Referendum Could Make Its Way on November Ballot
Tonight, Algonquin Township Trustees will discuss placing a consolidation referendum on the November ballot.
This is the first time the topic will be discussed formally at Algonquin Township, making Algonquin Township the second township in McHenry County to take up the issue.
A simple majority of township voters would be needed in order for the referendum to pass.
Township Road Commissioner, Andrew Gasser, was a proponent for putting township consolidation on the ballot when debated by the McHenry County Board in 2015.
What about Gasser ‘s patronage hire of Ryan Provenzano ? How is it he can get away with paying him 33 per hour when he is unskilled. Where is the outcry from his supporters Rachael Lawerence, Tirio and Demetri??? I guess it is ok when it is in your self interest.
PS What about the massive legal bills being rung up on tax payer dime for Gasser’s fishing expedition on prior administration.
Yup, Gasser and Cal were in favor of the 2015 twh consolidation TAX INCREASE.
This change will give better over sight to the twh board, but will not save tax payers a dime.
Ms.Lawrence said the following to the NW Herald a few day’s ago, ”
“I’m disappointed to see the highway commissioner has continued to employ this person,” Trustee Rachael Lawrence said. “He was an unqualified patronage hire.”
http://www.nwherald.com/2018/02/09/fired-political-insider-ryan-provenzano-keeps-job-as-algonquin-townships-deputy-highway-commissioner/apipmyn/
I disagree that there will be no savings. It will mean fewer people with their hands directly on OUR money and fewer people able to misuse funds for personal gain.
Brian this is about eliminating the Highway Com. and putting the Road dept directly under township board control.
This is not eliminate the road dept or eliminate townships completely.
So there will be better over sight, but now a person with qualifications will have to be hired to run the road dept.
No savings.
Keep pushing Andy. So many people believe in you and know you are doing the right thing. Your trolls will melt away soon enough.
Guess you don’t remember my “Where’s the Beef?” article.
You can find it with the McHenry County Blog search engine.
Post the link Cal, typing in “Where’s the Beef?” didn’t work. lol
Sam, you believe Andrew’s patronage hire is a good thing?
Wow!
Try “beef.”
Here’s the link to the article with the question, “Where’s the Beef?”
You were for your CL/LW township during the 2015 debate with no proof it would save.
I found the post where after it was voted down you asked for the beef or proof.
Why didn’t you ask for proof before the 2015 vote?
Why aren’t you asking for proof now when presenting these recent consolidation attempts?
Nob, putting it under control of the township and taking control away from the Hwy Comm. will take their hands off the piggy bank.
Collectively over the entire state that should save the taxpayers money considering the current allegations of the activities of the previous Alg. Rd. Comm.
What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
If it’s a good idea in McHenry it is a good idea in Algonquin.
This will let the voters decide.
What’s wrong with that?
So what happens?
Do roads become part of municipal or county property?
Or do they remain as township roads?
If they’re township roads, who will supervise the highway department?
Will a supervisor be hired?
Will the board act as supervisors?
If a supervisor were hired, would he be selected by the board?
Townships … a license to steal!
http://www.bnd.com/news/local/article180952636.html
An American,
This change is about putting the road dept which is now separate under direct control of the twh board.
There will be no elected road commissioner if the change happens.
A supervisor will have to be hired to then run the road dept, as the township supervisor has no expertise in running road department.
A job description will have to be made for the new road dept leader, should be a Civil Eng with a P.E. so some out sourcing of engineering can be done in house, a possible savings in that respect.
Pay at least as much as we pay now to start and long term a tad more.
More over sight, no $$$$ savings in the long run if not a tad more in cost.
Putting it on the ballot is fine, but that info should be made known to all the voters before the vote.
Elimination of townships is much more complicated, so a ton more info on a PLAN should be made known before any vote on their elimination.
If you were a municipal taking over additional roads, you’d want a annexation agreement and maybe some $$$$ for initial costs.
Then those new tax payers would then pay more as they now would have the hire municipal tax % to pay.
All you really get by living in a municipality is slightly better police protection.
Also if the township was eliminated the municipal would have to raise it’s levy to make up for the kick back the township collects for them now.
Alg twh road levy, about 50% goes to the various municipalities, that would have to accounted for or just lost.
Brian, we don’t care about the whole states taxes, the issue is Alg twh property taxes only.
There will be no savings with this change without service cuts.
Instead on one touching the fund, now six will have that ability.
Spreading the chances of corruption, not decreasing the odds.
Why would you need to hire a civil engineer? It’s not a job requirement; I can only think of one Highway Commissioner in the area who is one, and lots of people seem to have issues with him.
It would be wasteful to pay to have an engineer on the payroll full time.
Some additional oversight is a good thing; the Township would no longer be able to pass the buck to an unaccountable Highway Commissioner.
At the very least, this referendum would stop the Miller Clan from running their designated heir in the next election and reestablishing their dynasty.
Billy Bob, there is work related to MFT and some other spending that takes a PE to sign by law.
It’s out sourced now in Alg twh, there maybe a savings doing it in house.
Knowledge of that out sourced $$$$ would help on the requirement of the person hired.
A PE would understand the job better also, it takes 4 years of practical work, and 4 years of college on payments, paperwork, and such to get the licence.
With no residency requirement, Alg twh could hire Condon he’s qualified.
He’ll most likely need a job anyway.
To hell with losers up there in McH twh.
An American – Yes, A job description would have to be worked up (maybe with the help of the head of McHenry Co. Highway Dept.) then the Township Board would then advertise for the position, interview and select the best available person.
Agreed, not much in $ savings just more control over spending. As it is now the Township Board can APPROVE or DENY an expenditure per statutes.
They can’t however deny every small expenditure that comes across their reports to pay the bills.
Some of you should look at the Illinois Highway Code .it has the qualifications for TWP road Commissioner , if I remember right all you need to have is a CDl .McDOT administers the MFT Money
An engineer to mow ditches.drop a plow push snow.replace a few street signs wow just what I did at 16
One less level of government would put us more in line with the rest of the country. Hint, not every state has a township system. If other states can do it and have lower taxes why can’t we do the same? I don’t buy into the concept that eliminating townships or consolidation won’t work. It’s an old out of date system based on horse and buggy days.
New Jersey has 1344 units of gov and pay more as a percentage in property taxes than we do.
New York has less gov than we do and they have the highest total tax liability in the nation.
Bigger gov and high demand for services rules.
Salt Belt states have hire costs than non salt belt states.
Bigger the gov agency the hire the costs, it’s a fact.
Our taxes only seem low when you look at individual taxing bodies.
Taken as a whole the story is much different.
By your definition if I have a nickel and you have five pennies you have more than I do.
It’s a shell game.
Here, maybe this will help the discussion:
https://www.census.gov/govs/cog/GovOrgTab03ss.html