McHenry County Blog

Chaired by Donna Kurtz a majority of four nominated Crystal Lake City Councilman, banker and holder of an MBA Jeff Thorsen to fill the vacancy on the 708 Mental Health Board.

A vacancy remains because an 18-6 majority vote on the McHenry County Board refused to ratify the nomination of former McHenry County College Board President and 2012 Democratic Party Board candidate Scott Summers for the post.

Voting for Thorsen were Kurtz, John Hammerand, Sandy Salgado and Mike Walkup.

The other three members of the committee–Paula Yensen, Anna May Miller and Mary McCann–boycotted the meeting.

Following the eighteen “No” votes, Chairwoman Tina Hill informed the Board that she would submit her own choice to fill the vacancy.

After the Public Health Committee vote Hill was asked by Mike Walkup whether she would put the nomination on the agenda for the County Board’s May 21st meeting and she said she would not be putting the name up for the County Board’s consideration.

Then Walkup said,

“The Chair promised us in her State of the County speech that this would be a new day.

“Instead she has now plunged us into darkness.

“I suggest that everyone make sure they have extra batteries for their flashlights because it will be a long, dark night.”

John Hammerand asked why anyone should attend committee meetings.

Others considered for the post by the Committee members were

• Danijela Sanberg
• Charles Wheeler
• Catheryn Perfetti
• Cathy Ferguson
• David Barber

After the vote Sandy Salgado said she was not leaving the committee voluntarily. Salgado is employed by Pioneer Center.

Those opposing the nomination were

• Michele Aavang
• Yvonne Barnes
• Sue Drafkorn
• Joe Gottemoller
• Jim Heisler
• Tina Hill
• John Jung
• Ken Koehler
• Bob Martens
• Mary McCann
• Mary McClellan
• Anna May Miller
• Bob Nowak
• Nick Provenzano
• Ersel Schuster
• Carolyn Schofield
• Mike Skala
• Paula Yensen

In favor were

• Nick Chirikos
• Diane Evertsen
• John Hammerand
• Donna Kurtz
• Sandy Salgado
• Mike Walkup

None of the opponents offered a word as to why they were voting against Summers.

18-6 was the vote on the McHenry County Board to reject the Public Health and Human Services Committee nomination of former McHenry County College Board President Scott Summers to the 708 Mental Health Board.

But no one made a comment in public against Summers.

Immediately after the vote, Chairwoman Tina Hill invoked a specific rule that gives her the power to the make appointment without reference to committee.

“I’ve given this process a lot of thought,” Hill said after the vote.

“I will review the candidates, the tapes and possibility new candidates and bring a new candidate to you for a vote in two weeks,” Hill announced.

State law gives county board chairmen the power to make all sorts of appointments to boards and commissions, but the tradition, backed by rules with an apparent exception, has allowed committees to make the selections.

Shortly after the rejection of Summers’ nomination, the only alternative mentioned in the debate–Lake in the Hills Village Trustee Denise Bretto–released the following statement:

Denise Barreto

“I am officially withdrawing my name from consideration for the McHenry County Mental Health Board Appointment effective immediately.

“I stepped forward in April after reviewing the happenings of the last several months as well as the McHenry County Mental Health Board’s 2012-2013-2014 Three Year Plan.

“It has always been my intention to expand my service in McHenry County beyond my service on the Lake in the Hills Village Board.

“I saw this as an opportunity to serve on a board that expressly stated it was looking for diversity in leadership as well as someone with a tie the the Latino community.

“My business background, communication skills and reputation for being steadfast and fearless made me certain I’d be an asset to this board.

“I accepted and supported the committee’s decision to go with another candidate back on April 24, 2013 when I was notified.

“Since then, to my dismay, the process leading up to today’s McHenry County Board vote has been unprofessional and mean-spirited. While it is clear that the McHenry County Mental Health board needs fresh and diverse thinking to resolve its current issues, at this time, I am no longer interested in serving.

“I will continue to follow this board and others to make a determination in the future how to best leverage my talents for McHenry County. In the meantime, I will focus on my service to the residents of Lake in the Hills, who recently entrusted me with another term as Village Trustee.

“I appreciate the consideration of the Public Health and Human Services Committee and wish them the best as they seek to fill the vacancy.”

Speaking for Summers were citizens during the public comment period, plus Board members Donna Kurtz, who chairs the committee putting forth the nomination and Mike Walkup, a member of that committee.

Those opposing the nomination were

• 

  Scott Summers while he served on the McHenry County College Board.

  Michele Aavang

• Yvonne Barnes
• Sue Drafkorn
• Joe Gottemoller
• Jim Heisler
• Tina Hill
• John Jung
• Ken Koehler
• Bob Martens
• Mary McCann
• Mary McClellan
• Anna May Miller
• Bob Nowak
• Nick Provenzano
• Ersel Schuster
• Carolyn Schofield
• Mike Skala
• Paula Yensen

In favor were

• Nick Chirikos
• Diane Evertsen
• John Hammerand
• Donna Kurtz
• Sandy Salgado
• Mike Walkup

Among the public speaking out in favor of Summers was Crystal Lake resident Charles Raymond.  He told of his 17-year old daughter’s having lost “three friends to drug overdoses this year.”

“Put the politics aside,” he urged.  “Please make the right choices today.  I firmly believe Scott Summers is the right choice.”

Crystal Lake businessman Kevin Krak said he was “very worried about abuse of power, misappropriation of money, lack of oversight and accountability.”

He spoke of Summers’ being an attorney and having earned an MBA and being “a person of excellence.”

Cary’s David Ensor explained when he was a youth he had trouble with drugs and alcohol.

“These services seem to have been slowly gotten rid of.  Heroin has become an epidemic in this county. ”

He accused the 708 Board of “padding their pockets” and expressed astonishment that “anyone would ever consider closing a facility that would help people.”

Eric Boyer, who has returned to Crystal Lake after five years in the military said he was speaking “because of my overall concerns about drug abuse and mental health issues.”

He said the “commonly held perception” was that there was “corruption among the mental health board.”

“You have taken over five months to elect Board members.

“Rome may have already fallen by the time you get there.”

An Algonquin Latina whose name I believe is Rosolba Compolonsso spoke softly of her role with the Spanish speaking community.

She referred to the “scandal at the McHenry Mental Health Board.

“Something needs to be done.  The amount spent on administration takes away from [services].”

Ron McCone of Crystal Lake told of speaking to the Board previously “about the lack of accountability at the 708 Board.”

He supported Summers’ candidacy because “he has the skills, background…to halt needless spending and realign the Mental Health Board with its primary purpose.”

He also complained about administrative expenditures taking precedence over the “programs and services.”

After Kurtz nominated Summers, Walkup spoke up in support.

He reviewed how he had met Summers the night he and fellow McHenry County College Board member Kurtz stood up before the Crystal Lake Planning and Zoning Commission and publicly admitted their mistake for voting for the minore league baseball stadium [that would have put local taxpayers on the hood for $25 million].

And, how both Summers and Kurtz had been formally taken to the woodshed by their fellow MCC Trustees.

“We need people on the Mental Health Board who will be questioners.”

He then went through what he had heard as reasons not to support Summers.

First was the fact that he is a Democrat.

Walkup rebutted that by pointing out that the Board had appointed a lot of Democrats to positions, including himself before he turned Republican.

Second was that Summers ran for County Board in District 6.

Walkup noted that two former members of the County Board had received appointments.

Third was the rumor that Summers was “planning to run for judge.”

Walkup debunked that suggestion by pointing out a district judicial vacancy does not even exist where Summers lives (Harvard).

“A judge[ship] is up in [County Board] Districts 4 and 3.  Joe Gottemoller and I could run for that.”

Finally, Walkup asked fellow Board members to “respect the process.”

Kurtz pointed out that this was the second time that Summers had “finished at the top.”  He was fourth with three to be selected in the first round of appointment interviews.

She said that Summers would have spoken to the Board, but that he had had to leave for a 9:30 court appearance.

Kurtz listed the failings of the 708 Board that she saw:

• focusing too much on itself and not enough on the agencies who provide services
• the questionable $1 million loan to Family Services “that’s never gong to be repaid”
• “two board members have left the Board to take jobs with agencies [they voted to fund]“
• a building housing 50% fewer employees that the Board of Health in a building that is twice as large
• “contentious, antagonistic relations with some agences
• loss of $2 million in annual revenues that will state this year
• Medicaid billing problems

“We need Mental Health Board members who will stand up.

She asked County Board members to look at Summers resume.

“I think we got it right in our last appointments,” Kurtz said.

In his approach to the community college, foremost in Summers’ mind was

“How do I serve the taxpayer?”

She then asked her colleagues to “bring up any questions you have.”

There were none.

After the roll call defeated Summers’ candidacy and Hill’s announcement that she would make the appointment herself, Walkup took the floor.

“I am appalled and aghast that the chair would usurp the powers of the committee.

He then referred to Hill’s post-election speech about her stewardship would bring “a new day.”

“It appears the sun has not risen on that new day.

He called on the Board to change Board rules to re-empower the County Board to run the County Board.

Kurtz pointed to the “highly politicized situation” and questioned Hill’s decision to usurp her committee’s power.

“It’s highly inappropriate for a political type of move to be made by yourself,” she continued.

“This is a vote of no confidence.”

Ersel Schuster, who ran unsuccessfully against Hill for Chairman and voted against Summers, added the following:

“I’m so sick and tired of the politics.  We are here for the public.

“I, too, hope you will reconsider your decision.

“For us to stoop this low tears my heart out.

Nick Chirikos, the new Democrat on the Board from Algonquin also commented.  He voted for Summers.

“I’m pretty shaken by this vote of the County Board.

“I never realized there was such a majority on this Board.  I never expected a vote of this magnitude.

“It points to a political undercurrent of which I wasn’t aware,” he continued.

“I’m just inexperienced enough not to understand the full impact of this decision by the Chair.”

Kurtz was again given the floor.

She talked of the heroin overdose death in Cary two days ago.

“We have a problem.  We’ve got a sense of urgency that you seem to be missing.

“A lot of people in this county get it,” she said, pointing to affected family members.

“…and you sit here and deny a perfectly legitimate and qualified candidate.

“The time was now to have taken action.

“We’re not here for politics.”

Last weekend, the following popped up on Capitol Fax Blog:

“I am a regular reader of your blog. Also a county board member in McHenry County and attorney. I ran for State Senate in the 90’s.

“I was interested in the REO Speedwagon number you had on Friday and thought you might be interested in this story.

“When I was in college in Champaign in the late 60’s and early 70’s I was lead guitar for a band called
‘Feathertrain’. We were very popular at one point and played all over the state.

“That’s me in the back. Bruce Hall is the blond standing in back on the right. Gary Ritchrath and Michael Murphy were not in the band at that point. Dana Walden, the organist, later wrote an R & B crossover hit called “What About Us?’ Note the price of beer,” Mike Walkup wrote when he sent the ad.

“In late 1969 our agent, Irv Azoff, wanted us to start playing 6 nights a week instead of 4. This would have caused me to flunk out of college, so , figuring that no one ever heard of a 40 year old rock n roll star, I announced that I would have to quit in time to catch up on my studies before finals.

“The band then began a search for a new lead guitar player. On a gig in Peoria we met a guy named Gary Ritchrath. He brought his guitar and played for us backstage but didn’t have an amplifier so all we saw was his fingers flying over the fretboard. We couldn’t tell if he actually sounded good so we scheduled him for an audition at our practice studio in Campaign, which was directly across the street from the popular Chances R nightclub. He was put up against the former REO Speedwagon guitarist, Bill Fiorio, now known as “Duke Tomato”. Gary won.

“After I had quit, Gary joined REO when their lead player left. Then they picked up our singer, Michael Murphy, who I believe sang on original version of “Storm” , and our base player, Bruce Hall. Bruce is in the video.

“I met Bruce when he was still in High School in a little town outside of Champaign. We had to get his parents’ permission for him to be in the band.

“Keep up the good work with the blog. It is an invaluable resource. And keep rockin’.”

Michael Walkup
Crystal Lake, IL

Here are the McHenry County Board members who signed Nick Provenzano’s petition to call a special meeting on Friday, January 18th at 9 AM to consider whether voters should have a shot in April at passing a referendum on whether the Board Chairman should be elected.

You can see eleven signed the petition.  Eight–one-third of the Board’s members–were required to sign to call a special meeting.

So people can find their names, let me list them in the order in which they signed and who they ended up voting for in the County Board Chairman’s race:

• Nick Provenzano (supported Koehler)
• Mike Walkup (new, supported Hill))
• Ken Koehler (supported Koehler)
• Robert Nowak (supported Koehler)
• Joe Gottemoller (new,  supported Gottemoller)
• Mike Skala (new,  supported Gottemoller)
• Robert Martens (new, supported Hill)
• Diane Evertsen (supported Schuster)
• Donna Kurtz (supported Schuster, then Hill)
• Sandy Salgado (supported Koehler)
• Mary McCann (supported Hill)

Four supported Tina Hill for Board Chairman.

Four supported Ken Koehler for Board Chairman.

Two supported Joe Gottemoller.

One supported Schuster.

All are Republicans, which when one thinks about it, that probably just recognizes the lay of the political land, that is, Democrats are more likely to gain positions of power, e.g., Paul Yensen’s appointment as Chairman of the Management Services Committee, through politicking in the current system of selecting a Board Chairman than through a one-on-one fight with any Republican in a countywide contest.   Both Yensen and first time Democratic Party Democratic Party Board member Nick Chirikos voted for Hill and neither showed any support for an at-large election at the Monday Management Services Committee meeting.

Only one of what I would consider hardcore supporters of Hill broke ranks to potentially endanger the new ruling coalition’s ability to continue its power after the 2014 election cycle.

Just because someone signed the petition does not mean that they are committed to vote for an April referendum.

There are twenty-four Board members and a majority vote will be required to put the question on the ballot.

Do you want to express your viewpoint to your County Board members?

Here are their phone numbers:

• Michele Aavang – 815-648-4210
• Yvonne Barnes – 847-516-2719
• Nick Chirikos – 847-658-3434
• Sue Draffkorn – 815-653-6057
• Diane Evertsen – 815-943-3298
• Joe Gottemoller – 815 382 9940
• John Hammerand – 815-728-0700
• Jim Heisler – 815-459-1971
• Tina Hill – 815-347-4222
• John Jung – 815-338-6201
• Ken Koehler – 815-459-7841
• Donna Kurtz -815-788-0632
• Bob Martens – 815-675-6353
• Mary McCann – 815-568-1061
• Mary McClellan – 815-482-5693
• Anna May Miller – 847-639-5112
• Robert Nowak – 847-516-9637
• Nick Provenzano – 815-355-8540
• Sandy Salgado – 815-271-5293
• Carolyn Schofield – 815-455-9550
• Ersel Schuster – 815-338-2207
• Mike Skala – 847-669-3804
• Mike Walkup – 815-459-7090
• Paula Yensen – 815-404-3918

At this point one can see that Nick Provenzano read the political wind better than the Management Services Committee did on Monday.

Whether the wind is blowing hard enough to overcome the reticence of Board members who like the current insider system (for reasons including an inability to raise sufficient funds to mount a countywide campaign–campaign cost having been mentioned by several Board members during the ongoing debate) remains to be seen on Friday morning.

And whether the measure passes or fails, the roll call will be used in the 2014 elections.

It will be interesting to see if any County board members from the last Board who voted to put a tax hike on the ballot in April will refuse to allow their constituents to vote on whether to elect their County Board Chairman at the ballot box.

Just from examining the agenda that newly-installed Management Services Committee Paula Yensen drafted, one could predict that nothing would come of the Monday morning meeting concerning whether the public should be allowed to vote on whether the Chairman of the McHenry County Board should be elected or not.

And, guess what?

Nothing did.

Parenthetically, let me point out that the previous County Board managed to put something probably more important on the ballot before they left office–a tax hike referendum.

So, the public will get a chance to vote on whether their property taxes are increased in April, but probably not whether they will get an opportunity to vote for the next County Board Chairman in 2014.

While 2014 sounds like it is a long way off, for the current insider system of selection of whose hands control County government to be changed in 2014, it has to be approved in April.

And, there is still a chance such a referendum on the ballot.

(Last day to adopt a resolution or ordinance is Tuesday, January 22nd, advised County Clerk Katherine Schultz.)

Committee member Mike Walkup brought up the topic of a special meeting, which takes one-third of the members to call.

Before that, however, Anna May Miller called for more input.

“I still am 110% in favor of allowing the public to weigh in on the subject,” but she said she though more time was needed for citizen comment, e.g., “different focus groups,” including “McCog for municipal perspective.”

“I don’t understand the need for speed on this issue,” she said, pointing out that under 20% of citizens would probably vote in April.

There was discussion of two options, one for a two-year term in which the County Board Chairman candidate would also have to be nominated as a district board candidate.  The other was a four-year term in which the Chairman would not have a vote on the County Board.

Non-member Nick Provenzano was allowed to address the Committee twice.

The first time, he contended County Board candidates “kind of made a grand bargain with the voters” by opposing Democrat State Rep. Jack Franks’ County Executive referendum.

“It was always assumed that we’d follow up immediately.

“I think it’s absolutely a bargain we should fulfill at the next election cycle.

“The decision was to get that to the voters as soon as possible,” he contended.

There was disagreement with that interpretation from member Ersel Schuster, who preferred limiting County Board Chairmen to two terms.

While she said she was “always for the electors being allowed to vote”… she was “totally comfortable with the existing process.

In December, Schuster ran for Chairman, along with Ken Koehler and Tina Hill.  Hill won.

Mike Skala, at his first Committee meeting, told of being told people “wanted change” and “wanted some turnover, fresh ideas, fresh perspectives” when he went door-to-door.

“I’m personally not in favor of it. I think what we have does work,” he said.

“I agree they the voters should need (an opportunity to vote on the issue.)  I don’t think it should be rushed to judgment.”

Anna May Miller suggested that “accountability” of the  Chairman was “the only issue that resonates with the public.”

“We’re trying to do this very quickly,” he said.

“Act in haste, repent in leisure.”

“That’s really right on,” Donna Kurtz interjected.  “It goes back to the problem we’re trying to solve.  The problem is how do I make government more responsive, how do I make it more honest?

“I better dam well sure be sure I’m not making the problem worse.”

But, if I understood her context correctly, Kurtz, referring to the at-large election of the Chairman, said, “Many of us wanted to do that on Day 1 when we took office.”

Advanced earlier by Schuster as a means of making the Board Chairman more accountable was the proposal of putting term limits in the Board Rules.

Assistant State’s Attorney Donna Kelly explained twice that doing so would subject the County to litigation. from not only an office holder who might want to exceed the term limit, but also from voters whose rights to see the person they wanted in office would be curtailed.

Kelly pointed out that neither the State Constitution nor current Illinois law allowed for such term limits for County Board Chairmen.

“Out concern is litigation,” she said.

Skala, who has chaired many a meeting while he was President of the Huntley District 158 School Board, pointed out,

“The way I’m reading the agenda, we couldn’t pass anything even if we wanted to.”

He then pointed out that “it comes down [to] if we have people that want to have a special board meeting to do it.”

Walkup, who carried the ball on the side of having an April referendum, said he though people out to be put on record.

Provenzano took the floor again, saying,

“The fact that you had no resolution on the agenda doomed this proposal.

“The only way to do that is a special election.

“We’ve talked about it for two years.

“There have been numerous public hearings.

“There’s been plenty of opportunity [for input].

“We do have all the answers; some just don’t understand [them].

“We have a four-year term.  Put it on the ballot.

“Let the County Board members vote on it.”

“It’s not something where you just toss a coin and it’s heads or tails,” Kurtz replied. “We could paint ourselves into a very dangerous situation. We could potentially create far worse problems than we have now.”

Closing the debate was non-member, newly-elected Nick Chirikos:

“I respectfully disagree with Mr. Provenzano. Fully a third of this board is new [and] haven’t had the opportunity to weigh in on this subject.”

Discussion also covered the monetary requirements to finance a countywide campaign for Board Chairman.

“I agree with some who have said [candidates would be ]self-funding millionaire or millionaire backing or special interest [financing, such as] developers,” Walkup said.

Newly-elected McHenry County Board Chairman attended about three-fourths of the discussion.

When the discussion got to the Planning and Development Committee, the choice advanced by Chairman Tina Hill was newcomer Joe Gottemoller.

Gottemoller is a newly-elected member of the McHenry County Board. He has done extensive zoning work in the area and campaigned repeatedly on the over-restrictiveness and unfriendliness to business reflected in the County Zoning Ordinance.

He cited, for example, the requirement that someone operating a business out of his or her home have a separate entrance for the business.

So what does someone with extensive connections in the business community do to allay concerns about potential conflicts of interest?

Hill announced that Gottemoller’s law firm had agreed to forego any business concerning McHenry County government.

In discussions about the vice chairmanship of the Management Services Committee, someone of the Committee on Committees suggested Mike Walkup.

Another suggested Mike Skala.

Hill pointed out that Walkup had “publicly said he won’t take a chairmanship or vice chairmanship because he didn’t want [it] to appear [as] a quid pro quo.” She said it appeared in a blog comment.

Both Gottemoller and Walkup are attorneys.

Between this week and last the Crystal Lake Park Board seems to have undergone a collective brain transplant.

After sitting through an explanation of the tax levy process last week, I was convinced that taxpayers were going to be subjected to a “tax to max” vote Thursday night.

So sure was I that the headline on my last week’s article was

Crystal Lake Park District Planning to Tax to the Max

Park President Debbie Gallagher started out the discussion by hoping that the Finance Committee’s recommendation would be followed, otherwise what’s the use of having committees.

Committee Chairman Larry Wheeler, whose opinion last week was that all the money allowed under the Tax Cap should be taken, did not change his opinion, but did recommend a compromise.

The Park District would levy the maximum amount possible for the tax capped funds, but would reduce the Special Recreation Fund levy, which is not subject to the Tax Cap, enough so that the total taxes to be extracted from current taxpayers would be just under a half of one percent (0.45%).

Balances would be drawn down in various funds.

“I’m on the same page,’ Caroline Bachour-Chemaly concurred.

Gallagher noted that the proposal “captures new growth.”

“This is a far cry from what we had on the table [last week],” Mike Walkup, who resigned as of midnight in order not to have a conflict of interest when he takes office as a member of the McHenry County Board.

He later pointed out, “This is virtually a flat line.”

At the levy workshop, a consensus seemed to have been reached to ask for a 4.69% increase in the levy. Because the Consumer Price Index only increased 3% and new growth was estimated at about 3/10 of 1%, there was no chance of such an increase, but it was typical of the balloon levying most tax districts employed in boom times in order to get as much money as possible from the property tax.

Angel Collins, who was absent for the levy workshop said, “The time of just hitting it all the time might be gone for a little while.”

She supported scaling back the amount of taxes requested “in keeping with the understanding that people are having a hard time,” but noted it was “not something we can do all the time.

“We’re not a business where we can go out and raise our prices. We’re a government.”

When it was Paul Meyers’ time to talk, he said, “I know I was the renegade in this.”

As you can see by reading the article about the levy workshop, Meyer was the one who brought up the proposal to freeze the levy.

He pointed out that tax collections had increased 53% over the last ten years.

“I appreciate this is a group of people willing to compromise.”

Executive Director Jason Herbster the levy still captured the new growth and the increase in the CPI for those funds under the Real Estate Tax Cap.

“People shouldn’t be paying anymore than they did last year, except for the bonds.”

Collins observed that the Park District’s share of the tax bill was only about 5%.

“If you want a change, people need to go to the school districts,” she advised.

Gallagher prompted Herbster to tell of employee cutbacks.

He said the full-time staff was “down 9 from 73 to 64″ since he became Executive Director.

Gallagher announced her support for the compromise, but said, “When times are tough like this more people will be using the parks and the library.”

“This isn’t something we can do three, four or five years in a row.”

Jerry Sullivan, one of the most vociferous advocates of not foregoing any of the new tax money allowed under the Tax Cap, was absent.

= = = = =

After the vote I asked if I could speak out of turn and thank the Board.

Multiple sources have told McHenry County Blog that the McHenry County State’s Attorney Lou Bianchi’s Office is making contact with the three newly-elected members of the County Board to advise them of the conflict of interest that would exist if they did not resign their current posts.

The three and their current positions follow:

• Carolyn Schofield, Crystal Lake City Council
• Mike Skala, Huntley District 158 School Board
• Mike Walkup, Crystal Lake Park District

Of the three, Walkup has resigned as of midnight Thursday, November 15th.

Schofield has announced her intention to resign.

Skala has said that he does not intend to resign until February.

In the article linked above, you can read  1993 opinion from Attorney General Roland Burris that concludes serving on a school board and a county board at the same time is “incompatible, and one person may not serve simultaneously in both offices.”

Delaying his resignation from the School Board until February would allow the remaining members of the Board to appoint his replacement for the next two years.

Resignation prior to being sworn into the County Board would allow people to run to fill the remaining two years of this term.

Pete Gonigam at First Electric Newspaper has details of Skala’s resignation plans.

This is the last installment about McHenry County Board member-elect’s thoughts on township government.

CAN YOU JUST REFORM THE TOWNSHIPS?

There are some things that could be potentially done to improve the efficiency of township government.

I actually ran for Supervisor in 2000 on a reform platform.

I had a number of proposals to consolidate and trim various aspects of the Supervisor’s office, and work with other townships to merge some functions.

For instance, you could merge the interim assistance function with neighboring townships so that only one township would have to incur the overhead to keep an office and staff for when someone wandered in off the street looking for assistance.

Smaller townships which have part time assessors could merge the assessment function.

Road districts in the more populated townships could develop agreements with municipalities and the county to take over the road repairs and snow plowing in the less accessible locations.

It turns out, however, that townships are not going to pursue those types of reforms unless their very existence is meaningfully threatened.

They will also not try to work out any of the transition issues for how services could be provided by other units of government until a township is actually dissolved and they are forced into it.

As a case in point, the [Ann] Hughes Committee, which was formed in the General Assembly immediately after Bob Anderson succeeded in getting the abolition question on the ballot, was advertised to have been formed to explore the various transition issues of how services would be picked up by other governmental units.

Instead of doing that, when the referendum failed, they just passed a bill to make it more difficult to abolish townships county wide and adjourned.

Most of the Republicans running for office this year have made smaller government the foundation of their platforms.

Yet, when it comes to actually doing something about an area of government that could easily be reformed or eliminated, they are strangely silent.

I have gone into this issue now because this is the time for people to be circulating petitions to run for township offices.

[Filing is from November 19th through November 26th.  Make sure you file a statement of economic interest with the County Clerk's Office and attach a receipt to the petition, whose pages must be numbered and stapled together.  Otherwise an opponent like Marc Munaretto might challenge your petition, the way he did Nancy Scalero's when she filed to run against him in his first election.  Because the pages were not numbered, Nancy was kicked off the ballot.]

There look to be several hotly contested races in at least three of the most populous townships in our county.

What better time to have a discussion of how necessary the townships really are?

If you comment in the comments section, I will attempt to respond. Please keep your comments factual, do not try to engage in personal attacks on anyone else, and don’t post false posts in someone else’s name.

This installment of McHenry County Board member-elect Mike Walkup’s thoughts on township government concerns the political aspect.

THE POLITICS OF TOWNSHIPS

One of the main arguments for the continuation of townships is that the offices of Assessor and Road Commissioner are elected and that township government, being physically smaller than the county, is therefore more accountable to the people via the electoral process.

There is some surface appeal to this argument.

However, it is belied once you look at how the elections for township offices are actually held.

Elections for township office are held every four years in odd numbered years in the Spring.

The next one will be in April of 2013.

The general election portion of the township election coincides with elections for municipal offices and school boards, which are known as the Consolidate Elections.

Voter turnout at Consolidated Elections is invariably low, unless there is some type of taxing referendum on the ballot at the same time.

Typically, turnout in years with no taxing referenda is around 15% to 20%.

If more people are coming in to vote for a taxing referendum, they usually only know about that referendum and are not familiar with the candidates for township offices which they are surprised to see also on the ballot.

They will either not vote for those offices or will guess their way through that portion.

In the more populous townships which have adopted partisan elections, the situation is much worse.

No Democrat has ever been elected to township office in McHenry County so far as I am aware.  [Not on the Demcoratic Party label, as far as I know.]

Therefore, the Republican primary become tantamount to the entire election.

People who show up for the general election are usually even more Republican oriented than the population of voters who vote in general elections like the one we just had.

When, then, IS the Republican primary for township offices?

You may be surprised to learn that it is in February, 2013.

[Filing for GOP primaries in Algonquin, Dorr, Grafton, McHenry and Nunda Townships is from November 19th through 26th.  Petitions must be filed with the township clerk, along with a statement of candidacy and receipt from the filing of a Statement of Economic Interest with the County Clerk's Office.  These must be stapled together.  Pages must be numbered.]

Very, very, very few people show up for this election, making it easier for townships to overwhelm the vote with their supporters.

Typically the turnouts for the primary are in the single digits percentage wise.

This assumes that there even IS a Republican primary.

There does not necessarily have to be one.

If they want, the precinct committeemen of the township Republican Party can vote at one of their meetings (which the public does not attend) to select all of the township candidates by caucus.

Then there is no primary and the general election is a foregone conclusion.

Oftentimes, various township officials or their spouses are also Republican precinct committeemen .

When do you vote for your Republican Party precinct committeemen?

You do that in the primary election in even numbered years, but only if you vote in the Republican primary.

Only about a third of the registered voters vote in either primary.

The precinct committeeman position is at the very end of the ballot, and is usually uncontested.

Virtually no one knows that this vote can, in effect, determine who the township officials will be the following year.

ARE ARGUMENTS TO ABOLISH TOWNSHIPS PARTISAN?

It has been commented on this blog that it is the Democrats who are interested in abolishing townships because most townships are in Republican areas and this would get rid of some Republican office holders and patronage jobs.

Actually, the movement to abolish townships in Illinois was started by a paralegal named Mike Richardson, who is a Republican and who lives in an area where the Democrats control the townships.

Bob Anderson, who spearheaded the effort in McHenry County, is very much a Republican.

The City of Evanston has placed an advisory referendum on the ballot to abolish Evanston Township, both of those bodies being Democratic.  [It should be noted that Evanston Township has the same bounaries

Final installment: Are Townships Ready for Reform?