voters.
It is facts and reason that matter, not my opinion.
If I thought it was a major deal one way or the other, I’d write a post on it.
I don’t.
I liked your comparison of Brookfield Wis verse CL.
The lip of the NWH, AlanX was giving you smit about your points.
Now I see the ranking Cal posted here previously for livability in small cities, CL was 10th, Brookfield 4th.
Your analogy was spot on.
Public Works was what I did most of my life, so I think issues related more important than you do.
Whatever, keep pitching and throwing strikes, Hero!
Thanks, Eric for clarifying winners involvement and what organizations are responsible for what.
And thanks Mike W.
I never correlated it that way, but you are right!
Wimmer is no Winner.
He’s a Whiner.
‘Fiscal conservative” is codeword for LIBTARD.
He should return to the People’s Socialist Republic of Urbana.