McHenry County Blog

When Tom Cross replaced Lee Daniels as House Minority Leader, one of the changes he put forth was that he would not serve forever like Daniels did.

Ten years would be enough, thank you.

Cross has now taken the limit on his tenure as leader out of the House Republican rule book.

And, remember how Cross allowed the members to pick half the sub-leaders?

That disappeared this year, too.

Of course, a majority of the members concurred.

The more things change the more they become the same.

The longer a leader is in power, the less democratic he becomes.

I found the following in a Nov. 11, 2007, email newsletter from now-outgoing State Rep. Ruth Munson (R-Elgin):

“With the exception of the House Republicans, there are no term limits for leaders.

“Additionally, in all but the House Republican Caucus, the caucus leader appoints the entire leadership team.

“It is argued that the lack of term limits and the appointment of the entire leadership team by the caucus leader consolidates power into a handful of individuals, making it very difficult for rank and file members to influence policymaking.

“It was precisely this thinking that led to the reforms implemented by the House Republican Caucus in 2003. Individual members wanted a stronger voice and voted on new rules that limits an individual to no more than 10 years (5 terms) as leader and provides for half of the leadership team to be elected by the caucus members. These rules opened the door for more member participation in policymaking and more input into the legislative process.

“Because of these self-imposed changes, the House Republican leadership is directly accountable to caucus members (or they won’t be re-elected). The leader solicits member input before sitting down at the negotiating table and includes members in discussions about issues and policy direction.”

And newly-elected State Rep. Kay Hatcher (R-Yorkville) wrote the following in answer to an Aurora Beacon questionnaire:

“Unlike the other bodies, House Minority Leader Tom Cross has instituted a voluntary Leader term limit, which I think is a VERY healthy philosophy.

“Too much power, for too long, strangles the initiative of potential leaders, gridlocks the system and reinforces the public’s belief that Springfield sometimes does more damage than good.

“Cross has done a phenomenal job of finding common ground between members of both parties. I believe instituting a leadership term limit for the Majority and Minority Leaders for both the Senate and House would do wonders to clear the air.”

When Tom Cross replaced Lee Daniels as House Minority Leader, one of the changes he put forth was that he would not serve forever like Daniels did.

Ten years would be enough, thank you.

Cross has now taken the limit on his tenure as leader out of the House Republican rule book.

And, remember how Cross allowed the members to pick half the sub-leaders?

That disappeared this year, too.

Of course, a majority of the members concurred.

The more things change the more they become the same.

The longer a leader is in power, the less democratic he becomes.

I found the following in a Nov. 11, 2007, email newsletter from now-outgoing State Rep. Ruth Munson (R-Elgin):

“With the exception of the House Republicans, there are no term limits for leaders.

“Additionally, in all but the House Republican Caucus, the caucus leader appoints the entire leadership team.

“It is argued that the lack of term limits and the appointment of the entire leadership team by the caucus leader consolidates power into a handful of individuals, making it very difficult for rank and file members to influence policymaking.

“It was precisely this thinking that led to the reforms implemented by the House Republican Caucus in 2003. Individual members wanted a stronger voice and voted on new rules that limits an individual to no more than 10 years (5 terms) as leader and provides for half of the leadership team to be elected by the caucus members. These rules opened the door for more member participation in policymaking and more input into the legislative process.

“Because of these self-imposed changes, the House Republican leadership is directly accountable to caucus members (or they won’t be re-elected). The leader solicits member input before sitting down at the negotiating table and includes members in discussions about issues and policy direction.”

And newly-elected State Rep. Kay Hatcher (R-Yorkville) wrote the following in answer to an Aurora Beacon questionnaire:

“Unlike the other bodies, House Minority Leader Tom Cross has instituted a voluntary Leader term limit, which I think is a VERY healthy philosophy.

“Too much power, for too long, strangles the initiative of potential leaders, gridlocks the system and reinforces the public’s belief that Springfield sometimes does more damage than good.

“Cross has done a phenomenal job of finding common ground between members of both parties. I believe instituting a leadership term limit for the Majority and Minority Leaders for both the Senate and House would do wonders to clear the air.”

Early on in the Protect Marriage Illinois advisory petition campaign the Illinois Republican Party was making supportive noises.

There was even a link on the main page of the state GOP web site.

But, as far as I know, no Republican organization helped gather signatures.

And the petition effort fell short.

Not a lot short, but not enough signatures were gathered where it was thought the petition could withstand a vigorous attack from well-financed organized homosexuals.

Now, it turns out that about the only bright spot on the conservative election horizon is the constitutional amendment banning of same sex marriage in California.

The ballot measure, labeled Proposition 8, is passing 52.3% to 47.7%. There’s over a half million vote spread.

Ironically, many of the same voters who pushed Barack Obama to victory voted to ban same sex marriage.

Exit polls taken of 1,200 voters in 50 Los Angeles precincts by the Center for the Study of Los Angeles at Loyola Marymount University found that “50 percent of Latinos voted for Proposition 8 and 39 opposed it, while 47 percent of African-Americans voted for it and 40 percent against it,” according to the LA Times

So, here’s my question?

Had the state GOP gotten the Protect Marriage advisory referendum on the ballot in Illinois, might someone like Elgin’s State Rep. Ruth Munson have eeked out a victory, instead of losing by an unofficial 322 votes?

Understand that I don’t know how Munson stands on the issue and she would obviously have to been against gay marriage and her opponent Keith Farnham would have had to have been in favor of it for my suggested strategy to have had a chance of working.

However, if they had been on opposite sides of the issue, Elgin could have been ready-made to have replicated how California voters behaved.

In 2000, Elgin had 34% Latinos and almost 7% African Americans. These Elgin minorities are concentrated in Munson’s district. The district also dips into Carpentersville, which has 41% Hispanics, most of whom live on the East side in the Munson district.

“Blacks voted 70 percent in favor of Proposition 8, and slightly more than half the Hispanic voters backed the measure, according to exit polls released by the National Election Pool,” the Washington Times reported.

And, Andrew Pugno of ProtectMarriage.com said, “Inner-city black neighborhoods voted stronger for Prop. 8 than the Republican suburbs. An amazing analysis.”

According to Mark DiCamillo, director of The Field Poll in California,

“The Field Poll, completed one week before the election, had Catholics voting at about their registered voter population size (24% of the electorate) with voting preferences similar to those of the overall electorate, with 44% on the Yes side.

“However the network exit poll shows that they accounted for 30% of the CA electorate and had 64% of them voting Yes. Regular churchgoers showed a similar movement toward the Yes side. The pre-election Field Poll showed 72% of these voters voting Yes, while the exit poll showed that 84% of them voted Yes…

“My take is that polling on issues like same-sex marriage that have a direct bearing on religious doctrine can be affected in a big way in the final weekend by last minute appeals by the clergy and religious organizations.”

Whether Catholic Church priests and black ministers in Munson’s district would have done what their counterparts are said to have done in California is unknowable.

But, if they had, and if Munson had a campaign staff astute enough to capitalize on the issue, maybe she would have been re-elected.

Since neither the State GOP nor House Republicans nor Senate Republicans showed any inclination to help get the signatures to put the referendum on the ballot this year, I somehow doubt Munson would have been able to grab the opportunity.

If Tom Cross or Frank Watson’s successor or Andy McKenna figure out this could issue could help some legislators or even the GOP gubernatorial candidate in 2010, the time to be starting a petition campaign is now.

Early on in the Protect Marriage Illinois advisory petition campaign the Illinois Republican Party was making supportive noises.

There was even a link on the main page of the state GOP web site.

But, as far as I know, no Republican organization helped gather signatures.

And the petition effort fell short.

Not a lot short, but not enough signatures were gathered where it was thought the petition could withstand a vigorous attack from well-financed organized homosexuals.

Now, it turns out that about the only bright spot on the conservative election horizon is the constitutional amendment banning of same sex marriage in California.

The ballot measure, labeled Proposition 8, is passing 52.3% to 47.7%. There’s over a half million vote spread.

Ironically, many of the same voters who pushed Barack Obama to victory voted to ban same sex marriage.

Exit polls taken of 1,200 voters in 50 Los Angeles precincts by the Center for the Study of Los Angeles at Loyola Marymount University found that “50 percent of Latinos voted for Proposition 8 and 39 opposed it, while 47 percent of African-Americans voted for it and 40 percent against it,” according to the LA Times

So, here’s my question?

Had the state GOP gotten the Protect Marriage advisory referendum on the ballot in Illinois, might someone like Elgin’s State Rep. Ruth Munson have eeked out a victory, instead of losing by an unofficial 322 votes?

Understand that I don’t know how Munson stands on the issue and she would obviously have to been against gay marriage and her opponent Keith Farnham would have had to have been in favor of it for my suggested strategy to have had a chance of working.

However, if they had been on opposite sides of the issue, Elgin could have been ready-made to have replicated how California voters behaved.

In 2000, Elgin had 34% Latinos and almost 7% African Americans. These Elgin minorities are concentrated in Munson’s district. The district also dips into Carpentersville, which has 41% Hispanics, most of whom live on the East side in the Munson district.

“Blacks voted 70 percent in favor of Proposition 8, and slightly more than half the Hispanic voters backed the measure, according to exit polls released by the National Election Pool,” the Washington Times reported.

And, Andrew Pugno of ProtectMarriage.com said, “Inner-city black neighborhoods voted stronger for Prop. 8 than the Republican suburbs. An amazing analysis.”

According to Mark DiCamillo, director of The Field Poll in California,

“The Field Poll, completed one week before the election, had Catholics voting at about their registered voter population size (24% of the electorate) with voting preferences similar to those of the overall electorate, with 44% on the Yes side.

“However the network exit poll shows that they accounted for 30% of the CA electorate and had 64% of them voting Yes. Regular churchgoers showed a similar movement toward the Yes side. The pre-election Field Poll showed 72% of these voters voting Yes, while the exit poll showed that 84% of them voted Yes…

“My take is that polling on issues like same-sex marriage that have a direct bearing on religious doctrine can be affected in a big way in the final weekend by last minute appeals by the clergy and religious organizations.”

Whether Catholic Church priests and black ministers in Munson’s district would have done what their counterparts are said to have done in California is unknowable.

But, if they had, and if Munson had a campaign staff astute enough to capitalize on the issue, maybe she would have been re-elected.

Since neither the State GOP nor House Republicans nor Senate Republicans showed any inclination to help get the signatures to put the referendum on the ballot this year, I somehow doubt Munson would have been able to grab the opportunity.

If Tom Cross or Frank Watson’s successor or Andy McKenna figure out this could issue could help some legislators or even the GOP gubernatorial candidate in 2010, the time to be starting a petition campaign is now.

This is the fourth in my reporting on what happened at District 300’s legislative breakfast held on Monday morning.

Tom Hey, the assistant superintendent in charge of curriculum and instruction, explained that the district’s past financial problems had left little time “to focus on why we’re really here.”

He reiterated Supt. Ken Arndt’s comments that “grads and parents expect more of us and we will produce more for you…

“More students are learning more in District 300 than every before.”

He explained “our focus for the next few years will be on our high schools. ACT scores are not where we want them to be. While we have had increases, last year we had a slip in the cumulative (average).”

He promoted the goal of introducing more technology into the classroom.

State Rep. Ruth Munson (R-Elgin) told a bit of “The Women’s Tour” last year.

One of the comments from someone in an older school:

”We think we need in our classroom more than one electrical outlet.”

Chief Financial Officer Cheryl Crates told of how the district applied for one of the 3-year 2% technology loans, but “we didn’t get a penny.”

The tech guy, whose name I may run into later, said something interesting:

”We thought we might get the $30 million by then to be able to pay it back.”

State Rep. Mike Tryon (R-Crystal Lake) told of how well McHenry County’s leasing of its computers is working.

Eric Willard, Technology Director, was skeptical that it would work in District 300.

David Ulm is the energy conservation man for the district. He recounted how he, his staff and Johnson Controls have tried to save energy while keeping in mind the comfort of the children. He pits building against building and awards are given at an annual picnic.

= = = = =
On top is Tom Hey, District 300’s assistant superintendent in charge of curriculum and instruction. State Rep. Ruth Munson is the top head shot. The district’s Chief Financial Officer, Cheryl Crates is seen on the left side of the screen. State Rep. Mike Tryon is making a point with Board President Joe Stevens in the background. The photo on the bottom is of David Ulm, District 300 Energy Management Coordinator.

This is the fourth in my reporting on what happened at District 300’s legislative breakfast held on Monday morning.

Tom Hey, the assistant superintendent in charge of curriculum and instruction, explained that the district’s past financial problems had left little time “to focus on why we’re really here.”

He reiterated Supt. Ken Arndt’s comments that “grads and parents expect more of us and we will produce more for you…

“More students are learning more in District 300 than every before.”

He explained “our focus for the next few years will be on our high schools. ACT scores are not where we want them to be. While we have had increases, last year we had a slip in the cumulative (average).”

He promoted the goal of introducing more technology into the classroom.

State Rep. Ruth Munson (R-Elgin) told a bit of “The Women’s Tour” last year.

One of the comments from someone in an older school:

”We think we need in our classroom more than one electrical outlet.”

Chief Financial Officer Cheryl Crates told of how the district applied for one of the 3-year 2% technology loans, but “we didn’t get a penny.”

The tech guy, whose name I may run into later, said something interesting:

”We thought we might get the $30 million by then to be able to pay it back.”

State Rep. Mike Tryon (R-Crystal Lake) told of how well McHenry County’s leasing of its computers is working.

Eric Willard, Technology Director, was skeptical that it would work in District 300.

David Ulm is the energy conservation man for the district. He recounted how he, his staff and Johnson Controls have tried to save energy while keeping in mind the comfort of the children. He pits building against building and awards are given at an annual picnic.

= = = = =
On top is Tom Hey, District 300’s assistant superintendent in charge of curriculum and instruction. State Rep. Ruth Munson is the top head shot. The district’s Chief Financial Officer, Cheryl Crates is seen on the left side of the screen. State Rep. Mike Tryon is making a point with Board President Joe Stevens in the background. The photo on the bottom is of David Ulm, District 300 Energy Management Coordinator.

This is the third in a series of articles about Monday’s legislative breakfast given by Carpentersville District 300.

Attending were various district administrators, board members John Ryan, who chaired the meeting, and Board President Joe Stevens, plus members of the public.

There were a lot of empty chairs.

State Senator Pam Althoff (R-McHenry) and State Representatives Mike Tryon (R-Crystal Lake), Ruth Munson (R-Elgin) and Tim Schmitz (R-St. Charles) made up the legislative contingent.

Chief Financial Officer Cheryl Crates next took the floor. I can’t resist putting up a photo of here standing in front of the projector in which her face became the screen.

OK, I know I’m being naughty, and I’ve got a weird sense of humor.

But, there it was right in front of me—Crates’ face playing the role of screen. I couldn’t help myself when the word “Taxes” appeared on her cheek.

But, back to money.

Crates explained that in the last seven years the state’s share of the district’s operating budget has decrease from 29% to 16%. You can see the details on the screen, if you click to enlarge the picture.

She pointed out that as property value goes up, state aid goes down.

“We knew when the tax rate went up our state aid would go down,” Crates said.

She then attacked the state aid formula, pointing out something I had not realized:

District 300 is a mid-range district.

To me, that means radical change would leave District 300 pretty much unaffected.

“We feel it is incumbent to take on this problem and make it fairer,” she stated. “I understand the richer districts don’t want to help the poorer districts.”

At some point, appropriate here, State Rep. Mike Tryon (R-Crystal Lake) interjected that some of the Downstate school districts have local tax rates of $1.15 per hundred.

His point was that, even if they were considered “poor,” their local taxpayers were not making an adequate effort.

School Board President Joe Stevens pointed out that the so-called transition money couldn’t be used to hire teachers.
The reason is because it disappears.

State Rep. Ruth Munson (R-Elgin) pointed out she and State Senator Pam Althoff (R-McHenry) has worked on getting the fast growth money.

“We’re looking at ways to get current year funding for special education.”

This is the third in a series of articles about Monday’s legislative breakfast given by Carpentersville District 300.

Attending were various district administrators, board members John Ryan, who chaired the meeting, and Board President Joe Stevens, plus members of the public.

There were a lot of empty chairs.

State Senator Pam Althoff (R-McHenry) and State Representatives Mike Tryon (R-Crystal Lake), Ruth Munson (R-Elgin) and Tim Schmitz (R-St. Charles) made up the legislative contingent.

Chief Financial Officer Cheryl Crates next took the floor. I can’t resist putting up a photo of here standing in front of the projector in which her face became the screen.

OK, I know I’m being naughty, and I’ve got a weird sense of humor.

But, there it was right in front of me—Crates’ face playing the role of screen. I couldn’t help myself when the word “Taxes” appeared on her cheek.

But, back to money.

Crates explained that in the last seven years the state’s share of the district’s operating budget has decrease from 29% to 16%. You can see the details on the screen, if you click to enlarge the picture.

She pointed out that as property value goes up, state aid goes down.

“We knew when the tax rate went up our state aid would go down,” Crates said.

She then attacked the state aid formula, pointing out something I had not realized:

District 300 is a mid-range district.

To me, that means radical change would leave District 300 pretty much unaffected.

“We feel it is incumbent to take on this problem and make it fairer,” she stated. “I understand the richer districts don’t want to help the poorer districts.”

At some point, appropriate here, State Rep. Mike Tryon (R-Crystal Lake) interjected that some of the Downstate school districts have local tax rates of $1.15 per hundred.

His point was that, even if they were considered “poor,” their local taxpayers were not making an adequate effort.

School Board President Joe Stevens pointed out that the so-called transition money couldn’t be used to hire teachers.
The reason is because it disappears.

State Rep. Ruth Munson (R-Elgin) pointed out she and State Senator Pam Althoff (R-McHenry) has worked on getting the fast growth money.

“We’re looking at ways to get current year funding for special education.”

I could probably cover this meeting in one article as reporter David Fitzgerald of the Northwest Herald did, but why waste good notes.

The first notes I took at the Carpentersville School District 300 meting with legislators were of Superintendent Kenneth Arndt stating “the focus can now be on curriculum and instruction.”

But, as might be expected, most of the points made by staff and advisory committee chairmen were about money.

School districts basically just want to be left alone…except when they want money and don’t want to ask voters for more.

Arndt was bold enough to lay out some criticism found in the district’s 10,000-person (employees, parents, graduates, etc.) survey last year. I jotted this conclusion from the ones filled out by recent graduates:

“We felt that we were a little bit behind classmates…kids from all over the world.”

Funny thing. I had the same feeling when I competed against graduates of higher ranked high schools than Crystal Lake’s way back in 1960 at Ohio’s Oberlin College.

lso pointed out was the need “to put more emphasis on preparing out minority students (for higher education).”

Chuck Chorba, Community Building Committee Chair, led the charge for money by pointing out that the recent $185 million referendum was predicated on the premise that the state would cough up $30 million. None of that has come.

As a direct result, Chorba said, 30.5 % of the middle school students are still in trailers. He called them “mobile classrooms.”

Unstated was that the new Hampshire High School will have oodles of empty space.

I’m not sure whether it was School Board President Joe Stevens or board member John Ryan, who chaired the meeting, but one pointed out that the delay will result in costs of $6 million more.

$2 million of inflationary costs and $4 million in interest because more money will have to be borrowed than predicted.

State Senator Pam Althoff (R-McHenry) picked up on this as a prospective talking point in Springfield. Althoff was the only one of three state senators representing parts of District 300 who attended the meeting.

State Rep. Ruth Munson asked about student growth in the district.

Chief Financial Officer Cheryl Crates replied that the “growth is still going to happen, but it will push out (and, here, I can’t remember whether she said) 2-3 or 3-4 years. It’s way past business hours, so maybe she’ll email me with the correct figure and I can take the other one out.

In any event, a guy in the back interjected that growth next year will be 1-2%.

More tomorrow.

= = = = =
In the top photo, Northwest Herald reporter David Fitzgerald interviews State Rep. Mike Tryon as State Senator Pam Althoff looks on. District 300 Superintendent Ken Arndt is in the head shot on the upper left. Community Building Committee Chair Chuck Chorba is seen facing right in the other head shot. District 300 School Board President Joe Stevens is seen talking to those assembled with school board member John Ryan listening. At the bottom, State Senator Pam Althoff confers with State Representative Ruth Munson about a point being considered at the breakfast.

The following letter arrived from State Representative Mike Tryon.

I am happy to pass it on.

Dear Friend,

Last week the Democrat-controlled House and Senate voted to raise the taxes of McHenry County residents in order to bail out Chicago’s mass transit system, who’s years of mismanagement put them so deep in debt that they’re once again raising taxes just to maintain the status quo.

The Democrat’s legislation will impose a $500 million tax increase including a quarter point sales tax increase in suburban Cook County and a half point sales tax increase in the collar counties.

This raises the per capita sales tax in Chicago by $20 to $100 for a family of five.

In McHenry County, it raises the per capita sales tax by $62 to $310 for a family of five.

For McHenry County, this legislation increases our tax burden higher than Chicago’s, with only a small fraction of our residents using a mass transit system.

This tax increase will come with no expansion of services, no additional routes for McHenry County, no decrease in commuting time, and no road or infrastructure improvements in McHenry County.

This is a short-term fix for a mismanaged Chicago transportation system.

The only guarantee this tax increase will bring is another doomsday scenario as this legislation does nothing to address the capital needs of the mass transit system.

The CTA has already stated that without a capital bill to repair aging tracks, trains, wheels, buses and a host of other infrastructure needs, another doomsday is expected.

Additionally, this tax increase promises that seniors will be paying more for essential items like groceries and prescription drugs.

I opposed this sales tax increase along with a number of my House Republican colleagues.

Instead of raising taxes, the Illinois House Republicans believe the best way to increase state revenue is to create jobs and to invest in the economy.

I will continue to call for a capital bill to ensure that funding is provided for crucial road projects, bridge repairs, and school construction in McHenry County and throughout the state.

Sincerely,

Michael W. Tryon
Illinois State Representative
64th District