Oversight, Not Cost Savings, Goal of Proponents’ of Putting McHenry Township Road District Under Township Board

A letter to the Northwest Herald, reprinted here with permission of Ned Neumannn, its author

Cost Savings Not Goal of Abolition of Independent McHenry Township Road District

Why do so many seemingly intelligent people read simple things and not understand them?

I think it’s fair to assume that citizens who write letters-to-the-editor also read other’s letters.

Many others have recently written explaining that the consolidation referendum in McHenry Township to combine the road district with the town board is not about costs but rather to bring about some democratic oversight to a unit of government that is run by a single individual with no oversight.

Why do so many of these people keep talking about costs?

The proposal to consolidate the road district with the town board was not advanced to save money.

Nobody should ever shy away from trying to control costs, and that will probably happen with oversight, but costs were not the driving force for this referendum.

It’s pretty hard for the people who want to keep the present system to come up with the logical argument for keeping it.

Because there is not a logical argument for keeping it is why we keep hearing about a cost study.

Let’s distract people from the topic.

The topic is supervision and oversight.

Vote Yes in November to merge the McHenry Township Road District with the town board.


Oversight, Not Cost Savings, Goal of Proponents’ of Putting McHenry Township Road District Under Township Board — 9 Comments

  1. Another letter, goodness.

    I will vote no.

    Maybe Bob the barber, Ned, and maybe that Bill guy who resigned could start a banjo trio and play at local square dances?

    They can start with the John Prine song SOUR GRAPES.

    Now for something important relating to jobs, Dean’s Food in Huntley is closing in Sept.

    130 people out of a job.

  2. Someone should tell Bob Anderson to stop misleading people saying it will save on taxation.

    Say Ned or Cal handle that.

  3. The Truth About Illinois Pensions In One Stunning Chart.

    One graphic perfectly captures the absurdity of Illinois pensions over the past three decades.

    It’s what Justice Samuel Alito described as Illinois’ “generous public-employee retirement packages” when writing for the majority in the Janus v. AFSCME decision. Alito didn’t use this graphic but he could have, because it makes his point.

    In 1987, pension promises made to active workers and retirees in the state’s five state-run pension plans totaled just $18 billion. By 2016, they had ballooned to $208 billion.

    That’s a cumulative 1,067 percent increase.

    Read this and weep

  4. It’s a shell game with Ned and Bob.

    This is the first step to get what they want.

    Bobs only goal is to get rid of townships plain and simple.

    If he has control over the road district three the board he can run it right into the ground.

  5. That’s too many chiefs and not enough Indians.

    If you believe for one second that the patronage and nepotism will end, you are a fool, it will triple.

    They are changing their story as even they now admit no tax savings will be realized.

    Why on earth would anyone vote for this dumb idea?

  6. As mentioned elsewhere, the current township road commissioners would not be kicked out of office.

    They would serve out their terms, which expire in 2021.

    Likewise, the current township boards would have no more power than they have now.

  7. The MTRD works great, no need to change a thing.

    What a few grumpy old guys with nothing else to do but bitch will not convince me otherwise.

    It is not the sh*t show in Algonquin.

  8. Paul Revere, go get your gold star stamped on your forehead by your crooked boss, Jimmy “Stoned, again” Condon.

  9. JustinFun you sound old, grumpy and stupid.

    Good luck with that buddy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *