McHenry County Blog

When I saw that “Election Workshop” item on the agenda of the special meeting of the McHenry County Board for Tuesday, I called and asked the President’s Office what was up.

The woman I talked to did not know.

I figured it couldn’t be about board elections, since they were this past spring.

That left referendums.

That means tax hikes.

Thursday, a Northwest Herald article by Brett Rowland verified my premonition.

It is too bad that the MCC Board was unwilling to be more forthright.

The reaction shown in the comments below the article show that the College has a real image problem.

Certainly, the history of opaqueness will be an issue in any tax hike effort.

This is a board that won’t even tape record its meetings so someone could hear what went on, if he or she could or did not attend a meeting.

Let alone live stream the meetings.

The content of comments made by members of the public is not reported in the minutes.

“Transparency” is not part of this government’s philosophy.

This is a board that hid the baseball stadium details that would have put taxpayers on the hook for over $20 million in bonds…plus interest.

This is a board that kept us in the dark while conspiring to allow the tallest broadcast aerial in the State of Illinois.

One of St. Louis tax hike consultant Unicom-ARC's successful efforts to convince Woodstock School District voters to vote yes.

And new President Vicky Smith made it quite clear that her selection had more than a little to do with raising taxes.

Two summers ago there was a series of “community” meetings put together by the same tax hike consultant that ran the success tax hike campaigns in Woodstock Unit District 200 and Carpentersville District 300.

Read about those meetings and other aspects of MCC’s tax hike preparation efforts in the links below:

• McHenry County’s Power Elite and Meteors
• McHenry County’s Power Elite as Seen by McHenry County College
• MCC’s View of the Power Elite, as Laid Out in it Communications Plan
  
  What Does It Take to Have Democracy?
• McHenry County College Power Elite Nominees
• MCC Power Elite Add-Ons
• McHenry County College Inviting Public
• McHenry County College MAP “Engages” 60 Community Members
• 2010 Referendum Predicted For MCC, District 300 & District 200 Tax Hike Firm to be Hired by McHenry County College
• MCC MAP Meeting Light on Community Participation
• McHenry County College Citizen Engagement Process Attracts 31
• Northwest Herald Reporter Discerns Real Reason for McHenry County College’s $137,750 Hiring of Tax Hike Firm
• MCC MAP Meeting – Part 2 – Building Up Balances
• MCC MAP Meeting – Part 3 – Enrollment Increase & Who Pays What
• Northwest Herald Reveals More Than Ever Before about School St. Louis Tax Hike Firm Unicom-ARC
• MCC MAP Citizen Engagement Process Ends with Maybe 14 Non-Employee Citizens at Last Session

My timing was off on the date of the referendum. The rest should prove instructive to those interested in how a tax district goes about raising taxes.

Political consultant Drew Veeneman prepared this 2012 congressional map for Illinois. State Rep. Jack Franks is certainly correct in saying it is gerrymandered.

I commented on State Rep. Jack Franks’ having criticized the reapportionment process, but voting for the terribly gerrymandered map his Democratic Party leaders concocted for the Illinois General Assembly.

The article was entitled,

“Jack Franks Wants It Both Ways on the Remap”

When the congressional map came up for a vote yesterday, Franks voted, “No.”

He reversed course.

The Sun-Times had this quote from this only Democrat who voted against the new map:

“It seemed to me to be blatantly gerrymandered, and I didn’t want any part of it.

“You look at how these districts were drawn to protect incumbents in both parties.

“It was just pure power politics.

“I don’t know who cut the deals in the back room.”

You see below the Chicago area map of state representative districts which Franks voted for.

Jack Franks thought this map was good enough to vote for. Note the worm-like extensions of state rep. districts coming out of Chicago. No gerrymandinger there. No, Siree. Map by political consultant Drew Veeneman.

You can’t see any examples of gerrymandered districts there can you?

Nothing that snakes out into the suburbs to protect Chicago incumbents from the loss of two state rep. districts because the city lost 200,000 people over the last ten years, right?

So, it’s safe to conclude that Franks’ positive vote on the General Assembly remap followed by his negative vote on the congressional remap had nothing to do with firmly held principals.

I certainly don’t suggest that my pointing out his seeming hypocrisy previously convinced him to vote against the map that drew Franks out of Congressman Don Manzullo’s Rockford-based district and into a district that contains Joe Walsh and Randy Hultgren.

But there might be a reason that my political mind could understand for the flip-flop, the sudden Paul-like conversion on the road to Damascus.

I have been suggesting that Franks wanted to see all of McHenry County in one congressional district.

That would have given him what he would consider a “base” of over 300,000 people out of the 713, 682 people in each congressional district.

Remember that trip to Ireland with House Speaker Mike Madigan, Senate President John Cullerton and other political notables.

That was when Franks was still being coy about running for Governor.

I figured he had cut a deal to run for re-election as state representative in return for a McHenry County-based congressional district.

Shorty thereafter, Franks withdrew from the governor’s race, giving the story to the Northwest Herald.

Only the Galesburg paper noticed.

The U.S. Capitol as seen in 1983.

Talk turned to Congress after Joe Walsh’s narrow 8th District victory over Melissa Bean, someone whom Franks campaigned door-to-door for.

Made sense to me.

Madigan would create a district in which Franks would stand a good chance and there’s a win-win for Madigan and Franks.

Pretty good sources have told me that the relationship between Franks and Madigan are not so hot.

So a favorable congressional map would make Franks happy. He would have a chance for advancement and, at the same time, get out from under the stultifying dominance that Madigan has asserted since Lee Daniels’ lost the Speakership in 1997.

And Franks’ leaving the Illinois House would please Madigan. He wouldn’t have to worry about what Franks was going to do next.

Franks has been acting like he was preparing a run that included the southeaster part of McHenry County.

First Electric Newspaper featured a photo of Franks and Living Waters Lutheran Church Pastor Carol Gates in a short article telling of Franks’ having invited her to give the invocation prior to session in March of this year.  (Franks doesn’t send his press releases to McHenry County Blog.)

That is way, way out of his 63rd legislative district.

And Franks was soliciting campaign contributions in Algonquin Township for a breakfast fundraiser.

Not only was a mailing sent, but follow-up phone calls were made.

Algonquin Township is farther away from Franks’ district than the Living Waters Lutheran Church.

So, why was Jack Franks the only Democrat to vote against the congressional reapportionment map his Speaker put together?

I think it was because Madigan refused to give Franks what he wanted—a congressional district containing all of McHenry County.

Instead of acceding to Franks’ wishes and ambition, Madigan split off the 88,389 people living in Algonquin Township.

Apparently no one was in the “back room” looking out for Jack Franks’ interests, so he voted, “No.”

The sentence that contains the word "NEW" is flashign on the Speaker's redistricting web site.

Go figure.

There are two reapportionment web sites out there.

The 2001 is still active and that’s what I happened upon last night before I wrote the article below, which might be useful for historical purposes but has nothing to do with the map being drawn by Democrats this year.

= = = = =

The House Speaker’s reapportionment web site seems to have new maps.

Well, they definitely have different maps, but there’s no way to figure out how new, because the date of the new maps is nowhere to be found.

No way to ask at 10 o’clock because the email doesn’t work.

But there is a new map for McHenry County which does pretty much what people at the public hearing requested.

The poor side of Carpentersville, which I pointed out in the reapportionment hearing in Marengo has nothing in common with the current McHenry County part of Mike Tryon’s 64th District is no longer part of it.  It remains part of Democrat Keith Farhnam’s 43rd District.

Below on the left you can see the current map for the three state representatives for McHenry County.  District 63 is Jack Franks’, District 64 is Mike Tryon’s and District 52 is Mark Beaubien’s.

The 2001 state rep. map lines, according to Mike Madigan's web site. Don't ask me what that bump into McHenry County is. It doesn't exist on other maps of the 64th District.

The proposed 2011 district lines for state reps.

And, it looks a lot like the map now, at least in this county.

Version two of the new map for McHenry County is below:

This map is labeled Currie II after Bilandic amendment. I found it 5-16-11. Mike Tryon's district does not dip into the poorer part of Carpentersville in this version. Click to enlarge.

Here is the current map:

Here's the current map for McHenry County's legislative districts. Really hard to tell the differences.

Here’s the first attempt at a new map:

Currie's first draft gave Carpentersville east of the Fox River to Mike Tryon. The new version does not. Click to enlarge.

Here’s the Downstate map on the web site. Is it new or old?

Here are lines for the whole state. No indication of a date. I presume it is the new map, because I found another one dated 2001. Click to enlarge.

Below is an enlargement of the Chicago metropolitan part of the above map:

Again. This is the undated map I found Monday, May 16, 2011, on the House Speaker's reapportionment web site.

In the last article, McHenry County Blog showed the three maps developed by Dr. Michael Fortner.

Now, let’s focus on where the action is, the Southeaster part of McHenry County.

That’s where the bulk of the residents live, of course.

Map A. This map puts splits Crystal Lake even more than it is now. Currently the dividing line is Crystal Lake Avenue, the Algonquin-Nunda Township border. District 2 is in Algonquin Township, District 3 in Nunda Township. The small Dorr Township part (one precinct) on the northwest side of the area ends up in the Woodstock-Lake in the Hills-dominated District 5. Also split is Cary. While all in District 1 now, it would be split into a redrawn District 1 running all the way to Route 47 in Huntley on the East, which being combined with the Algonquin Township parts of Crystal Lake and Lake in the Hills with one precinct along the Fox River in Algonquin continuing to be linked to Crystal Lake.

District 1 has probably had the least commonality among constituents, except for, perhaps, the Woodstock-Western Lake in the Hills District 5, contains Fox River Grove, Cary and Algonquin. Fox River Grove and Cary fit together because most of their kids attend Cary-Grove High School. Because Algonquin children attend District 300 schools, about the only thing that Southern part of McHenry County has in common with the Cary-Grove area is the Fox River. I can’t remember when the Fox River was on the County Board’s agenda.

Map A promises to further expand the dissimilarity of District 1′s parts. Not only will Cary-Grove and Algonquin continue to be merged, but now a third school district, Huntley School District 158 will be added to the mix.

It would be foolish not to look for partisan implications in this most political of all decisions.

Democrat Paula Yensen is from the Grafton Township part of Lake in the Hills.  Her District 5 includes Dorr Township to the north.  Map A strips her district of that part of Grafton Township south of Algonquin Road.

Map B splits Grafton Township farther north of Algonquin Road, while Map C splits it East-West.

So, in any of the versions proposed by the Republican-dominated Legislative Committee, Yensen will find she has to cultivate many new constituents to get re-elected.  She’d probably just consider it a new opportunity to recruit more Democratic Party activists.

Map B cuts the Cary-Grove part of District 1 out, merging Algonquin with southwestern Lake in the Hills and eastern Huntley. District 5 sees Lake in the Hills disappear from its constituency, expanding much father east into the Crystal Lake area on the south and into southern McHenry on the north.

In Map C District 1 stretches from western Lake in the Hills through Algonquin and Barrington Hills to the south side of Cary and Fox River Grove. Democrat Paula Yensen lives in the little tip to the far northwest of proposed district.

These are the current McHenry County Board districts.

Three potential McHenry County Board District maps drawn by Dr. Michael Fortner have been posted on the County web site.

As was clear from the first discussion of what the maps should look like, the vast majority of the current board members want something as close to what exists now as possible. For starters, that meant a continuation of six districts with four members each.

The first draft results are below. Tell me what political implications you see in each of them. Remember you can enlarge any image by clicking on it.

This is Map A.

This is Map B.

This is Map C.

To lots of Grafton Township voters, what’s in this article won’t be a surprise.

But others outside of the township might be interested in the latest move in the continuing contest between the forces backing Township Supervisor Linda Moore and those on the Township Trustees’ side.

The post card shown here arrived in area post boxes recently.

It encourages people to attend the annual township meeting next Tuesday night at 7 PM, this year being held at the Huntley High School west of Downtown Huntley.

Here's a map showing where the annual Grafton Township Meeting will be held west of Downtown Huntely.

There’s even a map to help people find the high school.

The headline below appears on the address side of the mailing:

The headline on the address side of the mailing.

On the other side is the text below:

Does Grafton Township need a $3.5 million, or even a $2 million dollar building?

Grafton Township’s trustees do not want to wait to let YOU vote on a Referendum in November’s Election

Why? Because the Grafton trustees want a $ BIG $ building and they want it NOW whether it’s truly needed or not. The trustees want to make Grafton Township government BIGGER. Instead of finding ways to expand our current facility at a lot less cost or using other taxpayer supported facilities to provide services, the trustees just have to have their OWN. The trustees WANT what they WANT and they want it NOW – paid for with YOUR money.

They say…“It’s only a little bit.” But, this time, enough is enough. No more nickel and diming taxpayers.

On April 13th, 7 p.m., the trustees want you to attend a meeting to give them permission to borrow money to purchase an unnecessary and poorly thought out, $1.1 million dollar building and another half a million for upgrades. Only registered voters who attend the meeting will be able to vote on the issues.

A referendum is scheduled for the November 2010 ballot which will allow every voter to decide if Grafton Township should borrow in excess of $3 million dollars and issue bonds for a new, large building.

FACT: The trustees have repeatedly refused to appoint a citizens’ planning committee to analyze the township’s facility needs and options.

FACT: Grafton Township is currently $700,000 in debt, costing taxpayers over $40,000 in interest to date. No money has been saved for a new building and all of the funds must be borrowed. You and your children could be paying for this for years!

WASTE: - $100,000 already wasted on legal fees – $50,000 spent on unnecessary staff – $500,000 already wasted without your permission in an illegal attempt to build a “Taj Mahal” and nothing to show for it.

Call: 708-446-0114 with any questions; to make your reservation for a ride to the meeting; or, to let us know that you are committed to coming!= = = = =
Just in case you don’t know whether you live in Grafton Township, which starts at Gate 11 in Lakewood and includes the western part of Crystal Lake’s North Shore, as well as the West End and the western part of Four Colonies, take a look at the map below:

Grafton Township precinct map. If you live here, what happens next Tuesday night could increase your taxes.

Just under a month ago Northwest Herald reporter Brett Rowland rocked the McHenry County College political firmament by revealing that the college was considering holding a tax hike referendum:

Northwest Herald Reporter Discerns Real Reason for McHenry County College’s $137,750 Hiring of Tax Hike Firm

Although little ol’ McHenry County Blog had predicted that was the entire purpose for hiring the St. Louis Unicom-ARC political consulting firm (see related articles below), having the paper of record inform so many more folks than this blog reaches was clearly damaging to any college tax hike effort.

Today, Rowland reveals more about the tax hike support building firm Unicom-ARC. Again, it is the main front page story.

Forewarned is forearmed, as they say.

McHenry County Blog articles that might be of interest follow:

December 18, 2008 -UNICOM-ARC Hits Up Local Taxpayers Again

Saturday, January 24, 2009 – MCC Tax Hike Timeline

Friday, January 30, 2009 – McHenry County College Power Elite Nominees

Saturday, January 31, 2009 – MCC Power Elite Add-Ons

Monday, March 30, 2009 – McHenry County College Inviting Public

Wednesday, April 01, 2009 – McHenry County College MAP “Engages” 60 Community Members

Friday, July 31, 2009 – McHenry County College Citizen Engagement Process Attracts 31

Please note that these are not all the articles that have appeared here about Unicom-ARC’s activities in the Fox River Valley.

The college board is meeting tonight, by the way. You might find it interesting, although the interesting part is not identified so you could figure out at what point in the meeting the highlight will occur. The meeting starts at 6 PM.

This is the third part of my article on the MCC MAP meeting Tuesday night

The McHenry County College Promise, Todd McDonald told me, has already completely processed 650 high school graduates.

Another 170 or so await a report from the U.S. Department of Education to see if they are eligible for Free Application for Federal Student Aid. This FAFSA process takes 3-4 weeks, so high school grads who haven’t started the process yet probably won’t get an answer in time for classes to start.

“What a nice problem to have,” Ally said.

Telling me that college enrollment was up 55%, MCC Board President George Lowe observed,

A woman asked if the extra students wouldn’t cost more money, perhaps, she suggested, more than the resulting extra tuition.

Ally made two responses that I caught:

• “Our goal should be to have fuller classes running.
• “We’ll run extra sections with adjunct faculty.”

Part-time teachers are a LOT cheaper that the full-timers.

Suggestions from the tables that I jotted down included “hybrid classes.” That was defined as half in the classroom, half online.

I think it was the same table that said this about state financial assistance:

“We were hopeful that state funding might increase…but not too hopeful.”

It’s good to have a sense of humor.

Taking photos while taking notes makes it difficult to link the two. The table with the sense of humor is either above (the last one to report) or below:

Lowe took the floor at the end of the meeting and pointed out that state financial assistance had gone down from 23% to 7.9% over the last sixteen years.

That 23% was less than what the committee that led the 1967 junior college referendum effort presented to taxpayers.

The state told the organizers that it would provide one-third.

With a ten-cent referendum rate request, the committee told voters that

• the state would pay one-third
• the students would pay one-third and
• the taxpayers would pay one-third.

Obviously, the state junior college promoters lied.

Note, however from the pie chart that while the taxpayers now pay 59.6%, almost twice what voters were told their share would be, students do not pay the 33% that was presented in 1967.

Tuition brings in 29.3% now.

Part 1 is here.
Part 2 is here.

This is the second part of a three-part article on McHenry County College’s MAP meeting Tuesday. Part 1 in here. The Northwest Herald’s take, complete with shifting headline emphasis, is here.

My notes have “one cent sounds like nothing.” The “referendum” word was used.

Referring to the Property Tax Cap, Ally said,

“It’s costing the college millions of dollars each year.”

Ally impressed me with the increase in reserves that have been built up since he took office.

But his Tax Cap comment led me to reflect how differently those in government see the Tax Cap from those who are the taxpaying base.

We consider those millions “lost” to government as “savings” for us.

We know that government can spend every dollar it manages to pluck from our pockets (and from our children’s).

Factoring in the recently signed four-year faculty contract, Ally presented the chart you see above.

Coupled with the “look what just a penny increase in the tax rate will bring in,” it seems to me that the presentation was skewed toward a tax hike before the fund balance target begins to dip under the weight of the new faculty contract.

But the people at the tables didn’t bite.

One table mentioned how surprised they were at how much a penny would raise, but didn’t go so far as to recommend that taxes be raised. I think it was the one pictured above.

Questions were taken from the floor.

Kurt Begalka from the Northwest Herald asked whether increasing expenses would result into dipping into reserves.

“Not yet,” Ally replied.

“Reserves should not be used for ongoing expenses,” he continued. “That’s just not sustainable.”

Ally noted that health insurance costs were growing faster inflation. The college’s attempt to control costs resulted in employees paying 25% of the cost of insurance (50% for dental and visual) “to form a true partnership.”

I asked the total annual cost for an employee and was told that for a family it would be about $5,000. The college is self-insured, which means whatever the college cost of the health care plan the taxpayers foot the bill.

Later Begalka, at whose table I sat, pointed out that employees at many private enterprises pay 100%.

Ally said college enrollment this year is “the perfect storm.

Part 3 will address enrollment tomorrow.

That’s the number I counted sitting at tables.

21 women and 10 men.

There were about 60 at the first meeting.

I continue to believe that spending $137,750 on this project is unmerited. St. Louis referendum tax hike facilitator UNICOM-ARC is the main beneficiary.

There were only two of us at our front and center table. Naturally, we were encouraged to move to tables where there could be more interaction.

One lady invited us over, saying there were too many college people at her table.

So, the number of non-college people and non-members of the organizing committee there were at the tables had to be pretty slim.

Moderator Steve Weskerna kicked off the meeting. He asked us to pretend we were McHenry County College trustees.

The topic was finances.

Acting CEO Ron Ally, the college’s finance guy this century, gave a power point presentation that I thought unfair at only one point.

He compared a 4.2% increase in property taxes to a 1.1% increase in tuition to 1% increases in enrollment and a whole list of expenses.

You can look at the slide above (click to enlarge any image), which compares

a one penny (per $100 of assessed valuation) increase in property tax rate bringing in $962,305
to
a $1 per hour tuition increase yielding $112,794.

I learned one compares comparables to comparables.

So, from an “issue framing” point of view, I thought the presentation was slanted toward raising taxes.

More on finances tomorrow.