Republican Leaders and County Board Put Pressure on Rauner to Veto McSweeney Township Abolish by Referendum Bill, If Passed

Diane Evertsen

Comments are filtering out about what occurred at the handpicked and screened Republicans allowed to meet with Governor Bruce Rauner last Saturday.

Jim Kearns

It is evident that at least GOP Chairman Diane Evertsen (whose husband was Hartland Township Supervisor) and County Board member Jim Kearns (former Independent Grafton Township Supervisor elected as a Republican to the County Board) pressed Rauner to defeat David McSweeney’s bill to allow voters to abolish a township’s government at a referendum after gathering a lot of signatures to put it on the ballot.

Now, Capital Fax reminds readers of a February 20, 2018, Northwest Herald story

Bruce Rauner

“What I stand for is local control,” [Gov. Bruce Rauner] told the Northwest Herald Editorial Board on Friday morning as he visited McHenry County to pitch why voters should elect him for a second term.

“The people of McHenry should be empowered to make their own choices very easily.” […]

State Rep. David McSweeney, R-Barrington Hills, filed a bill in January that would give voters an opportunity to eliminate township government with a majority vote.

The move would shift the services provided by townships to local municipalities and the county. […]

Rauner stands behind efforts such as McSweeney’s.

“Let’s empower local residents to figure it out,” Rauner said.

“Let’s free up the people of Illinois and give power to the people to decide, and I’ll think we’ll get to a good solution.”

Bruce Rauner

Northwest Herald last night

Rauner spoke in general terms about the bill and commented that he usually does not support bills that focus on one county in particular.

He prefers legislation that carries statewide effect, GOP sources who attended the meeting said.

Editor Rich Miller then comments,


“He doesn’t want to sign McSweeney’s bill because it’s only about one county?


= = = = =
Of course, a statewide bill would have no chance of passing.


Republican Leaders and County Board Put Pressure on Rauner to Veto McSweeney Township Abolish by Referendum Bill, If Passed — 26 Comments

  1. Why not do the whole state if it’s good for our county that it should be good for the whole state and we would all be better off.

    Obviously it’s a political agenda by a certain county board chairman so he can have his own little fiefdom

  2. Yes Grumpy, and it’s interesting that McSweeney and Skillicorn are willing to carry the water for Franks, with support from McC.

  3. How come there is no mention that the county board is against elimination of townships without a plan Cal?

  4. How come we have more anonymous cowards?

    Fake names and straw man arguments.

    More of the same from deep blue operatives inside a dying party that stands for nothing.

  5. A dying party…179 days…tic, tock, tic, tock, tic, tock…

  6. McSweeney should fire whatever intern drafted this P.O.S. legislation.

    He needs to go back to the drawing board AFTER consulting with the County government and municipalities as to how it would affect them.

    That’s called “being a responsible public official”.

    Otherwise it’s just another headline grab for which The Chairman is noted.

    I agree with Andrew, the GOP currently stands for nothing.

    You can thank the guys in the Oval Office and the Governor’s Mansion for that.

    That’s what you get when you elect millionaires with no political experience to the top offices.

    That’s why there is a political ladder to climb. It separates the wheat from the chaff.


  7. Because you frighten them, Andrew? They don’t know how to deal with honesty. They don’t know what integrity is. They are very worried that the likes of you will cramp their style.

  8. Trying to get a copy of the letter to post, but so far unsuccessful.

  9. Gasbag!

    Have you tracked down you Amex rep yet to get a list of charges for your master to leak????!!!

  10. Cindy, Integrity is not whining about patronage and then hiring 7 patronage workers.

    Being disingenuous is not at all honesty either.

  11. This is obviously being brought on by Gasser’s expenditure on legal bills.

    Remember, Miller unionized his shop on his way out the door so Gasser would be forced to retain Miller’s relatives who could then sabotage Gasser’s operation.

    What choice did he have?

    Then someone dropped information in his lap indicating possible misuse of funds by the Miller Dynasty.

    The State’s Attorney apparently was not interested so he took it upon himself to investigate further.

    I don’t think that was inappropriate.

    Maybe he wasn’t using the cheapest lawyers around but you get what you pay for.

    So I am at a loss to understand why McSweeney, who originally supported him, has an apparent vendetta now against him, and why he has extended that to now include the new GOP Chairman, who I thought had previously supported him and vice versa.

    Another millionaire who bought his seat.

  12. Unless there is a deeper level to this I am not understanding……

    Like, “since the Labor Law does not give Gasser any chance to do anything to stop the Miller Clan from re-entering the Road District, let’s destroy the whole place.

    Verrryyyy Interrrresting…..

  13. And since abolishing the township doesn’t necessarily abolish the Road District (there are counties in Southern Illinois which have no townships but still have township Road Districts), by first folding the Road District into the township via referendum, when the township is abolished the whole thing disappears.



    “There is no attempt to derail. We are working to address the issues with this bill. We need to address the County Board in this as well,” Althoff said.

    “The biggest issue is that McSweeney never reached out to County Board members. Not one. He never spoke with a single senator that represents McHenry County. … That’s the big problem.”

  15. Dissolving a township does not dissolve a Road District.

    There are counties in Southern Illinois with township Road Districts but no township governments. (No supervisor, assessor, clerk or township board).

    Neither the McSweeney bill, nor the state constitution, provide a method of dissolving a township Road District. They only refer to “townships”.

    The only way to do that is to first have the Road District dissolved and those functions brought within the existing township board, as the newly enacted SB003 does. This can be done by referendum initiated by the township board.

    However, it is not effective until the next township election cycle, which is in 2021.

    Then when you dissolve the township, the road functions go with it.

    In the meantime, Andrew has the problem of what to do with the Miller Boys.

    Under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) there is noting he can do to fire them or prevent them from returning to work once the appeals on the current lawsuit are exhausted.

    The argument that the CBA needed to be approved by the township board will fail. There is no such requirement.

    However, their Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) is with the Road District, not the township.

    So if the Road District is dissolved, the CBA goes with it and so do the Miller Boys.

    But meanwhile, they can come back and stick around until 2021.

    If the townwship, however, is dissolved before then, which it can be under the McSweeney bill, there is no township to bring the Road District into under SB 003 and no other way to dissolve the Road District.

    Timing is everything.

    Did McSweeney think this one out at all, or is that his true intent?

  16. KnownExtremist, HB 4637 references road district elimination also.

    Contracts are mentioned also.

    I’d bet that more Road dist employees will want to unionize if elimination of their district is attempted.

    Whatever the County 150 union is now, expect more to mirror that CBA.

    Drain the Swamp has it’s side effect, AT is proof.

  17. You are right nob. That’s further down.

    So let’s say that the AL township board puts a referendum on the ballot for this Fall and it passes, to dissolve the Road District.

    What that does is eliminate the union agreement as the township was not a party to that.

    However, it does not become effective until Spring of 2021.

    So the Miller Gang could come back for a short time, or have to be bought out.

    Now if there is a referendum to dissolve the whole township put on the ballot before then, and it passes, then the whole shebang is gone in 90 days, and the union agreement goes with it.

    However, if the NLRB rules that the union agreement was valid, the Miller Boys will be owed back pay.

    The County would then have to pay that and hope that whatever assets they get from the Road District will cover.

    Maybe sell the pink truck.

  18. Known Extremist/Landshark (aka Jim Kearns) is too much of a coward to post his real name.

    Stay tuned for the news about what really happened in Grafton Township when liberal Jim Kearns was in charge.

    Isn’t it disturbing that an elected official like Kearns is waiting by his computer 24/7 to anonymously post comments? Coward!

  19. Not Jim Kearns. Sorry.

    Back to the topic at hand.

    I do recall that under SB 003 the union contracts remain in force.

    HB 4637:
    On or before the date of dissolution, all real and
    personal property, and any other assets, together with all
    personnel, contractual obligations, and liabilities oC the
    dissolving township shall be transferred to McHenry County.

    (5) All road districts wholly within the boundaries of
    the dissolving township are dissolved on the date of
    dissolution of the dissolving township, and all powers and
    responsibilities of each road district are transferred to
    McHenry County …

    So does that mean the union contracts stay or go? Is the union agreement a “responsibility” of the Road District?

    Does that mean that the County has to hire the Miller Family?

    The county Highway Department is already unionized so once into the fold, they would have permanent employment.

  20. I’mVERY disappointed with Evertsen.

    If I’d known about her township nonsense, I wouldn’t have voted for her fo Co. Chairman.

    Why was the loser Daniels invited to meet with the governor.

    He’s another loser.

    Gasser is right!

  21. That picture the paper posted was from 2015 (when the Dems/Unions sued the county board for Open Meetings Act violations by having too many county board members at his town hall-which they shouldn’t have been able to do.

    They werent discussing county business. They rolled over and settled for $25K.)

    Daniels was not at the recent meeting the Gov. had in our couinty.

    Don’t be disappointed in Diane.

    She is a great Republican and American.

    While most are salvating at the red meat they think they’ll be able to chew-on to eliminate township govt in our county, maybe she is one of the few that realizes this is a trap.

    Cherry picked legislation just for this county makes me very suspicious.

    I’m trusting that Diane and the Board Members see the big picture.

    This bill needs to be re-written with a plan that won’t have us paying union wages etc for everything that’s done that townships are now doing.

    If township hired/elected are angry about this possibility, thay can personally thank their buddy, Bob and Anna May Miller!

  22. Who is Cindy (Evertsen) going to appoint to replace cougar Pammy Althoff when she leaves by early July?

    Word on the street is that she’ll appoint Landshark/Known Extremist (aka Kearns), not Wilcox, to serve until January.

    God help the taxpayers.

  23. Informed? You might want to consider changing your screen name. It does not seem to be very accurate. Although Diane has a few years on me, I am honored that you think I am so much like her! Thank you for the high compliment.

  24. Shame on Evertsen!

    Not for being an ‘extremist’ trying to protect the country from invasion, but for siding with the township parasites at the expense of the taxpayers.

Leave a Reply

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