Citizsens Speaking Out!

Wrong is wrong, no matter what party commits it! By Laurence Siegel, Kankakee County

I am non-partisan. Wrong is wrong, no matter what party commits it. We are all aware of the state of corruption among Democrats, especially in Cook County. But it is not only Democrats that are wrong. George Ryan had his infamous "Illinois First" program. A lot of money went out for things it should not had. I'm sure Kankakee citizens are proud of Splash Valley. I wonder what citizens in other parts of the state, watching their local governments and schools cut back, think about Kankakee getting a swimming pool.

The problem is not just Blago. During the last two generations, we have seen 4 governors go to jail. Is it only crooks that run for governor? Are Illinois voters only capable of electing crooks? Or is it the system itself- the "You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours" system of getting things done in Springfield? What we need is legislators to do the right thing and voters who will support them. We need legislators with the guts to propose bills and say to their fellow legislators, "I expect you to support my bill because it is the right thing to do, not because you expect to get my support for yours." We need legislators who will do this even if it means they might only get one term in office.

We need a governor who will tell people like Mike Madigan, "This is what is good for the people of Illinois, not just you and your fellow politicians. Vote for it because it is right, not just to get you and your fellow politicians reelected!" We need politicians who will vote for the people of Illinois, not campaign contributions! Until these things happen, politicians can make all the speeches they want about changes in ethics laws and absolutely nothing will happen! By the way, I think Blago was guilty and got too many years. Why? because he was not running Illinois and would have had no say in the next senator. The real leaders were Mike Madigan and Emil Jones.

After reading about two thirds of the updated "The Original Arguments", a modernized publication of the Federalist Papers, I find myself absolutely stunned that such clear intentions could be so easily ignored by the elites among us. (By "elites", I don't mean people of superior intellect; I mean usurpers who have taken it upon themselves to decide what kind of government is best for us.)

Read this quote from Federalist 57 written by James Madison; "First, the goal of every political constitution is (or ought to be) to find rulers of men who will not have just the wisdom to discern, but the virtue to pursue the common good of society. Second, it is to take all necessary precautions and keep those rulers virtuous, so long as they continue to hold the public trust."

When you read that statement from the man considered to be the main architect of the Constitution, you have to realize that a longtime ago our politicians at every level "jumped the shark".

What "virtuous" politician could ever have voted themselves such generous rewards as public service now offers? What virtuous politician could have made deals with the various local, state and federal employees that make them practically immune from firing, give them shortened working careers before qualifying for sometimes multiple pensions and compared to the people they supposedly "serve" huge pension benefits?

What virtuous system of education would have eradicated from schools the vital knowledge of the Founding Documents and the inspiring stories of those who labored to give this country its start? I'll also ask what system of education would have eliminated from the halls of knowledge the indispensable book, The Bible", from the curriculum?

Americans, we have a chance to save and restore, but we had better become involved in selecting virtuous leaders and restoring the knowledge of what real virtue is.

The public pension systems across the nation are all suffering from the same problem.

The public pension systems across the nation are all suffering from the same problem....politicians negotiating with unions using tax dollars without taxpayer representation at the bargaining table. Pres Roosevelt warned of this back in the '30s & would not allow unions in government. Kennedy reversed the decision & we are seeing the results today. The state constitution written as it is compounds the problem, "State pensions shall be an enforceable contract, the benefits of which shall not be diminished or impaired." The language invites ambiguity. It suggests that pension benefits/money however acquired is legitimate. This forgives the many manipulations used to inflate pension amts. Example, the recent report of a $55,000/yr union boss getting a 6 figure pension. The subject employee worked one day for the city of Chicago & the rest of the yr for the union allowing to get full pensions from both.

As long as the public sector is allowed to unionize the pension problems will prevail.

Saturday's (4/2/11) The Daily Journal had a front page article featuring plans for a local labor rally to show support for public employee union members in Wisconsin and Ohio. Gary Ciaccio was quoted as saying "people are looking to set back the clock 30 years." He was talking about the rights of public employee unions to negotiate not only wages, but pensions, health care benefits, vacations and sick days, not with the voters, but with the politicians sent to represent all the voters, not just union members.

Mr. Ciaccio would do well to remember that liberal President Franklin Roosevelt said public employees should never be allowed to form unions, let alone negotiate every aspect of their employment agreements with politicians who would be leaving the stage long before the bills for the contract they negotiated came due.

Public unions negotiated themselves deals that politicians never provided the funds for. It is now too late to catch up unless the unions do some serious givebacks, especially on work rules, pensions and health care. The till is empty and we cannot afford the deals that the politicians made and the taxpayers have been forced to pay for.

Just as Enron employees and others who worked for companies that went bankrupt had to face loss of jobs, pensions and health care, so must the public unions. Like it or not, the only viable solution for those working for the public is to renegotiate or face losing everything.

We all have heard the old saying "When you're in a hole, quit digging." We've heard it, but a lot of us like IL. State Rep. Lisa Dugan don't know what it means.

The State of Illinois has an unmanageable debt problem. We have unfunded liabilities that if we quit adding to right now, will take our children decades to pay off. Lisa's answer: Add to the problem: How?: Permit Senior Citizens now on Social Security and working to collect unemployment as well as Social Security if they are laid off or the jobs they have (many of them only part time) go away.

1. Social Security is an income. Most seniors working are only doing it to supplement it, not live off of the income from work. Allowing them to collect unemployment and Social Security at the same time will only encourage seniors, now working and contributing to the tax pool to take a lay off or not look for work if their present jb goes away. We don't need more people with an excuse to live off borrowed money from the State and Federal Government.

2. It adds another entitlement to a generation of Americans which is already being treated quite well by the younger generation and degrades the character by encouraging people not to work when they could.

We need to get back to the adage, that work is honorable and not something to be avoided. Generous unemployment benefits encourage people to idleness, which is a bad thing. It is detrimental to emotional and physical health, as well as draining financially because instead of working and making money you have more idle time to spend it.

One of our wisest Founding Fathers, Benjamin Franklin said of aid to the poor, we ought to help those in real need, but that also we should make the majority of poor "uncomfortable in their poverty." By that he meant, welfare should not make people comfortable enough to avoid work. Adding unemployment benefits to Social Security benefits would do just that.

I intend this to be a respectful letter to the two most influential people of The Daily Journal content. I, and I'm not alone, am thoroughly frustrated at seeing Rep. Lisa Dugan in the paper weekly (sometimes twice weekly) with no other intent other than keeping her name in front of the public.

It is always on the topic of this is the day of___, week of___ or month of___. Representative Dugan is supposed to have the serious job of representing the voters in her district in the state of IL. House of Representatives.

She is never speaking about issues that sorely affect the pocketbooks and daily lives of her constituents. If she doesn't have a timely letter on issues, I wish you'd keep her out. The Voice of the People section is not intended to be a forum for elected officials to get free press time.

Our deficit and debt is real, unsustainable and not going away for a long time even with drastic measures.

Here is a plan that all retired and current politicians and public employees should embrace since they want the regular taxpayers to sacrifice to solve the problem.

1. Immediately raise the retirement age for elected and appointed officials to 65. Same for all public employees no matter what union they belong to or department they work for, at the federal, state and local levels.

2. Wherever it exists, end the practice of double-dipping. (Allowing people to collect more than one pension.)

3. Tie the compensation of all the above to the Social Security formula. No more, no less.

4. To those already retired, cut the pensions to 50 percent of whatever they are and increase to a 30 percent minimum the amount they pay for their lifetime health care insurance.

I think the above adjustments are perfectly reasonable given the exorbitant costs to maintain retirees who a. Have a shorter working career. b. Contribute less percentage-wise to their pension funds than Social Security recipients. c. Have a better health care plan than Medicare. d. Are in many cases collecting two or three pensions for life. e. Performed in many cases jobs that weren't necessary or were compensated more highly than comparable private work.

If you agree, let everyone at the local, state and federal levels know that you want this contribution to reducing our debt/deficit implemented.

"Like living next door to the Simpsons", that's how Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels described being the successful state (Indiana) adjacent to the dysfunctional state (Illinois). He's right, but not all of us are to blame. Not all of us voted for the likes of Gov. Quinn, Rep. Lisa Dugan and State Sen. Tori Hutchinson.

They have a "compassion" complex. Their compassion however is only directed toward the Public Employee Unions (Teachers included along with police and firemen) those on the dole, those who are in charge of handing out to those on the dole, politicians, state contractors and anyone who has anything to do with state government employee. These are the people living off the private sector which is again going to get royally screwed by the latest tax hike. 66% hike for everybody who pays state income tax and nearly the same for Corporations.

The private sector is supposed to pony up once again so the State of Illinois doesn't have to ask any of its overpaid, under worked and unnecessary workers to take a cut in wages and pensions.

We are the Simpsons! Can you imagine if you lived next door to someone who came up a totally irrational response to every problem? What if you could just move another house over and get away from the crazy neighbor and the repercussions of their actions? That is what the productive are likely to do.

The next alternative is to go all "TEA PARTY" on the democrat party in Illinois and vote against every one of them the next few election cycles.
I'm staying for now, but if we can't at least get rid of Lisa Dugan two years from now, Indiana, Florida, Texas or some other commonsense state (New Jersey?) will be my new home.

George Ryan's Park Bench by Ed Hammer, retired Illinois Secretary of State Police captain who helped convict George Ryan. He is the author of "One Hundred Percent Guilty".

A park bench dedicated to a convicted felon sits just outside Kankakee County's courthouse where justice is sought against the felonious. Those tried and convicted in the Kankakee court are usually the typical criminals we see on the crime dramas on television, like murderers, rapists, burglars and car thieves. The park bench is in honor of another type of felon common to Illinois, a corrupt politician. The bench is dedicated to former Governor George Ryan who is now serving time in a federal prison after being convicted on a 22-count indictment.

The bench is framed by young boy reaching out to a young girl with a bouquet of flowers.

According to a 2003 article in the Kankakee Journal, a private group raised $20,000 for the sculpture to honor the former governor.

Ryan was convicted in 2006 of crimes in part of a license for bribe scandal connected to several national highway deaths. One of the fatal accidents linked to that scandal was in Milwaukee, Wisconsin and resulted in six children burning to death in their family van. Investigators discovered that bribe money taken by license examiners was going to Ryan's campaign funds. The examiner who issued the license to the truck driver who caused the Milwaukee crash admitted to federal agents that she received eighty thousand dollars in bribes that went to Ryan's campaign. Ryan conspired with his chief of staff and inspector general to cover up the bribe scheme.

On Nov.1, 2010, Judge Rebecca Pallmeyer, the judge who sentenced Ryan, will be hearing arguments on a motion by Ryan's attorneys to reduce his six-and-a-half year sentence. He has served less than half thus far. The motion filed by Jim Thompson, another former governor, and Dan Webb, a former federal prosecutor, is asking to reconsider the sentence based a U.S. Supreme Court ruling on the "honest services" law deemed unconstitutional.

The honest services clause refers to a section of the federal mail and wire fraud statute which includes the phrasing, "a scheme or artifice to deprive another of the intangible right of honest services." In June of this year, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that section as unconstitutional as it applies to the private sector cases of Sun-Times magnate Conrad Black and former Enron CEO Jeffrey Skilling. In public corruption cases, honest services fraud may be more easily proven because the officials' unethical conduct is a violation of their oath and other state statutes. Ryan was convicted of racketeering, tax fraud, obstruction of justice, and making false statements to federal agents. The obstruction charges are linked to Ryan's attempt to cover up investigations of the license- for-bribe scheme by agents in Ryan's own Department of Inspector General.

The Kankakee park bench is dedicated to George Ryan for his years in public service which began in Kankakee. According to a July 2010 column in the Chicago Daily Observer by political biographer Jim Ridings, Ryan's first political scandal was in 1973 when he attempted to bribe a candidate not to run for Kankakee sheriff against Ryan's choice.

The list continues from there, including fixing cases, abuse of time, ghost payrolling, defaulting on county loans, prohibited state contracts, getting charges dropped on a nursing home accused of patient neglect and abuse, misuse of state airplanes, laundering money, bid-rigging, attempting to hire a convicted drug felon for DCFS, and soliciting campaign contributions from state-licensed automobile dealers.

If the park bench dedicated to Ryan's public service includes this litany of allegations that culminated in a conviction for covering up an investigation that is linked to the death of innocent children, then Illinois voters can only pray that Pallmeyer determines the Supreme Court's honest services decision does not apply to Ryan's conviction and he serves out his complete sentence in a dedicated prison cell.

These comments were inspired by a July 10 editorial in The Daily Journal commenting on the demise of our recent county assessor and solutions to the property assessment problem.

The Real Estate Tax Assessment is corrupt and rotten to the core. It can't be reformed by new rules, replacing individuals or improving reporting systems. It needs to be replaced by a flat-rate assessment based on something real, like actual square footage of living space. The assessment should be locked in stone via an amendment to the Illinois Constitution so the rate per square foot couldn't be increased unless the voters approved it.
That rate per square foot ideally would be $1 or less.

This would make Illinois a much more desirable place to live and would spur the development of new homes. Plus, in the long run, it would add huge amounts of revenue to local governments. (Of course, it would also discipline our local taxing bodies to live within their means.) It would also ensure that we knew our tax bills from year to year without calculations and could do away with the local assessor's office. This would work in the taxpayers' favor.

Yes, Virginia, there is no Santa Claus, but there are solutions to high taxes and government bungling. We'll find, though, government will resist real solutions because that will decrease government power and increase citizen freedoms.

The Herald reported that Gov Quinn has released $500 million for mass transit infrastructure. Our local system is to receive $1.6 million for a transfer station in Bradley. This report tells us that the transfer station project includes a clock tower, a pavilion, a water fountain, a walking path, and a fenced playground area. None of these extras have anything to do with mass transit.

The State of Illinois is broke, and can’t even pay its bills such as Medicaid reimbursements to doctors. How on earth can our brilliant politicians in Springfield justify spending like this is beyond comprehension. If all $500 million is spent with this kind of oversight, just think how much taxpayer money is being wasted on unnecessary items. I consider this to be almost criminal.

When our politicians spend our money this way, it is time to replace them all. The voters keep sending the same people to Springfield, and keep getting the same results. These are the people that can’t seem to find anywhere to cut the budget. Just wait until some of these bureaucrats start controlling our health care.

The voters should be outraged by this kind of spending with lack of oversight, and vote in record numbers to replace the current regime in Springfield that operates only for themselves with one that operates for the good of the people that pay the taxes!

Property taxes are up for re-assessment 2009/2010. Have they lost their minds? Property values have tanked to the lowest since 1983 and they are hanging us out to dry. I live in Limestone and this is the most "RIDICULOUS" increase I have ever seen in my life. For a better point, its kicking the struggling homeowners in the face when they are down on the ground and making darn sure they don't get up.

Lumberyard, Good for Taxpayers? By Ron Hansen, Bourbonnais

My fellow besieged taxpayers, hear my plea.

In Sept. the Bourbonnais Township Park District Board will vote on whether to spend $3.3 million of your hard earned dollars to buy the Lumberyard.
For those that don't know, it is located on Career Center RD, just No. of 7000W.
It is a ball diamond complex which was conceived about 2001. The original owners sold it to Wablick Family Limited Partnership in August 2008 for $625,000. The market value listed on a Kankakee County property tax bill in 2008 was $622,674 with an equalized assessment of $207,558.

No improvements have been made to the property and the original owners couldn't make a sufficient profit on it with a much smaller investment than $3.3 million. It sounds like we are overpaying and we probably are. So far I have talked to Hollis Clark, Park District Executive Director and to all the Board members except one recovering from surgery.
The conversations have ranged from sympathetic on their part to hostility towards criticism of the purchase. Mostly, I'm convinced I didn't change their minds.

Why am I against this purchase and just as importantly why should you be?

1. The Park District record of making good investments with our dollars is not very good. Willowhaven, Children’s Museum and the Perry Farm Stables.

2. Not just the BTPD, but government in general has proven they cannot run an enterprise at a profit or even break even. (Post Office, Amtrak, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and Public Broadcasting just to name a few. Why would any of us think the Lumberyard will be different? I'll also add, government has a poor track record when it comes to their primary responsibilities; defending the country and running a fair, efficient criminal justice system.

3. Park District Board Members argue that the bike/walking trails, fishing pond; soccer fields and etc. will be a huge benefit to the community. Actually not many people use the ponds that contain game fish for free. As far as bike/walking trails, we have them in lots of neighborhoods already, they are called sidewalks and I see lots of people using them. Many more would if the government would fulfill its responsibility to enforce codes requiring them to be kept clear of obstructions and in good repair. I personally know Bourbonnais does not do that now. As far as more soccer fields and youth leagues, I observe that most ball diamonds and facilities around the community are not used a lot. I'll add also that school facilities could be used a lot more since we've already paid for them. Finally, how about "fee" for service to the people that want all these services that actually cover the costs?

4. My last comment concerns the statement they are making a good "buy" because a lot of the land is valued a $50,000 per acre. Not according to tax bills. I can imagine if the BTPD can persuade us to finance the purchase and improvement of this property it will bode well for the profits of developers on land that they have already purchased and are waiting to sell for new housing. Here's a thought, developers put those things in that will help sell your properties at a higher value yourselves.

Fellow taxpayers, you either speak up now against this or your BTPD tax bill that could go down will stay the same or certainly increase in the future.

Hollis Clark, Exec. Dir. 815-933-9905 ext. 4

Board Members;
Nick Allen; 815-260-9028
Donna Brown; 815-933-6477
Dennis Lehnus; 815-929-9636
Wayne Delabre; 815-932-2377
Brian Hebert; 815-932-2896

City of Kankakee’s hypocritical garbage politics is rearing its ugly head once again. by Keith L. Runyon

Kankakee already charges the highest garbage pick up rates of anyone in the County and now the new mayor, following in Don Green’s shoes, wants to raise the fee by as much as $6 per month. While increased landfill tipping fees should add only 81 cents per month per household, the City of Kankakee is using a phony excuse that the cost of transporting the garbage outside the county necessitates the fee increase.

This is a false charge. The local dump has been closed for nearly four years during which time garbage collection fees stayed very reasonable every where but in the City of Kankakee. The City of Kankakee is again planning on raising its garbage pick up fees to punish their residents into supporting the proposed Fred Barbara and Tom Volini garbage dump.

If the City of Kankakee were really interested in having a garbage dump within the County, why did the City dispatch three attorneys to the Waste Management siting hearings in 2004, acting as city objectors to the Waste Management Landfill expansion? Mayor Epstein, be honest the only local garbage dump you want is in a city sponsored Fred Barbara and Tom Volini dump.

If you were really interested in slashing garbage collection fees, you would go out to competitive bid for Kankakee garbage collection and site a regional garbage transfer station.

All levels of government are out of control regarding demand for taxes. by Mark Hanold, Bradley

There is no longer a consideration that the tax payer may have limits in his ability to pay. I believe each taxing body should be periodically audited to verify benefits or achievements that proclaimed the need for its existence. Example: Is the general health of the county better today because of the existence of a county health dept.? The services performed in part fall short of the oringinal intent. For example, I believe they give lessons in diaper changing & cooking to young mothers, I fail to see where these types of services relate to the general health of the county. Like most government agencies there tends to be a mission creep that gradually is the bases used to "grow" the department....and increase our taxes.

Taxpayers have had enough! By Keith L. Runyon, President of Concerned United Taxpayers

The resounding defeat of five California revenue referenda should send a chilling message to all federal state, county and local governments that the taxpayers have had enough.

Tired of bloated pensions and staffs, funding of illegal aliens and general spending excesses, California taxpayers voted 2 to 1 to deny the government additional funding. The State is now confronted with the real threat of bankruptcy. Taxpayers essentially told government that they would rather have the state go bankrupt than give the government one more dime.

Wake up Illinois. It is time to tell all of our bloated governments the same thing-“if you can’t make it on the funds you have”, declare bankruptcy and start over again. By the way, don’t run for office again. You have proven over and over again that you cannot or will not govern cost-effectively.

There have been some recent grumblings calling for Kankakee County to drop its lawsuit against the Town and Country regional landfill. By County Board member Ann Bernard, District 6.

This landfill would annually import millions of tons of trash from the Chicago area, posing a direct threat to the health and safety of our county residents as ruled by the Illinois Pollution Control Board before Governor Blagojevich took office. This landfill would be sited in a flood-prone area and built in the aquifer that supplies local water needs. Supporters of this mega-dump now say tough economic times make fighting the dump a luxury.

This could be no further from the truth. Being forced to permanently buy bottled water due to landfill contaminants is a luxury many cannot afford. Having access to safe, clean water resources is an economic development engine the Kankakee River Valley cannot afford to lose. Dropping the lawsuit, after a major Illinois Supreme Court victory, to foot current government spending is short-sighted.

Governments at ALL levels are struggling with costs due to the economic crises created by Wall Street, and abetted by the repeal of the Glass-Steal Act in 1999. Yet, an overwhelming majority of these governments aren’t risking the long-term health and safety of their citizens by approving dumps to fund public spending.

Until the economy is back on its feet, the county can pursue the same cost-cutting measures other governments have. Those measures include temporary hiring and salary freezes, and temporary across-the-board pay cuts for elected officials, department heads, and their chiefs and deputy officials. With unemployment in our county now topping 11 percent, and a large sector of our residents making less than $25,000 a year, Kankakee County should lead by example. Our county should also look to Lake County, Indiana, which is pursuing a landfill alternative that will create revenue.

People are hurting. The worst thing our county could do right now is to endanger the long-term health and safety of our citizens by dropping the lawsuit. It is far better to take prudent fiscal measures while we ride out this economic storm.

Drug Ring Busted! By David Spencer, Chairman, St. Rose Peace and Social Justice Committee

Please give my congratulations to Manteno Police Chief Bernie Thompson for capturing these notorious criminals, especially the two eighteen year olds. They must have put his men in great peril. The Daily Journal felt obliged to paste the photos of these people on the front page of the newspaper. A few more details about the arrest would have been prudent. For example how much heroin was the notorious Mr. Caraker attempting to sell? How much ecstasy was Mr. Egan attempting to deliver? When I read the article it sounded more like street level sales than something you would associate with a drug ring. Where is the dope? How much dope and money did this so-called drug ring bust net?

I recently watched a Chicago newscast where their agents seized over a million dollars worth of drugs. That was real police work being done by real cops. They took a substantial amount of drugs off the streets. An appropriate analogy for Bernie’s bust would be like me loading a crew cab with three fishing buddies, towing a boat to Canada for a two week fishing outing, and coming back with a half of stringer of bluegill, and calling the trip successful. Give me a break! Hey Bernie, what’s the matter, couldn’t you find anything smaller? How about stepping down a couple of years, go right inside the high school, maybe Mr. Big is operating this whole ring out the second period gym class?

What about the two African Americans whose photos where also posted right along side the rest of the so-called drug ring? Does a little disclaimer in the article that says that these men weren’t suspected as being part of the ring excuse The Daily Journal for this serious lapse of judgment? Whoever was responsible for allowing this headline to be presented in this fashion deserves to be fired and banned from journalism for life. The real tragedy in this story is the 22 deaths t hat were caused by overdose. That should have been the headline.

Drugs are a very serious problem throughout the county, the state, and across America. The Daily Journal would serve the community well by doing a little investigative reporting like finding out what all is being done by whom to fix the problem. And, by the way Bernie, you need to go fishing again, and this time, get the dope! We know there is a lot of it out there.

I read the paper because my priest and mentor Fr. Wheeler believes it is important for Christians to be aware of what is happening in the community, but the more familiar I become with the paper the less respect I have for it.

Open letter to Bourbonnais Elementary School District. By Rod Danielson, Bourbonnais

The Bourbonnais Elementary School District and board appear to be living in a different world than the rest of the taxpayers in Bourbonnais. In case you haven’t noticed, the economy is in a severe recession and people are hurting with unemployment climbing daily.

Meanwhile, you are spending over $600,000 on a remodeling project, buying land, proposing spending $750,000 on a bus garage, installing a new bus parking area and expanding kindergarten from half-day to full-day. Of course, the expansion of kindergarten will necessitate hiring of more teachers, administrators and other associated staff and eventually building a new school which will require even more staff. Where will all the money come from to pay for these new expenditures? From the taxpayers, of course! Since your own projections show that revenues will decrease in the coming years due to bad economic conditions, you will then resort to raising taxes yet again.

When industry comes into bad times, they cut back and people have to do more with less in order to survive. A novel approach would be for the BESD to do the same, instead of increasing spending as is being proposed. The taxpayers deserve a break in these tough times, but it seems unlikely that BESD understands this or that they even care. The taxpayers do not have unlimited resources to pay for spending which can be deferred until economic conditions improve.

Here we go again, another "this can't miss" venture by the Bourbonnais Township Park District. By Ron Hansen, Bourbonnais.

The Lumber Yard, a sports complex No. of Bourbonnais on Career Center Rd. has been unable to turn a profit and is up for sale. Why hell!, says BTPD I know using their own money they can't keep the Lumberyard open, but we have access to the taxpayers "purse". (They wouldn't really say that in public, but that's essentially what they are saying.

Wayne Delabre, Park Dist. Pres. says "It will be a terrific addition to the park district." Park District Executive Director Hollice Clark said area youth teams would use the six baseball diamonds which would also be leased to outside tournaments at a profit. "It can be a money-maker for the entire community" said Delabre, "We'll take full advantage of it."

OK, let me get this straight. The complex has been leased to teams for tournaments and is now in financial trouble because they couldn't make a profit. Now our youth ball teams are going to use it for "free" and when they don't need it, we'll make a profit leasing it to all those teams that haven't been using it enough presently for the owners to turn a profit. This is what happens when we have officials using "others peoples money" as they fancy.

The purchase price for the six ball fields sitting on sixty acres with a few cheap buildings is $2.8 million. Let’s see, hmmmm, farmland is at about $6 thousand per acre. How about we offer the distressed owner no more than half a million and then only if we have a leaser that will guarantee us a profit on our investment and maintain the property at his own cost. At least we won't end up with another plot of land that is mainly useful as a vehicle to hire more park district employees.

I don't mean to be cynical, but I'll bet none of the park district officials gushing about this purchase would invest their own money in it.

My duty, sad but true. Someone has to do it. What you may ask must be done? Why explaining the real estate tax assessment system naturally. By Ron Hansen, Bourbonnais

First of all this is really easy to understand if you'll just remember the first rule of the tax-collector (assessor). "Government must not be allowed to suffer!" Feel better now, somewhat relaxed now that you know that your servants are not going to do with less? I didn't think so. Now I'll get down to more nitty-gritty technical explanation.

In the 1940's book, "The Road to Serfdom" F.A. Hayek, chapter 9, entitled "Security and Freedom" states there is a great "gulf which separates them (those in the marketplace competing for dollars) from the fortunate possessors of jobs for whom protection from competition has made it unnecessary to budge ever so little to make room for those without." "It is not a question of the fortunate ones' giving up their places, but merely that they should share in the common misfortune by some reduction in their incomes or frequently even merely some sacrifice of their prospects of improvement."

Now that is quite a mouthful so I'll simplify it. Government has become the place of secure employment and improvement of ones position. It unfortunately has come at the expense of those in the marketplace competing for their sustenance who in lean years have to do with less. Government has become accustomed to never doing with less.

This should start being understandable. Why does your assessment and the possibility of higher property taxes go up in a bad year? The rules are eschewed in governments' favor. Why does your assessment or your taxes going down "depend" on when the bad year is fully factored in? Because government doesn't know yet what it will need. Our Public Servants, from politicians to policemen, firemen, public works employees, school teachers and administrators, library workers, park districts and more never know what their needs or desires are going to be. Since they are of the "secure" class, not allowed to suffer, they are above all the common stress that the supporting class is prone to; we must wait until they decide what they need.

I hope this short article has helped you to understand the fiscal quandary we're in a little more clearly. We have created a two-tier society, one public, not allowed to suffer, and the other private, made up of the entrepreneurs and laborers who felt they could get ahead by putting their skills, strength and intellect into the marketplace.

We in the marketplace should be glad the public servants haven't demanded all our resources yet.

Letter sent to Bourbonnais area county board member Steve Liehr. by Kathy Tanner, Bourbonnais

Even though I currently live in Bourbonnais, I grew up in Limestone. It is interesting that water has been an issue there as well. Friends, members of my immediate family and myself have had significant health problems which may or may not have been from drinking the water there but really have no other family history or pattern.

I can only suspect that Shell Oil had to go through the County Board at that time and explain the benefits of their services to the county. Money was made at the expense of people's health. The people afflicted carry the burden of the "misunderstanding" with little to gain and what do you think their perception of the company is? or their perception of the people from the area who gained/agreed to such an arrangement?

I have read editorials, emails, and newspaper articles about the landfill suit and the financial versus health problems. It greatly concerns me that our county is considering conceding on such a vital issue. When considering items in priority, we can live without money but, as things have it, we cannot live without clean water.

Why the landfill fight is critical to our future! By Tim and Karen Schmidt, Kankakee

The Kankakee County Board will soon be voting whether or not to send the battle of the Chicago dump to the Illinois Supreme Court.

If you do not want to see this dump, which threatens the Kankakee River, you need to call your county representative and say so.

Pressures are being put on county board members and elected officials to stop the battle and allow the city to build a dump for Chicago that sits on an aquifer, in a flood plain bordered by a creek that feeds the river.

Progressive communities are not only not building new landfills; they are considering removing the old ones they have. Now here comes the current leadership in Kankakee looking into the future and seeing 1950.

Proponents want to scare you into believing we are spending all our taxpayers’ money to fight. When in fact, Waste Management Inc., has paid for most of the cost so far. County taxpayers have paid less than $5 per person to fight for their community, their reputation and clean water.

A landfill is a short term, destructive answer to a long term problem. If Mayor Green would have sited this landfill when he first took office, it would be nearly filled today and then what? Build a third?

Proponents are pointing at using the methane from the landfill to power other facilities yet to be built. You do not build a landfill just because it makes methane to save someone on their electricity costs.

Our leaders need to think about jobs that do not threaten the river. That's what progressive communities are doing all around us. If all they are going to look for are users looking for a cheap place to dump their garbage, we should be looking at the quality of the user.

The river is already under threat from heavy siltation. The siltation not only hampers recreation, but it fills the river, making it more prone to flooding in areas that were never threatened before. And siltation kills plant life that the fish and other marine life eat. Kill the river and you kill the community.

Why add to the problem by adding a landfill that we could have done something about.

You have to ask why Mayor Green and his supporters care about a privately owned landfill, owned by an out-of-town developer, who is going to sell it for millions of dollars once he has approval.

One of the answers is a solid waste management district. A local body with representatives from all the communities served. It can focus on more aggressive curb-side recycling, reduction, education, contracts and other issues, all in an effort to reduce waste and protect the environment.

This is urgent. Out-of-town developers want to roll the dice on our water supply. If they are allowed to, they make millions of dollars.

I witnessed one of the worst displays of Kankakee County Government I have ever seen in all the years I have attended their meetings.

It was the December 9 county Board Meeting during which discussion of continuing the fight against the Barbara/Volini Landfill took place. All the materials and ideas presented were selectively chosen to advocate a cessation of the County’s continuing fight against the toxic dump

It was stated that $2.2 million had already been spent on the fight Volini. This is factually incorrect. Over 2 years ago, then board member Martin and I got a complete accounting of all the legal monies expended on all the landfill siting and appeal related activities. At that time nearly $2 million had been paid to Hinshaw and Culbertson for siting hearings and, PCB appeal procedures. At that time nearly $1.8 million had already been reimbursed by Waste Management as required by the 39.2 legislation.

One board member said continuing the fight would cost up to $60k and that would require a tax increase.-Wrong-that’s 50 cents per county resident. When the dump poisons our water supply, each household will have to buy bottled water costing at least a grand per year. What’s 50 cents vs. a lifetime of purchasing bottled water?

The States Attorney failed to fully inform the board of the potential outcomes of taking the case to the Supreme Court-where the first application was overturned because the proposed dump failed to protect the health, safety and welfare of the citizens. He only discussed the possible reactions from the appellate court. There are many issues in evidence in this case, which may be taken to the Supreme Court and in all probability will cause the Supreme Court to once again rule against this toxic dump. What the Appellate Court does from this point forward is irrelevant. The relevant case to be heard is the appeal to the Supreme Court.

Finally we have been informed by a credible source that Mayor Green and some influential supporters are crediting themselves for placing Mr. Bossert in the Chairman’s seat. They claim that they expect Mr. Bossert to stop the landfill fight as a quid pro quo . The tone of Mr. Bossert’s first county board meeting seems to give validity to their claim.

A county vote to stop fighting the toxic dump is a vote for a contaminated and poisonous water supply i.e. the river and deep aquifer.

I know that by writing this I am going to be criticized by the responsible for setting the assessments for not understanding the process. The recipients of my tax dollars will probably all say their take of the total bill isn't that much and I shouldn't be so cheap.

Let me explain my problem with property taxes and why I will be appealing again this year and encouraging everyone else to do so.

1. The assessments never reflect the current economy. I appealed last year and had my assessment reduced. This year, despite home values plummeting even more, my assessment was higher than 07's original bill. Why, doesn't government realize that when the economies down taxpayers aren't as flush with cash?

Of course the answer is government just simply wants the money and the economy, the real value you can get for home doesn't matter to them.

2. Property taxes should and were originally supposed to be based strictly on living space. i.e. 2000 square foot of living space should always fetch the same tax per sq. ft. as a 1,000 or 3,000 sq. ft. home. It doesn't work that way, either the local assessor or this year from what I'm told someone from the county decides by driving by your home if your home is assessed properly. Very scientific.

In other words, it's subjective. If you take care of your home, improve the landscaping, or perhaps put in a patio, new windows a pool an attractive out-building, why they just figure you should be assessed at a higher value.

3. That logic stinks as far as what you pay in taxes. You take care of your home; make it more comfortable and useable not to sell it, but to live in it. These folks in government figure if you invest in your home you should be taxed eternally on it (pay rent on the improvements) until you sell or die. The people that improve their property also do their neighbors a favor by making the neighborhood more attractive to those looking for a home. We help others sell their homes for more and get to pay a premium every year to do it. (I should mention it's also good for the local economy as you employ people to do the improvements.)

A fair tax policy would be to establish a flat figure per sq. ft of living space. $1.00 strikes me as being fair; we can work down from there. That would be fair to current long-term homeowners, give confidence to those buying in the area and still be a steady source of revenue for the government.

Establishing a solid amount per sq, ft. would also impose some discipline on the government. As things currently stand, local governments, schools, park districts, libraries and others simply figure out what they need and then bill you accordingly. Try telling your boss or customers they have to pay what you think you need vs. what they are willing to pay. Government needs to get in the real world and start being accountable, not just expecting a greater % of taxpayer’s money every year.

based on what it would do to the City of Kankakee and County. I live in Manteno and previously served on the school board, so I am not a novice to this issue. Manteno does not need an influx of additional cash to educate their children en, they currently waste enough money as it is. In fact, most of the districts in the county have already resolved their space problem. The current funding method in the State of Illinois is that LOCAL school districts must fund their LOCAL education to the level that they feel is appropriate or they are capable of. The local tax payers decide if they want to pay more. I know, we had 3 failed referendums prior to success and guess what: We won 2 consecutive Bright Star Awards for education excellence and fiscal responsibility after the referendum failed! Since its passage, they have won none and in fact very few of the local school districts have ever won this award much less back to back.

Is it fair to the residents of Manteno, Momence, Grant Park, Herscher, Limestone, St Anne and others to fund BBCH’s space problem? What about the districts that have already passed a building referendum and the necessary funding mechanism such as Manteno and Momence or those that do not need extra money for new classrooms. Doesn’t this tax promote overbuilding and excess?

The real problem with this tax increase is that it will destroy the sales tax sharing agreement, or the Golden Egg. These funds have been instrumental in keeping the City of Kankakee afloat and funding additional programs in the County for all residents. ; If this tax increase passes, the sales tax sharing agreements will go to Morris and other jurisdictions that have a low 6.25% base rate. The city and county will have to add to our already high unemployment rate and cut services. Do those residents of Bourbonnais who will benefit think the theft and violence problem that will surely follow will limit their range to the City of Kankakee. If you were going to rob a house, where would you go? Oh sorry, can’t drive 2 miles out of Kankakee, that is Bourbonnais and we don’t rob those people! Bottom line, as our County seat goes, so goes the County.

I am personally sick and tired of the constant money grab by local school districts and the whining that Illinois does not adequately fund education. It is crazy that classrooms in the county sit empty at schools that are less than 6 miles apart and others are over crowed. When Illinois takes a County Wide approach to education we can cut the excessive spending on Administration salaries, consolidate our supply purchases, create a true magnate program for the intellectually gifted, consolidate our bus routes, maximize building space and develop an education program that is performance based and destroy the little nation of fiefdoms that currently exist. Think of the money saved by consolidating our resources across the whole county. In business, this type of approach always leads to lower cost. We should all unite under one simple goal: QUALITY EDUCATION AT THE LOWEST COST! If you think it can’t be done, call Southwest Airlines and Wall Mart and tell them that.

The current collapse of our major financial institutions has shocked the nation. By Mark J. Hanold, Bradley

The underlying reasons should serve as a wake-up call for all. The problem has much to do about ineptness and corruption in our government.

Squandering our tax dollars seems to be the hallmark of this sitting congress. The final line of tolerance was crossed when it was learned of the golden parachutes awarded to the very ones responsible for the financial breakdown.

To add insult to injury, we now are told that within a week after our government opted to use our tax dollars to bail them out, they treated themselves to a week's vacation at an exorbitant west coast resort costing in excess of $400,000.

Certain congressmen have been identified as collaborating with financial groups by lowering home loan requirements and in return received generous money donations ... a quid pro quo in the making.

Our Congress is fatally flawed. Lobbyists having untethered access to legislators lessens the significance of the voting public. In essence, a Washington lobbyist with check in hand speaks volumes louder than any letter from back home.

A musical throwback to the 60s and 70s is “Where have all the flowers gone?” A contemporary version may go something like, “Where has all the garbage gone?”

The end of garbage dumps is near. Modern technology, driven by the high price of energy, is preparing to consume the garbage streams that have historically been delivered to regional dumps. In the process environmental problems, such as polluted drinking water and methane contaminated air surrounding dumps, will be eliminated.

For those in authority locally, who still live in the Flintstone world, let’s look at a scorecard of recent actions. Two dump companies in Kankakee County have had four siting applications turned down or reversed by the Courts since 2001. In 2007, two landfill applications were withdrawn in Kendall County because the applicants realized the County Board would deny approval. The City of Yorkville formed a no dump political party which was swept into office and overwhelmingly rejected the landfill application. The city of Chicago in 2005 extended its moratorium on landfills for an additional 20 years. Landfill approvals zero, denials six. Let’s compare this dismal record with the advancement of the new energy producing landfill alternative technologies:

1) St Lucie County, Florida is now installing a plasma arc system that will consume three thousand tons of garbage daily. Two thousand new tons and a thousand from an old landfill which will provide electricity for 40,000 homes

2) Tallahassee, Fl. is now installing a plasma arc system to convert their garbage to energy.

3) Lake County, Indiana recently gave their approval to two private garbage-to- ethanol plants which will convert 4000 tons of garbage per day to ethanol while charging only $17.50 per ton to take the garbage. The nearby Allied landfill is charging a $41.00 per ton dumping fee.

4) Coskata, Inc. is a Warrenville, Illinois company partially owned by General Motors. They process garbage into ethanol. They are building their first plant in Pennsylvania while seeking sites in Illinois and elsewhere. www.coskata.com

5) Ten miles east of Reno, Nevada a trash to ethanol plant is being built by Fulcrum Bioenergy.

6) The most significant break from dumping garbage comes from-Clean Tech Biofuels which just announced an agreement with the City of Chicago to use Chicago waste as a fuel for producing electricity and ethanol.

These progressive ways of using garbage are cropping up all over the U.S. and nearby, while the City of Kankakee proposes to step boldly into the 19^th century with unparalleled regressive thinking, to dig a hole to bury a chief source of inexpensive energy, and to simultaneously contaminate our local water supply. Imagine the shock the mayor and city council will experience when they discover someone else is using their “desired” garbage stream to fuel our cars and power our homes.

Its the Water Stupid. by Keith L. Runyon, president of Concerned United Taxpayers (CUT)

Why have the various citizens groups fought so vigorously against the Kankakee City Barbara/Volini dump.? It's the water, stupid!

Some city aldermen think the citizens just want to prevent the City from receiving host fees from a dump. This is totally false. Everyone wants Kankakee to experience positive economic growth. Dumps do not constitute positive economic growth.

In a recent broad based survey of the public, 96% of those surveyed said that dumps are the least desired form of community development.

The simple truth is this, the proposed dump will, if built, will be located in a 100 year flood plain, beside Mini Creek and blasted into the bedrock that acts as a buffer, shielding the underground aquifer from above ground contaminates.

All landfills leak according to the Federal EPA -- the IEPA has told us that the City landfill will leak.

The convergence of high energy prices and the fruits of U.S. innovators, have given us new technologies which recover vast quantities of energy from our garbage in an environmentally friendly and cost effective manner. Virtually all forms of energy may be recovered from garbage by the various technologies including ethanol, at nearly 8 times the recovery from corn, light sweet crude oil, jet fuel, electricity, Syngas, and hydrogen.

Landfills are a dying entity. The new technology going into Lake County, Indiana will convert garbage to energy for $17.50 per ton while prevailing landfill dumping rates are $41 per ton. City Council, help kill dumps. Say no to the Barbara/Volini dump and say hello to the new technologies and what they will do for us.

Upon learning of the Kankakee School District 111 School Board's decision to hire current Bradley Mayor Gael Kent as the Assistant Superintendent of Business, my first thought was; "Wow, they just laid another barrier in the path of "alleged" reconciliation between school district officials and a large segment of the city of Kankakee's community.

After spending an entire academic year rigorously scrutinizing and, ultimately, coercing the former Superintendent, Dr. Brian Ali, out of the district for questionable spending of $2,000, the board followed up by extending a $75,000 contract to another community's mayor to work part time (at best). Keep in mind; he's currently serving as mayor of his municipality. Couple that with the fact that, according to an article in The Daily Journal, he can work no more than 120 days (4 months) without endangering his state-funded pension.

I do not question Mayor Kent's proficiency in education administration nor do I believe he will jeopardize his state pension by working beyond the reported 120-day window. Given the salary amount intended for Mayor Kent's services, money is clearly no obstacle for the district. Nevertheless, if the district can afford to spend $75,000 for, essentially, less than part-time assistance, it calls to question the true rationale for forcing Dr. Ali's resignation, largely, due to a $2,000 expenditure.

Kankakee area officials are setting a terrible precedent with the increasing practice of hiring local mayors to perform additional duties outside of their realm of elected responsibility. Earlier this year, Kankakee County's Economic Alliance hired Manteno's current mayor to a salaried position of approximately $50,000. The mayor recently announced his resignation from the Alliance. Nevertheless, this form of double dipping is not only fiscally unsound but suggests that no one outside the "good old boys" club is capable of effective leadership. As long as such practices continue, this area will never avail itself to fresh, new ideas. At what point are they simply spread-loading and squandering taxpayer money amongst friends?

"More contributions" is going in the wrong direction! I believe we should instead take the big bucks out of politics.

How about limiting the length of the campaigns to a couple of months rather than the endless diatribe we presently endure. Provide a set number of public-sponsored debates structured to cover key issues of the time.

Donations of any amount will open the door to special interest groups that currently dictate the course of legislators. Congress today is inundated by armies of lobbyists buying legislative favors. Retiring congressmen are also sought for lobbying duties because of their obvious connections in Congress.

Money has a way of compromising the integrity of the election process and unless its role is diminished, will prohibit all but the wealthy and politically connected from running for public office.

Why have the various citizens groups fought so vigorously against the Kankakee City Barbara/Volini dump. It’s the water stupid!

In a recent broad based survey of the public-96% of those surveyed said that dumps are the least desired form of community development.
The simple truth is this, the proposed dump will, if built,
will be located in a 100 year flood plain, beside Mini Creek and blasted into the bedrock that acts as a buffer, shielding the underground aquifer from above ground contaminates.

All landfills leak according to the Federal EPA-the IEPA has told us that the City landfill will leak and it will contaminate our water supply.

The record of leaking NE Illinois reinforces this fact. Virtually all NE Illinois landfills are leaking toxic chemicals: I)South Elgin-Volatile organic chemicals or VOCs,2) Mallard Lake-methane gas in homes,3)Hillside-methane gas poisoning residents,4)Pontiac-Phenols and zinc, 5)Kankakee County Landfill-vinyl chloride, 6)Wauconda-vinyl chloride, 7)Settlers Hill-vinyl chloride and many other leakers.

These leakers illustrate the danger of building the proposed K3 landfill in its hydro-geological adverse setting, using a design that ensures early leakage of toxic leachate into our water supply. City Council members who favor the dump are deluding themselves into believing the proposed dump will not leak toxic leachate into our water supply.

Once contaminated-our water supply will be gone forever. Can we really afford to sacrifice one of the three remaining sources of potable water in NE Illinois in the name of a few short run bucks for the City of Kankakee?

Who should oppose the building of this toxic time bomb- everyone who drinks water which comes from the Kankakee River, its, tributaries and its underground aquifer system. In addition Aqua America, the Kankakee County Medical Society, local hospitals. all businesses, all Chambers of Commerce all school districts and all villages and cities in the County and all homeowners, should vigorously oppose the building of this public health catastrophe with economic stifling consequences. A community without water is a community without a future.

Landfills are a dying entity. City Council, help kill them. Say no to the Barbara/Volini dump and what it will do to us and instead and say hello to the new technologies and what they will do for us.

I was at the meeting June 24^th for the proposed Eagle Creek Homeowners Association. In my opinion, “it was about time”. About time for residents to finally express concern over the deteriorating look of their neighborhood. About time for them wonder when the Village was going to begin showing concern for overgrown lots, unfinished boarded up houses and homes that were built with many violations of Bourbonnais Building Codes.

I’m all too familiar with one homeowner’s plight at 1435 Patriot Way. It was built on a plot that was supposed to be set aside for drainage. Not built with proper elevation or drainage systems and subsequently suffered many problems. These included cracking basement walls and floors allowing moisture in that resulted in mold. Mold so severe the family was told by a physician to leave the home. Bourbonnais officials showed no interest in their problems and indeed someone spread rumors that this was the family’s modus-operandi. Buy a home and then try to litigate in order to get a friendly settlement. The truth is it was their first home and the costs involved with the problems forced them into bankruptcy. Their bank was going to foreclose until they found out that the home is not livable and uninsurable. It now sets empty and deteriorating.

The situation for all the homeowners both in the Kennedy development and around it is serious. As more problems develop with existing homes costing too much to repair, more owners will vacate allowing foreclosures. Those that stay are going to face declining property values (With no relief in taxes unless they take action.) and a less appealing neighborhood.

It is my opinion that this is a village problem. A builder was allowed in using less than village codes for building. This was either done with village cooperation or allowed through lack of inspection. Either way, the village didn’t protect its citizens.

You can disagree about the causes and solutions, but you can’t disagree that we have a problem.

The decision by the Kankakee County Board to give themselves a raise proves these public officials are self-absorbed, sad individuals who are completely ignorant about the state of the world around them.

In a time when the economy is suffering, the U.S. dollar is taking a beating abroad and many people are finding it difficult to pay their mortgage, our elected officials find it necessary to praise themselves for the supposed hard work they are putting in.

Even as the state is burdened with $110 million of debt and the county's deficit nears $200,000, they remain obstinate to these glaring facts and increase their pay across the board by nearly five percent. Your action to increase your pay from our pockets sickens me.

Don't legitimize your actions with foolhardy and bogus arguments, especially by using "cost of living" as the basis for this increase. Illinois has a per capita income -- that means what each person receives financially, for those public officials unaware of tricky governmental jargon -- of about $19,000. The median income for a family is just under $50,000. So, if my math works better than the board's logic, that means the auditor, circuit clerk, coroner and board chairman will be making $40,000 more than the average individual in this county and almost $10,000 more than the average of an entire household in this county. What's the cost of living like for the average person? Perhaps you can buy groceries or pick up rent for some of the households you supposedly represent, you over-spending, deficit-inducing rats. Both parties are to blame for this egregious -- that means offensive -- action and anyone who votes along party lines should rethink their allegiances.

I know it must have been difficult, though, as board member Jim Vickery so saliently pointed out, to "drag themselves and their families through election after election." You, sir, are a public servant. Play your violin elsewhere, sir, because I'm all out of pity for you and how you're spending my money.

And no one in your district had a problem with it? This is easy to say, when the constituency -- that means people in your district -- don't find out about pay increases until it is printed in the paper on a Wednesday afternoon. Honest, hardworking taxpayers who pay these salaries are working on Tuesday mornings.

By the way, Mr. Kruse, you receive a stipend of $2,500 for your work as liquor commissioner, and therefore arguing that the raise reflects your "growing responsibilities" within the county is like shoving both hands in the cookie jar simultaneously. And, please, enlighten us ignorant peons on what the liquor commissioner duties entail? I would love to read all about the back-breaking labor involved in that job.

"It's time to get over the political posturing and get on with the business of Kankakee County," Vickery said.

The BBCHS board has shown where it’s priorities lie. A recent report detailed expenditure approvals of $390,000 for building infrastructure, $273,000 for the science labs, and $1.2 million for football field bleachers. More than 4 times as much is being spent for bleachers over educational improvements. The board seems to find plenty of money for athletics, but then asks for excessive tax increases to build a new school on land with drainage problems and several miles from town. We have also been told that the board wants to spend over $1.0 million to install artificial turf on the football field. Would it not make more sense to move the football field to the property that BBCHS already owns on Career Center Rd., and use the area where the current field is for a campus expansion? Also sell the property east of town to finance the proposed expansions

The taxpayers deserve better representation from the BBCHS board. Priorities need to be readjusted to make education the highest priority. Better use of taxpayer money will allow easing of overcrowding without asking for future tax increases.

Not only no "new taxes", but reduce and eliminate taxes. by Ron Hansen, Bourbonnais

To State Senator Halvorson, State Representatives Dugan & Gordon.

One citizen may not influence you very much, but according to surveys by "American Solutions" up to 80% of Americans think taxes are too high and need to be reduced.

Federal taxes have been greatly reduced or eliminated on those in the $50K or less annual income brackets. State and local taxes however have become more numerous and onerous.

The State of Illinois, I realize is running a huge deficit. This is not the result of too little tax revenues, it is the result of too much spending. Spending that takes little regard for actual needs and benefits to the taxpayer, but takes very good care of the politicians, bureaucrats and regular employees of the state.

We want our taxes reduced, regulations curtailed, private property and gun rights respected and especially the right to use our tax dollars to educate our own children.

Mayor Kent and the Bradley Village board are off on another tax confiscation binge, while the school districts sit back and benignly and impotently accept the latest raid on their revenue streams.

It appears that the Mayor and Board will not be happy until they have TIFed the entire Village. All taxes ordinarily collected by other taxing bodies will then be diverted to the Village. The raided taxing bodies will have no choice but to push their levies up to maintain operations.

There are two main villains here and lots of victims. The Villains are the Village and the school districts. The victims are all the taxpayers of Bourbonnais Township and the County. Monies confiscated from the other taxing bodies will have to be made up by all of us living outside the TIFs.

The local school districts are doing nothing to halt these raids on their tax dollars, unlike school districts outside our area, which are fighting TIFs in the courts and winning.

BBCHS will soon come crying to the public again for another referendum or two. They will whine and cry about how they don’t have enough money. Fortunately, the public now understands that BBCHS has been very generous with teachers salaries-done an adequate job for most of the students but has failed miserably in its’ financial responsibility to the taxpayers. With inadequate impact fees and by giving away tax dollars to the Villages of Bradley and Bourbonnais, they hope to put the screws to the taxpayers. Won’t happen!

Last year, local taxpayers defeated the BBCHS referenda in every voting precinct On primary day this year; the voters of the Peotone School District defeated a referendum in every precinct by a 70% to 30% margin. The issues: tax diverting TIF districts and inadequate impact fees.

Perhaps it is time to replace the BBCHS board members and administration, which seem to leave the taxpayers out of the decision making equation. It is certainly time to clean house in the Village of Bradley-which unconscionably keeps sTIFing the taxpayers

Weller’s Seat by Ron Hansen, Bourbonnais

We haven’t had a lot of information to judge who should be the Republican to replace Congressman Jerry Weller but one fellow among the three major candidates, Heenan, Baldermann and Lee, seems to have a fiscally conservative head on his shoulders. That person is Tim Heenan. He has stated consistently that cutting corporate taxes would spur more growth in the economy than simply sending borrowed money from Washington. He is right.

Federal and State Corporate taxes are too high to encourage businesses to invest in America. When you add the high taxes of states like Illinois to the Federal mix, you’re really in trouble. High taxes and burdensome regulations are hurting our job market and Heenan acknowledges that more than Balderman and Lee.

One more thing I like about him is that he speaks plainly about the proposed Peotone Airport. It is something Peotone/Beecher residents don’t want and the Airlines are not going to support. It has been a drain on taxpayer dollars and if it is built will be a far greater one. Kankakee has a viable airport up and running that could be easily expanded if we need one downstate.

America has been built by freedom of the individual, not by government initiatives. I hope Mr. Heenan has a chance to take his message to Washington.

In case you’re interested, for President; Mitt Romney or Rudy Guiliani. They appear to be the best choices for a truly conservative government.

Why hasn’t the Illinois EPA delegation agreement been a top priority for Kankakee County? by Helen M. Donaghue-Evers, Kankakee County.

I am speaking because I truly am concerned about our environment. And I am a tax payer. I have been following this Kankakee government for about 12 years now. I must tell you, I liked it a whole lot better when I was Naïve about how this county government works. When I believed the people who were appointed or elected won because they had good moral integrity. I have only grown more frustrated. I have learned that in reality, there is a different side of what goes on… especially here in Kankakee County. I have never been more disappointed in who I thought were good people and cared about this community. What I have learned is…and these are the Facts….

1) We finally had a county inspector that really and truly cared about our environment.

2) We had a Delegation Agreement that was terminated because as our County Board Chairman claimed the state didn’t pay us on time. This was the lame excuse that really doesn’t make any sense. He said it took them more than 11/2 -2 years to receive the money. This Is Not True. Records show the county was usually (or almost always) paid within 2-8 weeks. The chairman said we could not afford to kick in $40,000 from county funds to pay for the program. Yet new programs arrived along with new employees. Both of the local solid waste site inspectors were allegedly assaulted during an inspection, and (incredibly) he said that he was concerned because the county has all the liability for doing the state’s job.

3) The inspector responsible for writing up violations to the people that are polluting this environment got fired. Now instead of being pleased with the clean up…the powers that be…you know, the appointed and elected officials, simply got rid of her. The public still doesn’t know why she got canned. The local newspaper recently printed a quote form an attorney representing one of the polluters (who is now being sued by the A G) ..”She was an overzealous inspector.” (Isn’t that like the attorney for a drunk driver saying the policeman who stopped him for a 0.15 blood alcohol level was out of line?) Now does this mean anyone in the future who cracks the whip and tries to get things cleaned up will be terminated? This whole issue of avoiding the Delegation Agreement has NEVER made any sense to me. Now, I ask, was she becoming way to threatening for the old “good boy club”?

Why hasn’t the delegation agreement been a top priority for this county? It was suspended nearly a year ago. What has all of the stalling been about? Wasn’t it back in August when the PZA gave the chairman the okay to apply for the grant? I have said to Mr. Kruse, something isn’t right here. I still believe something isn’t right yet. And the finger pointing is a joke. I wished things were different, but I have found you can’t make a difference when the powers that be have their own agenda.

Another Proposed Landfill Has Been Derailed In Kendall County. by Keith Runyon, president of Concerned United Taxpayers (CUT)

Once again the elected officials of Kendall County have made the elected officials of the City and County of Kankakee look foolish. The Kendall County Board was prepared to deny the latest siting application when the applicant withdrew his application at the last minute. Anthony Soave,, a prominent Michigan landfill developer was the latest operator to withdraw his application, while facing certain denial.

Earlier, Waste Management and Jerry Joyce withdrew their landfill application because they knew the County would deny them. Prior to both of these withdrawals, The City of Yorkville denied Fox Morraine’s landfill application. Thus far the score is Citizens of Kendall 3, landfill operators 0.

The elected officials of Kendall were not seduced by the host fee bribes of the landfill companies. They were far more concerned with protecting the public’s health, safety and welfare from the ravages of toxic landfills.

The two withdrawn applicant’s sites were to be situated over a major water supply aquifer with similar fragile hydro-geologic conditions as those of Volini’s proposed city dump and Waste Management’s proposed expansion of their now closed dump site.

We should all be asking our City and County elected officials why they are willing to sacrifice our health and safety when Kendall is unapologetic for protecting their constituents.

Three issues I'm sick of hearing about! Katrina, Healthcare & Education by Ron Hansen, Bourbonnais

Can we lay the facts (which are simple) on the table about these 3 issues and move on to real solutions?

Hurricane Katrina: Sorry, no conspiracy against black folks or a huge failure by the federal government. A huge failure on the part of state and local government by ignoring the impending disaster immediately before it hit and years before. No preparation or little by those responsible for ensuring the safe evacuation of New Orleans residents. Misappropriation of money given over the decades to strengthen and expand New Orleans levies. (Done by democrat administrations.) Governor Blanco’s and Mayor Nagin’s failure to acknowledge and accept federal help before the hurricane hit. (Gov. Blanco wisely didn’t run for reelection and now Louisiana has a Rep, Gov..) Both Mississippi (hit hard by Katrina) and more recently California during the fires were run by competent Rep. Administrations and fared much better than New Orleans.

What is it about healthcare that is so hard for people to grasp? The very word means that you take care of something and in this case your health. You are the first provider. Everybody else is secondary after you’ve done your best. If people will not do what they can for themselves, no program, federal or state is going to be able to give you health. “If” people would first of all do what they can for themselves as regards diet, exercise and maintaining a positive mental outlook on life, we could easily take care of the few indigent victims of accidents, illness or bad luck in the gene pool. The next point on this subject is, capitalism works best at providing lower cost and higher quality services, be it automobiles or healthcare. “If” we promote Health Savings Accounts taken out when people enter the workforce and personal responsibility the problem will go away to the maximum we can hope for.

Finally, education, “sigh”! How long before we just admit that public education is about taking care of the people that work in the field and not providing “truth” based education to our children. When simple math has to be performed electronically, complex words cannot be read, our nations history is not known, the Constitution that guides us not understood and those working in the system receive greater financial rewards for just staying in it than improving it, it’s time to shut it down. Revelations of how hard it is to get rid of perverts, misfits and unprepared teachers amplifies what I’ve just said.

We can continue believing lies about these issues all we want. It won’t change reality and it won’t prepare us to solve the problems.

Mayor Green And The City Council's Decision To Enter Into Contract With Lobbyist Michael D. Smith Of Cornerstone Government Affairs Is Problematic.

The recent decision by Mayor Green and Kankakee's City Council to enter into contract with lobbyist Michael D. Smith of Cornerstone Government Affairs at $15,000 per month PLUS expenses over, as reported in the Daily Journal, a period of "about" two years, is problematic for a number of reasons.

First and foremost, there is no guarantee or assurance that neither Mr. Smith nor Cornerstone Government Affairs, will be able to successfully secure the necessary monies from the United States Congress to fund either the projected $20 million overhaul of Brookmont Boulevard or address the proliferation of boarded-up and vacant housing in the city. Consequently, there exists a real possibility that the city of Kankakee could ultimately end up paying Mr. Smith some $360,000 (over two years) PLUS expenses and get absolutely NOTHING in return! This equates to an extremely risky investment. And for the record, these lobbyist "expenses" summarily mentioned as a mere footnote, have historically included such things as all expense paid, first class trips to locations throughout the globe for legislators AND their entire families, for the purpose of enticing their vote. Over a two-year period, these "expenses" could add up to a very hefty price tag.

This lobbyist initiative was introduced in the October 15, 2007 city council meeting agenda under new business. Therefore, the thirteen (13) Aldermen/women present (one absent) had limited opportunity to research and review the matter prior to voting on it. Normally, such matters are voted on after a second reading. Nevertheless, Kankakee City Council's all too common practice of "suspending the rules" which might interfere with passage of an action (i.e. a second reading two weeks later, and, invariably, time for aldermen/women to conduct background research, provide information to constituents, and, most importantly, gauge the communities sentiments towards the subject initiative) placed this contract on the fast track for approval without specific research or forethought.

I believe the $360,000, PLUS expenses, would be better spent as a direct payment to local contractors (preferably from the communities in which they will eventually build/rehab) to finance improvements on existing properties and new homes throughout the city. This will at least ensure some guaranteed degree of return on investment. This option sounds much more profitable than a potential "zero-sum" gamble with lobbyists. Never mind the fact that Smith, now employed by a different lobbying firm, was mentioned as a member of the now imprisoned "supper-lobbyist" Jack Abramoff's team.

Furthermore, the Honorable Mayor Don Green, given the fact that he has officially announced his intentions to NOT seek another term, is effectively entering into "Lame Duck" status. Simply states, he is on his way out of office. Truly, how prudent is it for the city council to allow an impending "Lame Duck" mayor to doll out large amount of our taxpayer dollars on such a risky investment when the mayor will not be around to answer for failure? This is the same mayor who proudly heralded the Prairie Walk Homes Development, south of town, as a major turning point in economic development for the city.

Two years later, the Prairie Walk development has produced no more than eighteen (18) homes; three (3) of which are currently under construction) and possibly two (2) multi-unit structures. No more than four (4) of these homes "appear" obviously occupied. Moreover, some homes are already in foreclosure. Could it be that the city council and the mayor's administration misread the "tea leaves" on Prairie Walk as a sound investments initiative? For these reasons, City of Kankakee taxpayers are justified in seeking the mayor's rationale for the much slower-than-expected progress of the Prairie Walk initiative.

Consistent with the lobbyist decision, the mayor's administration, and the city council, considered Prairie Walk a wise and profitable initiative. At this point, the Prairie Walk project, as well as the recently approved lobbyist contract, is ripe with legitimate scrutiny.

AN INTRUSIVE PROPOSAL THAT WILL ULTIMATELY HARASS PET OWNERS by Kankakee County Board member Ann Bernard

Here are the latest developments in Kankakee County's heavy-handed approach to dealing with animal issues.

On September 19, 2007, Kankakee County Animal Control Director Julie Boudreau asked to hire additional animal control officers. She said the cost of the additional officers could be offset by having the officers go door-to-door to basically, "count noses." (Meeting minutes & transcript of this meeting are available upon request).

This is an intrusive, heavy-handed means of dealing with animal issues that will only drive more people underground, or result in more people dumping their pets at our severely inadequate animal control facility, which has a 37 percent euthanasia rate. Other progressive animal control centers have kill rates as low as 11 percent, and some are even no-kill. I will forward you an e-mail on Nathan Winograd's presentation on no-kill nation.

This Wednesday, October 17th, 9:00 AM, Ms Boudreau is going to seek permission to hire additional animal control officers. I would strongly urge members of the public to attend and voice their opinion on whether these officers should be hired so that they can count noses, and basically, step on the 4th Amendment. (AGENDA ATTACHED)

Amazing that the county can't or won't prosecute dog fighters, amazing that the owners of a dog that died due to inadequate water and shelter in the sweltering heat we had last month has (as far as we know) yet to be prosecuted, but now the county wants to count noses? Whatever happened to the county's responsibility to enforce laws to ensure humane treatment of animals? Is this what we want our tag fees to be used for?

The county nearly passed an ordinance (language attached) at their regular board meeting on Tuesday, October 9, 2007, that would have allowed anyone to "dispatch" (basically kill) a stray animal that was running loose for more than a week and that couldn't be caught and that whose owner couldn't' be identified, as long as that person got the OK from animal control. It was temporarily stopped when I made a motion to send it back to committee because the subcommittee that is in charge of updating the animal control ordinances voiced clear opposition to this provision that would have made it much easier to kill a stray dog. Think about that - it could be anybody's pet. The Kankakee County State's Attorney's office presented us with this language that completely contradicted what the subcommittee wanted.

The ordinance has other issues too, such as not including adoption as an option to "dispatch" for animals once their holding period is up. Language to the effect that "every effort will be made to re-home adoptable animals, through avenues, such as adoptions, working with other shelters and foster homes, shall be made," should be included in the ordinance.

Kankakee County Board Was Not Notified When $400,000 Was Borrowed From The IMRF Pension Fund.

I recently was informed that the county’s general fund borrowed $400,000 from our IMRF Pension Fund in June of this year. The full board was not notified of this. This is an issue of concern. In years past, the full board was always apprised of fund transfers and had to approve those transfers. However, in March of this year, we were presented with an innocuously worded resolution that allowed these transfers to occur without notifying or asking the approval of the full board. This is part of a worrisome trend that has been emerging in the last few years, in which the full board is not being informed of developments. We’ve arrived at the point where escalating spending, $31-million budgets three pages long are bring approved before we get the actual account details; we now have full board meetings barely lasting 30 minutes. The county board needs to reclaim its responsibility to diligently serve the public interest and oversee county government. One of the first things we need to do is reject any attempts next year to re-approve the resolution that allowed this borrowing to take place without the full board’s knowledge and approval

OK, Mr. Phil Angelo, you asked for it. Wanted, Kankakee mayor. Several possibilities. By Inell Yates, Kankakee

Steven Hunter --- Some say he has mayoral ambitions. Steve, what took you so long? You have been alderman for over 34 years. Supposedly, Hunter knows the ropes to better improve Kankakee yet he quietly sat on the sideline while the city crumbled from a lack of jobs. Hunter does not know if he wants to be a Democrat or Republican. I am still waiting to see if Green hands him the mayoral seat for the rest of this term.

Nickey Yates --- Yes, he did run a good 2005 campaign against Green without assistance from the Democrat Central Committee. In fact, the Democrat chairman, Don St. Germaine, essentially endorsed the Republican candidate in the newspaper. For the record, the “spat” between Yates and the Democrat Chairman was not simply over the conditions at the headquarters.

The real issue was the fact that Yates was not willing to allow St. Germaine to talk to him as if he were a child. Is Yates too abrasive? No! He just calls it like he sees it. Nickey is not afraid to speak up on those issues that others, especially so-called black “leaders,” have failed to address. I am just waiting to see how many “Alan Keyes” hop in the race as independents to purposely split the vote.

Theodis Pace --- I believe he will run as an independent although I wonder if he is acting on his own. As president of NAACP, not many people are impressed by his lack of initiative in addressing the countless incidents of racial indifference through out Kankakee County. Kankakee requires a leader with moral courage.

For that reason, if Sam Nicholas is considered too nice, then he may be better served sticking with the county board.

The same applies to for Tim Schmidt. Mr. Schmidt went along with the “Green Machine” for a number of years, but suddenly resigns.

Finally, as for Mr. Ron Jackson, I find it hard to trust anyone who proclaimed himself an ordained minister but suddenly abandoned the title prior to becoming owner of a nightclub. Jackson is a role model for whose kids?

If this city is to ever shed its dismal reputation as a mockery of municipal government, we must stop electing people who are not qualified and who’s “leadership” ability is measured by how quickly they compromise our kids’ future.

County Board Chairman Karl Kruse Interview, A Big Joke! by Helen M. Donaghue-Evers, Kankakee County West

I am very disappointed in your article that pretty much "hails" Karl Kruse. It said NOTHING about how he really truly operates. The biggest joke was his attempt to portray himself as such an environmentalist! Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha! Many of us had a big laugh at that one.

How about tackling some real issues? Talk about how he got rid of a very competent individual for doing her job. How he is going to now have the IEPA Delegation Agreement on the fast track now that he has Mr. Bevis in charge again. You know, the man the IEPA wrote a letter about saying how INCOMPETENT this man is. See no evil, speak no evil, and hear no evil would explain his performance on how he runs his inspections for the county.

The article should have talked about how Mr. Kruse continues to support these kind of people. How he has allowed Mr. Joyce and Mr. Bauer to spoil the land in the western part of the county. How he and his administration allows building permits to be issued for land that is rated 97% wetland by the NRCS. Talk about these issues so the public can finally see how this man truly operates his ship. Maybe then, people would vote differently. Now that would be great Journalism.

Bourbonnais Fiasco- by Ron Hansen, Bourbonnais

Mayor Bob Latham and other long serving members of Bourbonnais government are proving that being a “nice guy” isn’t always good enough.

Mayor Latham and I believe Trustee Residori and perhaps some others were complicit in beginning the whole K-Mart at 102 and Latham Drive comedy. You may think that because the people have elected you, you’re smarter than the markets. The market for retail has proven that when government has to back loans for or give subsidies to private businesses it’s because the market really isn’t there.

The Mayor says now that we have given the real estate company responsible for solving the dilemma of what to do with all the available space another $450,000 of taxpayer money we can just “move on”. That’s liberal speak for sure I screwed up, but you know I mean well, now forget about it. After all, it’s not as though I’m a conservative or republican.

The poor Realty Company was just caught in a bind after already profiting from moving Jewel from one end of the plaza to the other. How could they know what any wise investor would normally investigate? Underground tanks, asbestos, not to mention no one would pay the price needed to bail Bourbonnais out of bad business decisions.

The Mayors problem which many of the Trustees and soon to be gone Village Manager Frank Koehler share is this. Simply doing what government should do isn’t exciting enough. You know keeping the infrastructure up and enforcing laws and codes equally. Boring stuff. Playing monopoly with taxpayers money, much more exciting.

I hope this is behind us also Mr. Mayor. Perhaps you and guilty Trustees will be too.

Will BBCHS learn from defeat? By R. L. Hurst, Bourbonnais

This week, another funding proposal for a new high school was rejected by the Bradley-Bourbonnais voters.

This time it was rejected by more than a two to one margin. In voting as a Bourbonnais resident, I felt that the BBCHS School Board and the "Friends of BBCHS" were once again less than honest with their community.

It was still a bloated and unpopular plan, including the questionable location. If we live in a democracy, then why does the high school board rely on voter turnout strategies, rather than the plain and simple truths? They were relying on and will again rely on low voter turnout to eventually get this flawed plan passed.

As an example of a less than genuine tactic employed by the "Friends of BBCHS," I can point to their selected mailings to recent BBCHS graduates asking for their help at the voting booth in passing the referendum. In my opinion, enlisting the aid of nonrenters and nontaxpayers is somewhat less than ethical.

Another sad aspect of school referendum votes is the fact that the state will allow a bond issue to pass without a preponderance of votes affirming the issue. In short, they don't assign a minimum percentage of votes necessary. I believe that the tactics employed by the school board are right out of the consultant's play book in getting unpopular school bond issues to pass. We can't keep allowing the state to vacate their responsibilities regarding new school construction.

The health of this state's economy is very much in jeopardy because of the failures of its past and present leadership. State taxes are eventually going to be raised either through sales or income. There have been no solutions in Springfield other than a ridiculous gross receipts tax that is going to drive even more businesses to other states. I belabor the point of looming tax increases because it is another fundamental reason that the referendum failed.

The voters are growing extremely weary of ever increasing taxes. We know we have other referendums coming from our grade schools, and some of us are aware of the cost of a failing state economy.

The BBCHS School Board needs to go to "Plan B" if such a plan exists, and look at location, cost, and putting the plan on hold until the state can match funds. Explore other options other than the one you are married to. Most of all, quit spending the district's money on meaningless polls and architectural plans for a "Megaplex High School." We are still a blue collar community.

I met with Supt. Hogan, who was gracious enough to give me over an hour of his time, in late Feb. to answer questions I had about the proposed new high school. I have come to the conclusion that an expansion is needed to counter overcrowding of the existing school, but that not enough evaluations have been done by the board to justify spending $41.6 MM at this time. This requires voting against the proposed referendum.

Why have I come to this conclusion? While I don’t expect details on an estimate of this magnitude, I do expect that the estimators have a good idea of what it is they are proposing. For example, Mr. Hogan was asked what kind of construction was to be used for the building such as brick, precast concrete, or steel sided, and he said that hadn’t been determined. When asked about the infrastructure costs, he admitted that they don’t have an estimate on water and natural gas infrastructure costs, and only have a promise on sewer costs. Some preliminary soil borings have been done, but problems could still crop up with the land being next to a creek. I’m also not sure that drainage estimates have been done to handle storm runoff on land that according to the drainage district drains several thousand acres. Building estimates were based on a dollars per sq ft basis based on school buildings constructed in Beecher and other suburbs. Again, details are not available. These types of estimates are called factored estimates, and often are accurate to only about +-20%. Mr. Hogan was unsure whether the land costs ($3 MM) were included in the estimate, or had been taken out. When asked if anyone had looked into whether it would be wise to install footers and steel to support additional stories for the main building if expansion in the future was needed, Mr. Hogan said that this was not looked at because they had lots of land and no more than 2 stories would ever be needed. My response was that if you don’t look at the cost, you can’t make an educated decision.

Alternative plans were discussed. I asked about building on land east of the football field at the existing site (about 150 ft X 600 ft is available). Mr. Hogan said that they had talked about this, but decided that they didn’t want to do this. I asked what the cost saving would be by building there, and he said they never even looked at the cost. I was a project manager for many years, and never would have presented a project for approval without having investigated alternatives, and their related costs. Management would never approve a project unless the alternatives were evaluated fully. This referendum project as presented is, “this is what we want, but we don’t want to consider any alternative plans”. This is unacceptable to me, and should be unacceptable to all taxpayers. Projects also need to include estimates of future investment required to complete the entire project scope. No such estimates have been provided.

I asked Mr. Hogan what the costs for operating a new school would be. He said that he estimates $425 M yearly less teachers. I believe this figure is for operating costs and utilities. Costs which may not be necessary if the building is built on the existing site would be salaries for counselors, nurse, administrative, office, maintenance, and cafeteria staff. No one has talked about the extra costs above teachers needed to operate an entire new campus. These extra costs will be dumped on the taxpayers after the new school is built, and taxes will again be increased. The BBCHS board was unable to provide the calculation of the estimated tax increase that they are claiming home owners would pay if the referendum is approved. We can’t even be sure of how much the taxpayers will have to pay. I guess this is “Trust me”.

Other costs are included in the estimate that would not be needed if the existing campus were expanded. Athletic fields ($1.73 MM), Site Structures ($600 M), and Off Site Construction ($500 M) would not be required for the existing site. Infrastructure costs would be far less at the existing site, as water, sewer, and gas are not a mile away.

In conclusion, I have made my decision not to vote for the referendum for the following reasons.

I believe that the BBCHS district has asked for a big pot of money, and will then decide what they can buy with it. The board should be stewards of the taxpayer’s money, and they have not shown this to be the case. As our famous Senator Everett McKinley Dirksen once said about the taxpayer’s money, “A million here, a million there, and pretty soon you’re talking some real money”.

Please vote on April 17^th, and join me in voting against this tax increase until better alternatives have been investigated, and costs fully disclosed.

When Will The Next Shoe Drop For Taxpayers? By John Foltz, Bourbonnais

The BBCHS school board and administration would have us believe that they've cut their request for funds to the bone. They say they've polled the public and this time they are asking the voters to approve what the public asked for -- a bond issue which will give them $41 million to construct a freshman only campus, and allow them to make necessary repairs to the existing facility on North Street.

I think all they've done is change their tactics. They began their expansion spending with a $3 million purchase of land in Bourbonnais Township. They talked about building an $85 million campus on the 120 acres. This was to be a second campus for a high school population that they said would approach 6,000 students. When state funding for new school construction evaporated, the board scaled back their plans and placed two referendums on the fall 2006 ballot. One of the referendums asked for the authorization of a levy (a permanent tax increase) of $11 million to fund maintenance projects at the current facility and to fund operating expenses at the new facility. The second referendum was to fund construction of phase one of the new campus -- a freshman only campus. They hadn't given up on their plans for a new four- year school. They were only changing their tactics. Both referendums were defeated in November of 2006.

Well, they've changed their tactics again. Now they want us to approve a $41 million bond issue with no mention of the funds necessary to operate and maintain the new facility. What happened to the $11 million levy increase? They want us to believe it's been dropped because that's what the public asked for. But have the costs gone away? If the spring referendum is approved and the second campus is constructed, how will operating expenses be covered? If $11 million was required last fall to operate the new facility, why should it not be required now? Believe me, if the current proposal is approved, this board will be back knocking at our door again.

The upper management of the company I retired from called this type of approach "Salami Tactics." They wanted to know the full impact of a proposed project prior to approval. They were very intolerant of a carelessly proposed request for capital investment that led to future requests for funds. They likened this approach to building a salami sandwich where slices of salami, lettuce and cheese were added one at a time to complete the sandwich. They demanded to know where it would end, and rightly so.

Voters in the BBCHS school district deserve to know how many slices of salami are necessary for the completion of this sandwich. What will be requested in the future? If the spring referendum is approved, how much will it cost to operate the new facility?

My recommendation is to vote "NO" on the April referendum. Withhold the bread from this sandwich. If you agree, please remember to vote. The school board recently conducted a telephone poll of registered voters. They know who supports their proposal. Again, I strongly encourage you to visit the polling place and vote "NO."

After reading the piece by the president of the IEA, it should be no surprise to anyone why school reform in Illinois is not in the cards. The IEA is "unalterably opposed to elimination of tenure, and merit pay." Without these reforms taking place, the school system is doomed to mediocrity.

Paying teachers based on seniority, and advanced degrees is an insane way of compensating teachers. Good teachers deserve to be paid well, and poor teachers do not. Without incentives for excellence, we will only get more of the same poor results. No other professional employees are paid under such a system. If you don't perform, you don't get a pay increase.

Tenure is another insane way of operating an educational system. The Daily-Journal ran a series of articles on the tenure system which exposed just how broken this system is.

Nowhere in industry do employees get a job for life just because they have done an adequate job for a short time. Employees change over time, and if they can't perform at a decent level, they should not be guaranteed a job.

The Chicago Tribune had it right in their series on Illinois education funding. The politicians in Springfield have to have the courage to take on the teachers unions, and tie funding increases to real reform, such as tenure elimination, and merit pay. If they lack the courage to do these things, then there should be no further funding of schools via tax increase.

I would have to agree with Larry Groskreutz's comments on using the existing property to expand and moving the football field. This property on Career Center Road was purchased years ago for this purpose. I have lived in Bourbonnais Township for 26 years and have been paying taxes for St. George and BBCHS.

Over the last few years, we have had two additions at St.George and now the high school wants more money for a new school. It's not a matter of an increase of $273 per year for the new school. It's the idea of the residents east of Cardinal Drive getting bond issues from both school districts, which double the increase. A lot of area residents agree that the board needs to look at this and go to plan B; then they might get a yes vote instead a no vote in April.

I believe that it is time that the Board of BBCHS recognizes that the residents of the district do not want an entire new school building. Why hasn't the board considered adding on the current building? This has to be a less costly option to the 41-million-dollar new campus.

The building could be increased into the parking lot and the football field could be converted into parking. The football field could be moved to the same area where the soccer fields and softball fields currently are located on Career Center Road. They also have all of the expensive land they bought in St. George.

It is time that the Board uses what it has and not tax the residents of the district to death. They have a fine facility that can be enlarged and the entire operation would be in one location. It has to be much less costly than a new building.

February 16, 2007

BBCHS referendum, A Taxpayer's Perspective by Rod Danielson, Bourbonnais

With another referendum coming in April, and both sides getting further apart, I think the voice of the average taxpayer needs to be heard.

The majority of taxpayers agree that there is overcrowding, and something needs to be done. They just don't agree that the funding should come only from property taxes.

A property tax hike is going to be needed, but other sources of funding must be applied as well. The local politicians need to pressure state government to contribute their share. Builders of new homes need to pay substantial impact fees to help reduce the burden on current residents. The local communities have to stop giving away sales tax receipts via TIF districts. Perhaps some alternative taxes, such as a local sales tax, need to be implemented. We cannot rely on any one of the above taxing methods to solve the problem. We need all of the above. When this happens, the taxpayers will approve a property tax increase.

Taxpayers would also like to see a little belt tightening by the school district. In industry, every few years the ranks need to be thinned after "empire building" in lots of places. If the school district is not overstaffed in a lot of places -- not teachers -- it would be amazing. What's wrong with cutting staff, and asking people to do a little bit more, just like in other businesses, or privatizing some operations? This may not yield much in the way of revenue, but would certainly be very symbolic to the taxpayers.

Taxpayers have a lot of questions about the referendum proposal which have not been adequately addressed by the school district. I will list a few. I am not advocating any of these, but they deserve to be answered.

Why was new poorly drained land purchased without taxpayer approval when the district already owns land on Career Center Rd.? If the land is not suitable for a school, why was it purchased? Sell it to a developer, and apply the proceeds against the new school proposal.

If there is land for mobile classrooms, why not build a multistory building on this space?

Why not build on property behind the school and move some of the athletic fields to Career Center Rd.?

Why not lease classroom space from one of the soon-to-be-empty buildings. (Kroger, Jewel, K's Merchandise)?

"Early Bird" classes are to be offered. Why not go two or three overlapping shifts to increase classroom availability? Example: 7-2, 8-3, 9-4.

Is the proposed new school a monument to some architect, or a basic utilitarian bldg.? Details have not been forthcoming.

How much will a new school cost to operate in terms of staff and operating expenses, and where will that money come from?

As far as the new referendum being voted on in April, the taxpayers want to know how the $900,000 in roofing is being covered. If there was $900,000 fat in the original proposal, how much fat remains? Why has the roofing been neglected for 20 years? The business world spends a budgeted amount on infrastructure improvements and maintenance every year. Why hasn't the school district done this?

The school district needs to be more upfront with the taxpayers. Using scare tactics about overcrowding doesn't fly when the school has been close to these levels for several years. Things do not have to change immediately. There is time to come to a solution that everyone can support.

In conclusion, the school district needs to lose the "We know better than the taxpayers, and we don't have to tell them anything" attitude, and the taxpayers have to realize that tax increases are going to be necessary. Both sides must give a little, and only then can they come to an agreement to solve the problem of school overcrowding.