Painting an unfortunate picture.
This is different. The whole “praise people in public, criticize them in private” meme defined Ron Sandack’s first two years in office. It led to fast meetings, unanimous votes, jocularity and little dissenting opinion.
That normal good humor and jocularity got a kick in the teeth Wednesday night courtesy of Sandack himself, via Lucy Lloyd’s blog and her duplicate post on TribLocal titled “Village Meeting Ends With Dissent: Mayor Ron Sandack Responds To Criticism”. For apparently the first time Mayor Sandack went beyond the public record of his closing comments not to discuss an issue (he does that all the time), but to indicate his disagreement with and opine on the actions of fellow council members (the unnamed Marilyn Schnell, Bruce Beckman and William Waldack), all of whom stated differing opinions about what to cut, what to keep, and how to balance a budget that has a well-documented gap.
Although Lloyd has made it clear her blog reports are off-limits, Sandack is a public figure who has released a public statement after the fact, after the vote, and after a documented terse closing commentary the previous night at a council meeting marked with differing viewpoints.
Quoted directly and exactly from The TribLocal, after the break the entire quote.
“The 2010 budget process has thus far been the most inclusive and detailed in recent memory; maybe the most open and transparent in Downers Grove’s entire history. It is instructive to recall this detailed and meticulous process to date because it objectively answers a hollow complaint proffered by some of my well-meaning colleagues. For the budget process began, in earnest, back in May of 2009, and included eight Long-Range Financial Planning meetings as a run up and introduction to the 2010 budget meetings. In total we have had 13 or so meetings where anyone in attendance was permitted an opportunity to raise issues and express themselves; including Council members. While persons of good will can and often do disagree– and I’d suggest this happens more often when times are economically tough — that does not mean there was no “compromise” or that an unfair process ensued. Anyone interested in the facts as to the Council’s process need only visit www.downers.us and read the minutes of all of the meetings or listen to the podcasts of them. Complaints about unfair process are objectively disproved there.
Admittedly, what has not occurred thus far has been the faintest hint of the past practice of horse-trading of programs or taxes or a return to some of the same old patch-work budget practices. If that is what is meant by some when they say “compromise,” then it is true that did not occur. This economy is a game-changer and it was agreed during our laborious meeting process that the Council needed to focus on the delivery and payment of core Village services and this Council methodically defined such core services. No, not everyone agreed fully but there was undeniable consensus, strong agreement in fact, that the Village could no longer provide all of the services it had in the past and must necessarily stay true to core…police, fire and public works. Because given the rising personnel expenses including pension obligations the Village, we could not continue under the “old way”; that was deemed by almost all to be entirely unsustainable. The record on this is replete that Council direction, clear and unmistakable, was achieved. Now when it is time to make the specific decisions and follow through with that Council direction, difficult no doubt, to stay core-focused, some pine for “compromise”–ill-defined and without price tags. Some even complain that there was a “process problem” or that there was no “compromise.” I humbly suggest that these are mere fall back positions, emotional reactions really, to the tough decisions that make many naturally uncomfortable. However this is when true leadership and follow through is required.”
Tuesday night Sandack was visibly frustrated by the differing opinions culminating in a closing comment that took all three commissioners to task for the “nay” votes that led to the 4-3 levy approval.
The next night he released the above statement via the Downers Grove Chronicle and TribLocal for public consumption. As DGreport commenter and regular council meeting attendee John Schofield reported, tempers were dicey after that council meeting.
The usual council M.O. is there’s no surprises, everything gets vetted beforehand. That must not have happened Tuesday night.
True leadership and follow through are required!
…but is everyone who has read this a known person…???
oh wait..
I am so sick of the council and Sandack touting themselves on how open they have been and how they have listened at multiple meetings to the comments of community members. If they have been listening, why are they essentially just passing the budget exactly as presented with really very little change based on anything presented by the community.
Just because there is public support for a program does not mean that it is a good idea to have the village fund that program. I find it hard to believe that the county or state do not have adequate counseling services. The IL department of human services has plenty of services to offer at the tax payers expense. I am not going to post the link because its easy enough to find, just google it.
The simple answer to that is lack of consensus, which Sandack discussed in the meeting. There’s no innovation by council when it comes to organizing thought out budget cuts. I’d love to see more cohesion between board members and actually attempting to meet outside of the meetings to come up with suggestions of what to cut.
I think that we as residents have the easy job, to sit and complain about what the village is doing wrong without taking any action on our own. I’m choosing not to do that and have reached out to the board, all-be-it, not as much as I would like to, but at least offering up suggestions. If council decides to bring them up or at least consider any ideas, great, if not, then I know who I am/am not voting for come next election. At least then you feel you’ve made an attempt.
As I have said in the past this budget should not consist of compromise. This budget should be treated as a template moving forward. This budget is getting to the bare bones of what the village’s core services are. If some council people don’t get that then maybe they need to be voted out next time!!
Compromise is give and take though. Some services have to be cut, that’s not even a question. When people aren’t willing to work together to be creative is when the task at hand does not get accomplished.
With regard to “core services,” one could argue that Heritage Fest (beating dead horse) is not a “core service.” Others would argue that it is. To me, the budget is much more than that. After all the redline items have been analyzed, council should then begin to look at services that are essential to the satisfaction of the public, as well as services that cannot be eliminated (ie, pension benefits, police, fire, etc). Those to me are your “core services.”
I think that the mayor was disappointed on Tuesday night because SO much focus was spent on how much to cut Heritage Fest, while many other things could have been discussed that weren’t.
My main concern is that this council reaches a bottom line budget that focuses on core services. After that we can start adding resident pleasing services as the budget allows. You can’t be everything to everyone. People need to remember why government was created in the first place. Public safety and security. Everything else is an added bonus and therefore is open to being reduced or cut. I would love those two officers jobs to be saved. I stood up at a meeting in support of our police department and its officers. That doesn’t change the fact that pensions are out of control and the state forces you to fund them no matter what the market is doing. I think state pensions should ebb and flow with the market just like the private sectore. We would not be arguing about the loss of cop jobs if that were the case.
The big, chunky, enormous white elephant in the room is the pension for the the police, fire and municipal workers. We can shuffle the deck chairs around, but it’s a slowly sinking titanic. Much like the state of Illinois.
I agree with both of the last two comments. Especially in an economy where others are losing jobs and wages cut, pensions continue to go up.
a couple of thought’s. Although i agree that the pensions are the enormous elephant in the room, much like our own well stocked 401K’s isn’t that why peole work as long as they do and poay into thoose funds so they can reap the rewards of retirement later? I do agree though that the Pesions are an issue. I also think the discussion of HF should be continued to be constructive and transparent. To have it just cut from the budget is way to short sided. Find ways to have it paid for via corporate sponsers. Even thogh it has been a bit of a Carnie effect for the last few years, those people from out of town come to DG and attend that Fest, spend money in DG, eat in DG, contribute to the economiuc well being of DG. I agree it needs to be moore localized but I rmember the term being DG is “inclusive” so all area residents should be welcome to come here, spend their money, eat, drink and shop in our community to boost it any way possible. What about those darn commuter buses? Why has that not been any part of the buget cut process? I know the Village justpaid huge $$ to upgrade them but still, park them for a year or two or sublet them out to another community for a fair price. Cut the October Fest entirely, that’s a huge waste of money, Right size HF, Keep all the coops employed, cut the commuter shuttle or lase it to another Village for two years. Reasses the pensions and sharpen the pencil there. Eliminate the Ice sculpture event, Bike race and right size the car show or find a couple of Corporate sponsers for that and trin the community events department to one person and have volunteers to step up and help carry that load. I bet there are plenty of event planner wanna be’s in this town who would want to log some hours in event planning with the Village of DG. Lastly, incorporate some of the current “un-incorporated neighborhoods for additional $$.
“…council should then begin to look at services that are essential to the satisfaction of the public, as well as services that cannot be eliminated (ie, pension benefits, police, fire, etc). Those to me are your “core services.”
I think this is as good a definition as any of “core services.” Thanks, Ryan.
fromtheheart,
Octoberfest was put on by the Rotary CLub and had a paid entrance fee. Food and beer inside were additional as well. Yes, it was small, but very fun for families alike. It was canceled this year because of difficulty of getting corporate sponsorship. The Rotarians plan on holding it next year. Not a village run party at all.
The buses are another story. They will be out of the budget entirely after 2011. Please read Mayor Sandacks comments regarding the buses on another thread or on DG Chroncile (look for the link on the right of DG Report).
All,
Corporate sponsorships are getting harder and harder to come by. Yes, it’s easy to lob an option that way at a Sara Lee, etc. but I can tell you they put their discretionary dollars where their bread is buttered. They have less of it and DG Heritage Fest isn’t in their wheelhouse for give away funds. Sure, they can help out, but it will never be “Heritage Fest 2010 proudly sponsored by Sara Lee and DeVry”.
If Heritage fest is truly the draw that everyone says it is than corporate sponsors would be lining up to sponsor HF. Advertising in a down market is more important that ever. Marketing 101…Exposure equals sales! Business’s are advertising more than ever. They just want the most bang for the buck.
I missed Octoberfest. Last year I danced with my daughter to an oompa band and my brother in law and I had our clocks cleaned in bags. Great times. I certainly hope that the Rotary club can put it back on the docket next year, recession be damned.
If we don’t learn from history, we are bound to repeat it. Down business cycles will happen again, they always do. Pension costs will probably increase over time. Are we as taxpayers expected to make up the difference, either through increased taxes and or reduced services, each time we are in down cycles? Reducing or eliminating Heritage Fest, Octoberfest, the Bike Race, etc. are temporary cures to an on going problem. Many businesses have somewhat solved the pension problem by throwing it into the laps of the employees with a 401K and letting them invest their own funds. Many individuals do well and many don’t, but at least some other entity doesn’t remain responsible for too much risk, too much leverage, and too slow to react when business cycles go in the wrong direction. Right now the taxpayers are that other entity.
Well said, George.
Forget abot corporate sponsorships being the solution – the payback from these so called great opportunities simply isn’t there for any business that could afford it. Are you going to buy Sara Lee products more often because they sponsored HF? Those are “for profit” entities with a responsibility to their shareholders – they can’t afford to be the savior for this community.
As for what constitutes “core services” everyone has an opinion on that. If I don’t drive, I don’t care about snow plowing. If I don’t have a car, I place a higher value on buses. That is why consensus is a pipe dream. It comes down to costs and the greater good – which means tough choices.
Though I will agree with all of you that are forward looking that we have to get about the business of fixing the mess we are in, I’ll remind you that these problems are the result of trying to be all things to all people, trying to keep up with the community next door and turning a blind eye to the blatantly obvious. This council, and past councils, were much too optimistic about revenue flows, and much too aggressive in what they wanted to do in trying to make Downers Grove something that it isn’t.
The pension obligations shouldn’t be news to anyone – they have been there all along. Unfortunately, this council spent well beyond our means – just like too many people in the private sector. All those parcels of land assembled downtown – and for what? Overblown capital expenditures – like a firehouse that should forever stand as a symbol of what happens when you get too full of yourself. Now we can’t afford to have firefighters inside that building! The beautiful recreation center that replaced one of the last oak groves in this town, and seems under used whenever I drive through that parking lot. (I know that is a DGPD facility, but it is representative of the mindset in this town). The village motto should have been “Downers Grove – We want it all, and we want it now”.
I have to believe the outlook for this town is very bad – because this council is now in a panic on how to deal with the issue. I only hope that these great leaders learn a lesson from all of this. Save for tomorrow – you just may need some of that money.
I know – an old geezer like me simply doesn’t have the capacity to grasp the vision that our leaders put forth – hopefully I’ll get it before it is too late. I just struggle with the concept of over leveraging myself and thinking that the money will keep flowing in.
“The Mayor Strikes Back?” That’s your creative title? Who are you writing against here Mark? What’s your beef?
I find it refreshing that everyone who contributed to this blog wrote about the serious issues, and not lashing out at the figurehead, as you appear to have been hoping.
Humor and jocularity were kicked in the teeth? Good. I want some serious faces at the most important budget meeting in recent years. Get on board.
Previous councils made the same ill advised choices. Lets not place all the blame on the current council. Previous councils let the storm water and infrastructure needs of the village on the back burner. I don’t want to hear that it is one council or another’s fault. There is plenty of blame to go around but not enough solutions.
Ben, you can’t lay this at the feet of only the current council (although I’m not sure you are). Assembling real estate for redevelopment was the thing to do in the 90’s. Redefining the basis for TIF districts provided what appeared to be a financing mechanism to do that. Although we are carrying debt obligations (I keep putting off posting about our debt) with the stated need to borrow more for stormwater projects, I don’t think the outlook is bad because the council is in a panic. Last week’s meeting showed some differing opinions, and some elevated reactions. That’s not necessarily a bad thing; it shows they care about the village and its future.
Scott, I appreciate your continued participation, and I will provide you with a bit of context I provided Ron. When I came back Thursday night and read about “finger pointing” “bitching” “complaining” and “schisms”, and then a long and detailed statement from Ron, that’s new ground. I expect it will be water over the dam by Tuesday.
If you don’t like the title of the post, you’re not alone.
As for getting on board, I’ve attended more budget meetings this year than anyone if you include the stormwater utility meeting, and the annexation exploration meeting. I have made numerous public and non-public suggestions about where expenses can be cut, revenues can be enhanced, and both general and specific short and long term steps that might be explored this year 2010, next year (2011), and for 2012 to bend down the cost curves that are killing us. I offered suggestions as to how to get the message of delayed expectations (for street repairs) out to the village residents. Don’t take my word for it; ask anyone on council or on staff, or simply reread my budget postings.
LOL. Check this out-
“Strikes back” is more popular every day.
http://www.mysuburbanlife.com/elmhurst/news/x2087401959/Citizens-strike-back-on-property-tax-levy?popular=true
Mark, are you throwing your hat in the election ring for VC? You tend to do extensive research on your own and your persepctive, in my opinion, would be a great based on some folks up there now. Ahem, WW……
I’m pretty sure I placed responsibility with both the current and past councils, though I’ll recheck my original post. I do that because they ran for and won the position – and all the responsibility that comes with it. They can’t have it both ways, and to be honest I don’t think any of the current council are shying away from the responsibility – to their credit.
I’m comfortable with my previous statement, because having lived in my home for more than two decades, and consistently stating the need for sound fiscal management, it is clear our problems are mounting. This village is tied to industries particularly hard hit by the economic implosion, and the rebound will be very slow in coming – probably not in my lifetime. Auto dealers have disappeared, and the way people do business has changed forever. Circuit City isn’t coming back either.
As an example of my point about needing to change, I am quite confident that the village would have assumed massive debt for a new police station and village hall had this economic collapse been another year in coming. Where would we be then? Our residents do not have the financial means of some neighboring communities, but we can lead comfortable lives if we don’t get caught up in trying to be something we aren’t. Yes those structures will eventually need to be replaced, but when it comes to serving the taxpayer, you better squeeze every last day out of those structures before saying they are no longer adequate. That is what the taxpayer and business owner must do – and government must be held to the same standard. To suggest the flood abatement program required as much as $300 million to address was a joke. That’s the kind of stuff that gets the common man upset. We’ve had more rain in 2009 than I can remember (I’m sure Mr. Thoman can prove me wrong), and there have been isolated issues. Isolated.
Chad – I respect your opinion, but the solution to the problem is exactly what fiscal conservatives have historically preached. I have nothing new to offer, because I have consistently stated that we should never have spent to the extent we have. Look at my posts on this site going back several years. I take no joy in saying this, but the handwriting was on the wall years ago.
So I’ll reiterate that I hope this council has learned from this experience. I truly mean that.
I am sure that all of the public servants, who have to work unusual shifts, have to work weekends, have to work holidays, have to miss a majority of their family life, and have to deal with the worst society has to offer, so that folks can walk safely to the train everyday, are really thrilled about those complaining about funding their pensions. The schools we have, the home values we enjoy, are directly related to the services that are provided by public safety departments such as Police and Fire. Instead of the continued bashing of pensions we should focus on where we can cut some more. I feel that the “No sacred cow” statement is an empty statement. The P.D. can still cut programs that are not core services. There are sacred cows they are not looking at. Why are we only cutting officers? It appears that We are eliminating two officers just because we are upset with pension contributions. Those contributions are protected by the state constitution, we cannot do anything about it. Lets look at the cows!
You are spot on. This has been a very wet year. Wet spring, wet summer ridiculous wet fall delayed harvest weeks. Meteorologist Jim Angel of the Illinois State Water Survey* released preliminary data for Illinois: this was the 11th coolest and 8th wettest summer since statewide records began in 1895. Average temp June–August was 71.4 degrees- 2.4 degrees below normal. Total precipitation for June–August was 15.2 inches- 3.6 inches above normal. I don’t know if we even ran our AC this year. Maybe one or two days.
*The Illinois State Water Survey at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign under the Institute of Natural Resource Sustainability is the primary agency in Illinois concerned with water and atmospheric resources.
I have kept my mouth shut for a very long time regarding some commenters’ continued lack of support for the FD and PD in our town. Do you want to see what kind of care and protection you actually get when we do our job strictly for the paycheck or are only worried about retirement? The answer is “no”. Are those people on both departments? Yes, they are. But almost everybody I work with and my friends on the PD truly love their profession. I love what I do and it’s all I’ve ever wanted to do.
Most of the people in town that we run across a very appreciative of us and what we do. At 3am or 3pm, we do our jobs professionally and with heartfelt dedication. To undermine that dedication is a shot to every police officer and firefighter that protect you while you sleep. Your beef with the pensions is clouding your vision as to how well the citizens have it in this town in regards to the services they get with the FD, PD, and PW. You don’t have to travel very far in this area to see the difference in the level of care you recieve if you have to pick up your phone and call.
Zig,
First off, the police and fire personnel in Downers Grove do a fine job. Nobody here on this blog has ever said you guys don’t do a great job.
The main difference between our police and fire department is that the fire department has found ways to reduce spending and the police department has not.
Now to the real point of the conversation. It is about economics…math doesn’t lie! The numbers just don’t add up right now. I have an idea. If the police are really interested in keeping the streets safe and 81 officers is the only number of officers that can get that job done, then why not just forgo your 2010 raises? Your 2010 raise is scheduled to be 3.4%. That should more than save those two officers jobs.
What is the line item for sworn police officer salaries Mark Thoman? I think Chad has a point. Find out the line item for salary and multiply by the 3.4%. I am sure it is greater then their salaries. Good Point Chad!!
I am sure the Union will say…..not my problem!! Show me the money………..
Many companies are using a “no raise” strategy to avoid layoffs. That occurred in 2008, and may happen again in 2009 in the private sector as employers try to weather the recession. I think Chad is on to something.
Zig,
I don’t see where anybody is not appreciative of all those working for the government today, Federal, State and Local, including our military. HOWEVER….it is how much we appreciate you is the question, via, how much your total compensation, when retirement benefits are added, cost the tax payer. Everybody, including doctors and nurses feel very underappreciated today. Most, make less today then they did 3-4 years ago…are you?? just wondering, cause I am. My Downers Grove bill, re. taxes…just went up (again), even though I am making less. My healthcare costs just went up (again), even though I am making less….did yours? We all appreciate you, we just may not be able to show it, financially, the same way we have been….cause many of us don’t have the money.
It’s salary freezes at every company my immediate and extended family works for – as well as increased healthcare costs for lessor policies and higher revenue numbers to meet in order to keep your position. Keep the cops – make all other necessary cuts, but salaries should freeze.
I’m loathe to possibly upset my most favorite union guys in the entire world. My guys; love you all in a respectful not-get-in-your-face way… but if two patrol positions will save the village $130,000, you could expect that to be almost all salary. The 5/1/09 starting is $56,112. So if 61 officers each take a hit somewhere between $2,131.15 and $1,839.74 it gets you there.
Here is the 2010 budget page for 624 Patrol/Traffic Enforcement:
Anyone read anywhere where this has happened? I have not.
Just curious: Are you only looking at sworn officers? Isn’t there another category to consider, the community service officers? Just asking — I’m not an expert on all things PD.
It pains me to agree with Chad (just kidding) but at least he has put forth an idea to save some officers’ jobs. No one likes to make less or even the same, but given the choice, isn’t it good just to have a job these days, especially one that they truly love? Thoman’s’ numbers seem reasonable and the union might be ok if it means saving jobs. Has the PD come up with any ideas to save money?
What I’m refering to is that there are those that contribute to this blog regularly that constantly call into question our dedication. And yes, Magoo, I am feeling the pinch as much as everyone. My wife is unemployed and in school full time. I have 4 kids. My insurance and taxes go up every year as well. Everyone has it tough these days. Don’t think that we’re immune to the same problems the private sector are having.
Zig,
Everyone here on this blog is looking at this issue from a economic standpoint. Its not personal or about dedication, its just business.
EJ- Just fund 624 Patrol/Traffic Enforcement. There are other police salary categories not included. Salary ranges are clearly posted in the budgets. More on that later.
Before we continue PD bashing. The police and their union are voting on possible concessions. They have always been willing to make cuts. They have already offered incentives for early retirement and the like. The problem is that the village manager placed two officers in the budget and he and the council are pretty unwilling to budge. But yes, they are working on concessions only it is a private matter between the police and the union.
Private matter? Who pays their salary. The tax payers. If they have a plan they should propose it so it can be discussed openly and transparently.
You’re right, I just meant that discussions are probably private until or unless they come up with something.
Fair enough Concerned.