McHenry County Blog

In the “field report” made by Diane Evertsen after she attended the Harvard School Board meeting to complain of the district’s having rented Harvard Junior High School for use by the Mexican Consulate for four days, she revealed that a referendum was pending.

Now Jenn Wiant of the Northwest Herald has spelled out the details in an article.

$20.7 million for an elementary school. The vote was 6-0.

Estimated cost – “$42.50 a year for each $100,000 in assessed property value.” $100,000 in assessed value would equate to a $300,000 home.

There is another sentence, however, that makes me wonder if that $100,000 really refers to actual value. Here’s that sentence:

“’ The citizens, parents and staff of the Facilities Task Force made it very clear to us that they wanted us to keep the cost of the proposed school to less than $100 per year for the owner of a $200,000 home,’ Superintendent Lauri Tobias said.”

Notice that the school superintendent does not say for a home assessed at $200,000, which would be worth $600,000, because assessments are one-third of market value.

There was no press release on the district’s web site, so no way to find out over the weekend.

22 acres of land will be donated by Dan Hereley through the Evelyn Hereley Trust. It’s off Marengo Road.

Barrington architect Ruck Pate will use a design used previously. My guess is that it will not be built out of energy efficient Solar Crete.

Labels: Diane Evertsen, Harvard School Board, Referendum, Ruck Pate Architecture, Solar Crete

Tucked away in an application for state financial assistance for McHenry County College's request for assistance from state taxpayers is evidence that referendum approval for $10 million will be sought.

That's the source of local funds for Phases One and Two of the college's "Master Plan."

To provide the local funds needed for Phase One --$3,947,000-- the college board proposes passing a referendum.

$11.5 million is being requested from state taxpayers.

Phase One calls for

• a Health Careers Center
• Math and Science and General/Computer/Virtual Classrooms
• Food Service/Dining Improvements
• 46,400 more square feet; renovation of 3,100.

The Health Careers Center is said to be "driven by employers who need qualified health care workers to address demands for services within the district."

But, that's not all.

The college board apparently intends to ask permission to borrow another $7.1 million from us voters.

$21.2 million is expected to be paid out of your state tax dollar pocket.

That's for Phase Two.

It will consist of

• a Bookstore
• Humanities and Social Sciences
• Learning and Student Support Services/Administrative/Development
• Health/Wellness/Athletic Center
• General/Computer/Virtual Classrooms
• Human and Public Services

85,300 square feet here, plus renovation of 9,700 more.

Labels: MCC, McHenry County College, Referendum

I really have divorced myself too much from what's going on in Springfield.

Recently, I suggested that what Springfield did didn’t matter.

Reading a bill that State Senator Pam Althoff introduced on February 7th has changed my mind.

The title of the bill is “An act concerning referenda” and, boy, does it.

It pretty much guts the already too weak Election Interference Act, sponsored by State Rep. John Matijevich (D-North Chicago) back in the 1970’s when a local school district spend taxpayers’ money to pass a referendum. That law is intended to keep public money from being spent to promote or oppose (fat chance) tax rate hikes or bond referendums.

The law is already too weak because most state's attorney's won't prosecute unless the (usually) school district communication (usually direct mail) says, "Vote Yes." School districts have learned not to be that blatant when they spend tax dollars to get you to vote yes.

Althoff wants to gut the Election Interference Law.

I have never inflicted legislative language on readers of McHenry County Blog, but, in this instance I am making an exception. Below are the changes in state law Althoff proposed in her Senate Bill 227, introduced on February 7th.

Here’s the new language she wants put in the State Officials and Employees Ethics Act:

Nothing in a governmental entity's regulation of political activities shall prohibit the governmental entity's corporate authorities from communicating to the public

(1) the reasoning for the corporate authorities' decision to place a referendum question on an upcoming election ballot, even if that communication supports the referendum question or otherwise may constitute a prohibited political activity, or

(2) the reasons why the corporate authorities support or oppose a referendum question on an upcoming election ballot (regardless of how that question was placed on the ballot), even if that communication supports or opposes the referendum question or may otherwise constitute a prohibited political activity.

In any such communication, however, the corporate authorities must specify how they believe the referendum question directly affects the health, safety, or welfare of the residents of the governmental entity or otherwise pertains to the governmental entity's government and affairs.

The exemptions from prohibited political activities provided by this subsection shall apply only to communications with respect to referendum questions and not to communications with respect to candidates for any public office.

Then, to make sure everyone knows that the intention is to gut the Elections Interference Act, there’s this change in that law:

Nothing in this Section prohibits the corporate authorities of a unit of local government or a school district from communicating to the public

(1) the reasoning for the corporate authorities' decision to place a proposition on an upcoming election ballot, even if that communication supports the proposition or otherwise may violate this Section, or

(2) the reasons why the corporate authorities support or oppose a proposition on an upcoming election ballot (regardless of how that proposition was placed on the ballot), even if that communication supports or opposes the referendum question or may otherwise violate this Section.

In any such communication, however, the corporate authorities must specify how they believe the proposition directly affects the health, safety, or welfare of the residents of the unit or district or otherwise pertains to the unit's or district's government and affairs.

This subsection applies only to communications with respect to propositions and not to communications with respect to candidates for any public office.

Co-sponsors are Dan Rutherford, the 2006 Republican candidate for Secretary of State, and Democrats Mike Jacobs and Sue Garrett.

Should we be thankful for the small favor that Althoff doesn't want local governments to spend money re-electing their officials...just to raise our taxes?

It appears that tax hikers like Huntley School District 158’s B.E.S.T. and Carpentersville District 300’s Advance 300 would not have to get huge contributions from developers and school vendors if Althoff’s bill were passed. Tax hike committees in districts like McHenry’s Grade School District 15 would not have to go to teachers’ unions for money to pass referendums to give teachers and administrators raises.

They could just take the money out of what they have already received from taxpayers in real estate taxes.

Don’t believe me?

Check it out for yourself.

Althoff was asked via email for her motivation for introducing the bill early last week, but has not yet replied. If she does, I shall be happy to publish her reason.

Labels: Bond Issue, Election Interference Act, John Matijevich, Pam Althoff, Referendum, School Referendum

Details of the minor league baseball stadium, discussed in secret by McHenry County Board last Monday night, are beginning to be leaked.

While junior college officials refuse to release the $70,000 report to McHenry County Blog, Chicago Tribune reporter Tim Kane was told that the ballpark will have 3,000 bleacher seats and could be open as soon as two years from now.

And, get this:

Without voter approval!

President Walt Packard told reporter Kane that

MCC plans to issue debt certificates and would start to turn a profit on the venture after four or five years.

But, according to an answer I got to a Freedom of Information request-VIA CERTIFIED MAIL, no less--

there is no document, paper or electronic, which touches on the subject or mentions the topic of financing additional buildings or purchase of property without having to obtain referendum approval.

Wouldn't a baseball stadium be a building?

This must be a very oral organization.

Northwest Herald reporter Nick Swedberg got a similar answer from Packard:

Money from leasing the stadium to a baseball club and renting other sports facilities in a proposed health, wellness and athletic center would suffice instead of the college going to taxpayers to ask for building funds.

Don't worry, taxpayers.

Be happy. (Which smiley face best fits this situation?

It's free.

Never mind those pesky realists who say,

"There's no such thing as a free lunch."

It won't cost you a dime.

Anyone but me want to make sure of that?

Will the deal repay the taxpayers for the value of the land, now valued at more than $67,000 per acre (more than the land referenced in the article because it fronts on Route 14)?
= = = = =

The two pictures on the right hand side of the story are of McHenry County College President Walt Packard. The smiley faced man is EquityOne Development President Mark Houser.

Labels: Baseball Stadium, College, Equity One, Equity One Development Corporation, Mark Houser, Minor League Baseball, Referendum, Rt 14, Smiley Face. Mark Houser, Walt Packard

Only citizen--now Huntley School Board member--Larry Snow of Lake in the Hills figured out how the 55 cent tax hike referendum proposed by Huntley School District 158 last fall was being misrepresented.

The school board put a 55 cent tax hike on the ballot, but forgot to tell the folks in the subdivisions that, if passed, the referendum would allow the school board to hike its tax rates by 55 cents per year for each of the next five years until the new maximum tax rate approved by a bare majority vote was reached.

Here was this not-so-ordinary citizen Snow pointing out that the Emperor had no clothes.

Lots of people did not believe him.

How could he know more than the trusted school board members and district officials?

Well, it turns out that he did.

The reporters who underreported the magnitude of the Huntley school tax hike proposal now are a lot more knowledgeable.

Click here to read what Daily Herald reporter Jeffrey Gaunt says about the Dist. 300 proposal.

Labels: District 300, Huntley School District 158, Larry Snow, Referendum