Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Durbin splits hairs
Next Post: Question of the day
Posted in:
* From the Telegraph…
A bill sponsored by state Rep. Jay Hoffman, D-Swansea, that could allow significant savings for Belleville taxpayers by allowing for the dissolution of Belleville Township has passed through the Illinois House and Senate and will now be sent to the governor. […]
Current law only permits townships to be dissolved if there is a county-wide vote approving the dissolution of all townships within the county. Hoffman’s bill, House Bill 3693, allows the members of the Belleville Township Board and Belleville City Council to approve a dissolution ordinance without requiring a countywide vote.
Belleville Township’s lone task is providing temporary general welfare assistance to families who are waiting to receive state aid. The township uses an operating cost of $288,000 and only provides $177,000 in assistance to local families.
That’s some pretty darned low hanging fruit right there.
* I bring this up because Lt. Gov. Evelyn Sanguinetti’s task force on reducing the number of local governments has been bogged down over her apparent insistence on a handful of anti-union proposals…
The panel met May 20 at the offices of the Illinois Municipal League in Springfield. That meeting came after two previous meetings in April and in May had to be canceled.
But, not enough members showed up May 20 to have a quorum, leaving the committee unable to vote on recommendations designed to jump-start the consolidation process.
Some of the absences were by design. Labor unions, for example, opposed recommendations affecting the prevailing wage, privatization and relief from unfunded state mandates.
The unions then called union-friendly members of the committee and asked them to simply stay away from the meeting.
Afterward, Sanguinetti pledged to work hard to ensure enough members show up at a late June meeting to have an official vote.
Right. Good luck with that.
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 11:58 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Durbin splits hairs
Next Post: Question of the day
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Some posts speak for themselves.
This one says it all.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 12:08 pm
I kinda feel bad for Slip and Sue, but if you’re going to insist on things that won’t bring people together as “musts”, indeed, can anyone play this game?
If Slip and Sue were smart, she’d already have used her magic in this and all of the “stuff” the guy that hired her wanted.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 12:11 pm
The fact is, Illinois has way more units of local government than other states. (Pennsylvania may have a similar number.)
If other states get along with fewer units, it’s possible.
The challenge is, most of these units have elected officials who are unlikely to go quietly.
Consolidation will reduce property taxes, maybe a little, maybe a lot. Gotta at least seriously consider.
Comment by Sir Reel Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 12:19 pm
Another superstar gettin’ it done for Illinois!
Comment by Ducky LaMoore Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 12:22 pm
It is what it is, but this one certainly could play with the narrative that the other side is for “big and expanding” government and not consolidation. Voters understand consolidation. That one’s a firecracker with people.
Comment by A guy Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 12:31 pm
===It is what it is,===
First, can we please ban this phrase? It’s so overused and meaningless.
Second, voters understand consolidation, and it usually means their kids taking a long bus ride to another school when school districts consolidate. When we count the number of governments in Illinois, please don’t forget the school districts.
Other special units of government are relics that were only created to borrow money. Some, like township government, will have to find another unit of government to provide their services, which while hopefully more efficient, are hardly a guarantee of actual bottom-line taxpayer savings.
I’m all for consolidation, but let’s understand precisely what we’re talking about or that firecracker will blow your fingers off.
Comment by 47th Ward Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 12:37 pm
Well said, 47. The “less government” crowd often runs with the “save billions by ferreting out waste, fraud and abuse” crusaders. Do it, but be thoughtful about it and don’t bring an ideological agenda into the mix.
Comment by Arthur Andersen Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 12:45 pm
Would we be eliminating township governments if we didn’t have a political party constantly telling us we’re broke?
The savings here is less than what the governor makes in 20 minutes.
Comment by VanillaMan Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 12:54 pm
==- A guy - Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 12:31 pm:==
Most of the things Sanguinetti is pressing for have nothing to do with consolidating government.
Comment by Precinct Captain Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 12:59 pm
=== That’s some pretty darned low hanging fruit right there. ===
1. A lot of low hanging fruit adds up. As a taxpayer, I’m not interested in funding government for the sake of funding — I’ll gladly take a few hundred of my property tax bill.
2. We need to start to go after some of this low hanging fruit to build momentum toward higher fruit.
Comment by Just Observing Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 1:04 pm
++When we count the number of governments in Illinois, please don’t forget the school districts.++
Schools can not pass laws! Therefore, a school is not a government body.
Comment by Mama Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 1:05 pm
=== voters understand consolidation, and it usually means their kids taking a long bus ride to another school when school districts consolidate. When we count the number of governments in Illinois, please don’t forget the school districts. ===
Schools and school districts, as you know, are two different things.
Comment by Just Observing Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 1:06 pm
In Belleville, would another governmental entity take responsibility for:
“. . . providing temporary general welfare assistance to families who are waiting to receive state aid.”
Comment by Bill White Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 1:10 pm
I do see a point in townships, but not co-terminous townships. That is just wasteful.
Comment by Just Me Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 1:15 pm
===Schools can not pass laws! Therefore, a school is not a government body.===
Mama, maybe Capitol Fax isn’t the best blog for you. Isn’t there a local paper near you that allows comments? Start there and get some practice, and then you can come back here.
http://www.ilga.gov/commission/lrb/con7.htm
Comment by 47th Ward Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 1:15 pm
Point of Information:
Illinois had 6,026 units of local government that levied property taxes in 2013, payable in 2014, according to data compiled by the Illinois Department of Revenue. The total included 860 school districts and 2,221 special districts.
More information is available at http://www.revenue.state.il.us/AboutIdor/TaxStats/PropertyTaxStats/2013/
Comment by Anonymous Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 1:19 pm
My apologies, the 1:19 “anonymous” was my submission.
Comment by Charlie Wheeler Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 1:21 pm
== Second, voters understand consolidation, and it usually means their kids taking a long bus ride to another school when school districts consolidate ==
Well living in one of the larger geoprahic districts in the state I can say, kids get used to it. It isn’t the end of the world.
But when I hear consolidation I hear the idea of getting rid of mosquito abatement districts, getting rid of a township that provides services to some folks but not others, services than can be provided at the county level without hundreds of thousands of dollars of additional salaries. A government entity that can’t afford to maintain the roads they have, but had the money up to credit the state rep for getting them the money to put in a stoplight.
Do we really need a highway commission who gets paid a salary that is more than a thousand dollars a year per mile of road the township is responsible for?
I would say the answer is no and a resounding one at that.
Comment by OneMan Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 1:30 pm
+++ 47th Ward - Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 12:37 pm:
===It is what it is,===
First, can we please ban this phrase? It’s so overused and meaningless.+++
No.
Comment by A guy Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 1:36 pm
Voters have come to evaluate this by the number of line items on their tax bill. They was less of them, and the ones that remain they would like to see either lower numbers, or not growing.
They equate government bodies with more taxing. We can dance all night about how that might be the wrong way to look at it. Doesn’t matter. This is how they see it. It’s been pounded into them over years.
Comment by A guy Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 1:41 pm
Oops. *They want less of them (not they was) Sorry.
Comment by A guy Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 1:42 pm
This one makes sense since Belleville township doesn’t function like most other townships and have a road commissioner. Another one would be where the great Rich Miller lives, Capital township and the city of Springfield.
Comment by The Colossus of Roads Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 1:43 pm
Townships in rural areas, full of unincorporated areas can be somewhat useful. However, in largely populated townships full of municipalities and little to no unincorporated areas, they’re completely useless and a waste of taxpayer money. In the Metro East, it’s nothing more than a political animal used to create crony jobs, and I’m sure in the Chicago area it’s the same.
Comment by econ prof Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 1:47 pm
One Man, I wish to hell that I was making a thousand dollars a year per mile; I make less than half that type of salary; I have 80 miles of road-you do the math. State maintainers start at a salary higher than, have nothing invested except maybe a lunch bucket, have no responsibilities except to show up. You have no idea of what my job entails or how much the job is worth.
Willy had a word for people who had comments like that—–
Comment by downstate commissioner Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 2:19 pm
end townships now!
Comment by Amalia Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 2:23 pm
What does the prevailing wage have to do with reducing the number of local governments?
Comment by Demoralized Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 2:38 pm
Apparently, Rich, some folks can play this game.
It’s just that none of them work for the governor.
Comment by Juvenal Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 2:58 pm
I have little faith in this “consolidation coalitions”. The local one in Sangamon County has barely done anything in the near decade during which it has existed and met.
I literally cannot think of a single entity - other than a couple of Springfield libraries - which has closed since the coalition was formed. Every township is still in existence. No schools have closed. And even the libraries were closed because the Springfield City Council - and not the coalition - made the decision (and it was mostly related to the Great Recession budget problems).
So color me skeptical - at best.
Comment by Team Sleep Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 3:12 pm
Working group “bogged down” by Rauner’s key representative insisting on an unrelated Turnaround Agenda item, before dealing with their stated mission.
Where have we heard that before?
Comment by walker Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 3:25 pm
Townships may have been needed when the county seat was a day’s ride on a horse and buggy, but they are no more needed than a buggy whip today. They are mostly government troughs for politically connected families. I live in a county without any township government and county handles these services much more efficiently.
Comment by dr. reason a. goodwin Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 4:51 pm
Guy, apparently we’ll need to add “irony” to that long list of concepts that zip by unnoticed over your dome.
Funding a “task force” that cant even put a quorum together, though the useless office of l.g., to reduce ineffective layers of government? Give it a think.
Comment by Wordslinger Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 5:18 pm
Here’s how I view consolidation:
1) for schools focus on elementary and high school districts (particularly districts with 1 school) before unit districts.
2) examine townships in the urban areas and see if they can be eliminated, maybe even look at a state law abolishing them in every county above a certain population.
3) I think mosquito abatement districts should just be flat out eliminated and all responsibilities transferred to local health departments.
4) expand the DuPage consolidation bill to the whole state instead of just McHenry and Lake and whatever else is in the current bill.
But taking on all this extra stuff that has nothing to do with reducing the number of governments is counterproductive.
Comment by MyTwoCents Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 6:37 pm
Is that article correct? Evanston Township was dissolved without all suburban Cook County townships being eliminated. Admittedly, the legislation drawn up for Evanston Township might be applicable to other Cook County townships that are coterminous with a single municipality.
Comment by Under Further Review Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 8:06 pm
Lets bargain, first lets establish what we have to have in the outcome . . . ok, now lets get started with working groups with everyone prepared to compromise while ensuring what we must have is in the final deal. Works for me except I’ve never found another party to negotiate under those conditions.
Comment by nadia Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 8:42 pm
@ufr: If I remember correctly, STate Rep. Daniel Biss was one of the folks who worked to get Evanston Township eliminated.
I grew up on a farm in Southern Illinois, and I live in a city now. Townships definitely serve a purpose in the rural areas (if the township I grew up in had not existed, our road repairs would have been made from the scraps left over after the townships with larger populations than ours were done fixing their roads–in other words, very rarely, and with very small budgets.), and most of them do not have large staffs or payroll budgets.
However, I live in a city now, and we have a co-terminous township, as does the city next door. Does welfare, but no roads or other programs. I fully agree that co-terminous townships should not exist.
And why does a state with 102 counties need 860+ school districts? Indiana and Iowa have county-wide school districts, and I would argue their children aren’t doing significantly worse than ours here in Illinois.
This blog has a self-selected audience who may be able to answer these questions:
1. How many people here are aware of the fact that we have elementary school districts with less than 150 students in this state?
2. How many people here are aware of areas (mostly in Chicagoland) where you have elementary, middle school, and high school districts? You can live in the same house for 10+ years and pay taxes to 3 different school districts!
3. How many people here are aware of situations like Rantoul Township High School, which recieves children from FIVE different elementary school districts, all within a 10 mile radius of RTHS?
4. And remember folks, each of those 860+ school districts has its own superintendent and at least one school principal (some of the small districts combine these jobs)! Talk about administrative overhead!!
Comment by Lynn S, Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 12:33 am