McHenry County Blog

This morning’s ribbon cutting for Rakow Road had a bit better weather than the snowy day when the road was inaugurated.

The sides to the tent weren’t lowered today.

No participation, but wind strong enough to lift the unweighted tent poles from the parking lot surface.

And, it mused up more than Miller’s hair.

Traffic on the 32,000 a day road was light between 9 and 9:30 in the morning.

The road is designed to handle 60,000 vehicles a day.

The main speaker was Phyllis Walters, the wife of Jim Rakow, the man after whom the road is named.

She pointed out that she wished Congressman Don Manzullo was in attendance since he had gotten $7 million for the widening of the road put into the Federal budget.  She said she would miss having him as Congressman.

And, then it was off to cut the ribbon.

No stopping traffic.

This ribbon cutting was as symbolic as the ground breaking ceremony a year and a half ago.

The ribbon cutting part of the ceremony did not go as planned.

By this time I was laughing my head off.

I was asking,  “Is anyone getting video of this?”

If at first you don’t succeed…

And the wind kept blowing.

I was laughing so hard, had I had a camera with film, the photos would have been fuzzy.

Maybe you had to be there to enjoy the spectacle.

I’m sure the guys who did the work were amused.

Afterward, there was a rush to the inside of one of the businesses in the at least half empty strip mall which has to have been hurt by the two construction seasons.

Now maybe the at least half empty strip mall at the intersection of McHenry Avenue and Rakow Road will find some tenants.

With tax bills having arrived, it seems appropriate to call attention again to those McHenry County Board members who recommended to tax us to the max:

Who Voted to Raise Your County Taxes?

The Board members voted “balloon” levy, that is, they asked for more than they knew they could ever get to make sure they captured the full 1.5% increase allowed under the Real Estate Tax Cap law.

Plus all the new construction in the County.

I noted that the McHenry County Board’s tax take was 1.85% higher than last year and asked County Administrator Peter Austin why.

Here is his answer:

“Three main reasons:

1. New Growth of $31,668,547 – Not capped in first year
2. State of Illinois assigned a .017700 multiplier
3. Valuations continue to decline, causing tax rates to artificially increase to maintain parity with tax revenues from the prior year.

“This is not unique to only the County’s rate. This is happening across all taxing bodies within the County also.

“I would recommend to any person questioning the “why” to view the County Clerk’s web site where all of the calculation formulas are displayed.”

The County and bunches of other tax districts have been pushed under the statutory maximum tax rate by the Property Tax Cap.

Because there is no meaningful rate limit, when tax districts ask for more money, as long as the figure in state law is with the inflationary increase allowed by the Tax Cap (which the technicians call PTELL), rates increase to make up for decreases in assessed valuation.

Judge Gordon Graham turned thumbs down on reconsideration of the amount of money he has authorized for payment to Special Prosecutors Henry Tonigan and Thomas McQueen.

The request of Illinois-Appellate Prosecutor Charles Colburn was made on behalf of the McHenry County Board.

He argued that state law had changed since the 1973 court case upon which the Judge was relying. The change was passed in 1988 and, according to Colburn, was intended to rein in fees for Special Prosecutors.

It did so by requiring fees to be tied to the salary of the State’s Attorney in the county, which in McHenry County is $166.508.

The hourly fee under this “apportionment” approach would be $91.50 an hour, based on a State’s Attorney working a seven hour day.

The latest bill from the Special Prosecutors–$69,910–was for 218 hours for a four-month period. My math tells me that works out to $320 an hour. Because expenses are also included, the hourly rate, would be less.  The figure $250 per hour came out, but Tonigan refused to reveal his hourly rate when I asked him the first time I saw him in court

This is re-enforced by McQueen’s having revealed after court today that the Special Prosecutor in Amy Dalby’s case was paid $300 an hour. McQueen noted that nobody objected to that fee.

McQueen pointed out that the $169,000 he and Tonigan had billed was over a 15-month period, which is about what the State’s Attorney makes in a year.

Colburn pointed out that the two were not working full-time on the case and had the opportunity to make additional money, which was prohibited for full-time State’s Attorneys.

McQueen kept coming back to the early 1970′s to justify being paid more than would result under the 1988 law passed to rein in Special Prosecutor’s fees.

Graham pointed out that a motion to reconsider is “generally brought on newly discovered evidence not available at the time.

“What’s different today that was (available when the issue was decided)?”

Graham emphasized that there is “no case law [court decision] to support your position.

“Where do you have standing. You’re putting me in a difficult position.”

Both the Judge and Colburn read from the transcript, which is sealed to outside eyes.

Colbun pointed to pages 7-9 of the March 14th hearing, which “indicated an apportionment should be made.”

“Weren’t you going to provide (me the details)…wIt until after the fact to tell me what you (think the Special Prosecutor should be paid).”

Graham was clearly upset.

“I assumed the Court would be making an apportionment,” Colburn replied.

“I asked you that a month ago,” Graham said. “Want to tell me what you mean by apportionment?”

Again the Judge asked,

“Any case law?”

“No,” was Colburn’s reply.

Colburn then explained two methods that the apportionment method could be determined.

For the latest bill, $69,910, the suggested method would yield
$20-21,000 without expenses.

“I find it amazing that you would stand here and go through this recitation,” Graham replied. “You have shown no change in the law, the Barrett case in 1974.”

After reading the case, Graham made his ruling:

“I deny your motion to reconsider because I don’t think you’re provided anything new.”

Next up were the motions filed by Lou Bianchi Attorney Terry Ekl on behalf of six citizens.

Will the decision be appealed?

“This is under discussion,” County Administrator Peter Austin said.

That story will come later.

= = = = =

From a personal point of view, I was listening to Judge Graham with a legislative branch hat on.

The Illinois General Assembly, indeed, every legislative body, regularly identifies court decisions that don’t make sense.  That is apparently what happened regarding the 1973 o4 1974 (both years were referenced) Barrett decision upon which Judge Graham hangs his decision.

Illinois lawmakers passed a law in 1988 to overturn that decision, as I heard the chronology.  That is the law of the land, this non-lawyer thinks.

When Judge Graham saof, “You have shown no change in the law, the Barrett case in 1974,” I’m figuratively slapping myself on the forehead saying, “Whoooa.”

But Judge Graham was obviously looking of his definition of the law and I was looking at it from my legislative branch point of view.

And, he is the udge.  I’m just a former State Representative.

It would be interesting to see what an Appellate Court would think of his reasoning.

The Northwest Herald’s Kevin Craver covered the McHenry County Board’s Management Services Committee meeting Friday.

Guess what?

The animal control folks have enough money to do what they wanted to do at the Crytal Lake Route 14 former State Farm Insurance building…without the extra $773,000 the county board rejected at its last meeting.

The article says County Administrator Pete Austin observed,

“It’s not ideal – we knew it wouldn’t be ideal at this point – but it’s workable.”

And without a McHenry County Republican Cat Tax.

Imagine that.

Here are a couple of the cutbacks Craver gives:

• “$27,000 by reducing aesthetic millworking” and
• “using county staff instead of subcontractors for installing the kennels and landscape watering system.”

There will be enough space for 103 cats and 60 dogs.

And room for a Crystal Lake Health Department outpost for people, too.

According to the NW Herald,

Barbara Wheeler, R-Crystal Lake, does not want to see the health annex shortchanged, especially since the county has applied for a grant to fund breast and cervical cancer screening for low-income women.

= = = = =

The picture at the top is Pete Austin, McHenry County Administrator. At the bottom is McHenry County Board member Barb Wheeler.

The Northwest Herald’s Kevin Craver covered the McHenry County Board’s Management Services Committee meeting Friday.

Guess what?

The animal control folks have enough money to do what they wanted to do at the Crytal Lake Route 14 former State Farm Insurance building…without the extra $773,000 the county board rejected at its last meeting.

The article says County Administrator Pete Austin observed,

“It’s not ideal – we knew it wouldn’t be ideal at this point – but it’s workable.”

And without a McHenry County Republican Cat Tax.

Imagine that.

Here are a couple of the cutbacks Craver gives:

• “$27,000 by reducing aesthetic millworking” and
• “using county staff instead of subcontractors for installing the kennels and landscape watering system.”

There will be enough space for 103 cats and 60 dogs.

And room for a Crystal Lake Health Department outpost for people, too.

According to the NW Herald,

Barbara Wheeler, R-Crystal Lake, does not want to see the health annex shortchanged, especially since the county has applied for a grant to fund breast and cervical cancer screening for low-income women.

= = = = =

The picture at the top is Pete Austin, McHenry County Administrator. At the bottom is McHenry County Board member Barb Wheeler.