I’ll take him at his word — and offer a few of my thoughts later in this post (and invite you to do the same). But first a little background.

Sandack  introduced the possibility of limiting mayoral terms during his 2007 campaign. “I want to be a citizen mayor — not a career politician,” he wrote at the time.

“This village is full of competent people whose expertise can be invaluable to our community and with an ethics ordinance prohibiting non-stop campaigning, qualified residents needn’t worry about raising obscene funds in order to run for office. Correspondingly, the next council should seriously consider limiting the office of mayor to two consecutive terms assuring the residents of fresh ideas and new leadership opportunities.”

He resurfaced the idea at the March 16 council meeting, suggesting that commissioners be limited to three consecutive terms and the mayor held to two consecutive terms. Elected village officials serve for four-year terms.

Sandack acknowledged that the subject of term limits “invokes a decent amount of emotion.”

“Some think elections are term limits. Others feel it’s good succession planning,” he said, emphasizing that it is residents’ opinion, and not his or his fellow council members, that matter.

Sandack also read an e-mail from absent Commissioner Marilyn Schnell, who in 2009 was elected to her sixth council term and is the only sitting commissioner who would be impacted by a term-limits ordinance should she choose to run again.

“I’ve always believed the people of Downers Grove have the right to decide who their elected officials should be,” Schnell said.  “An election is a unique opportunity for the residents to tell their officials how they’re doing and how responsive they have been to the electorate.

“If they want an individual to continue to serve, they will reelect them, if not they will vote them out of office,” Schnell said, adding that she considers it a “plus” for the village council to include both experienced and new members.

“It allows for a unique exchange of ideas which can only benefit the community,” she said. f a referendum on term limits is put before the community, “residents will do what they think is right for the community.”

Whatever the outcome of the proposed referendum, it wouldn’t be the final word on the issue.  That could only come after the community votes in favor of the proposition in a binding referendum.

Resident Gordon Goodman took issue with the potential for two ballots on the same issue.  “If you really want to accomplish something with term limits, put it on as a binding referendum and see how people feel about it,” he told the council.

I agree with Goodman that once would be enough for most voters. Given the amount of time before the August deadline for submitting the question, why not hold a public hearing or two to allow for full discussion and then go ahead with a binding referendum if called for?

Not that I would necessarily be one of those calling for it.  To be sure, there are good reasons to give the matter careful consideration.  Sandack told the DGreport term limits could potentially dial down the political pressure by offering commissioners “a freedom of sorts to vote in a manner that is devoid of any thought of re-election.”

He also said more residents might be encouraged to run for Village Council. “I think there’s an inherent hesitancy for many to challenge incumbents,” he said.

“All of this, I assert, depoliticizes the election and turn-over processes a bit (albeit subtly) and offers opportunities for new residents to serve without some of the perceived baggage. And the goal, I assume, is to encourage talented and interested residents to take time out of their busy lives and serve their village.

“We know we, as a community, have lots of thoughtful and talented people,” Sandack said. “So, why not remove some known barriers to community involvement?”

But if it’s barriers to community involvement that are prompting the discussion on term limits, perhaps we should extend the concept to appointed village offices? Indeed, the number of citizens appointed to village boards and commissioners dwarfs those elected. And many of these appointed officials wield considerable influence, if not power.

The library board, for example, has the authority to set that institution’s budget and tax levy. Among those who have served long years on the board are president Stephen Daniels and trustee Kathy DiCola, who were both recently re-appointed to six-year terms.

Daniels, when I approached him last fall to discuss the board’s budget actions, flatly refused to speak to me. I found this troubling. Yet, as a Downers Grove voter, I have no ability to register my concern at the ballot box.

Term limits, anyone?

Stephens and DiCola are among the many local volunteers who have been appointed again and again to local boards and commissions. In some cases — and I believe the library board is one of them — there aren’t many or any alternative candidates vying for the job.

However, in other cases, residents submit their applications repeatedly before finally getting tapped for a seat at the table. And some never are. Meanwhile, a number of “regulars” serve on multiple commissions concurrently.

I’m not sure whether limiting participation on appointed boards and commissions would work or not. However, I suggest it should be part of any discussion of term limits, if only because so many elected officials begin their involvement in local government in that way.

Schnell started out on the Plan Commission, commissioners Sean Durkin and Bob Barnett served as liquor commissioners (Barnett went on to be appointed to the Stormwater and Flood Plain Oversight Committee) and Geoff Neustadt was a member of the Traffic Advisory and Human Service commissions.

It appears Sandack may agree. “The sentiment certainly seems applicable to our boards and commissions, too,” he said.

“I do not believe there would be a numbers problem, in fact, the village may see more interest from residents with a more organized rotation.”

The water commission has come under increased scrutiny since November, when it was revealed administrators had spent down nearly $20 million in financial reserves.

While the Tribune is reporting that some area mayors are denouncing the effort — which they see as a “power grab” by Cronin, the Republican candidate for county board chairman — Mayor Ron Sandack reacted more favorably.

“Although I have yet to read the proposed piece(s) of legislation and fully think through the possibilities, it appears this may be a worthy endeavor,” he said in an e-mail.

“As many know, the DuPage Water Commission has some significant problems so if the county can provide the service within its existing infrastructure why not seek to reduce an extra layer of government and try and find some efficiencies?,” said Sandack, who along with Commissioner Bob Barnett and local attorney Jim Russ Jr. spearheaded the “Downers Grove for Dan” effort for Cronin’s primary campaign.

DuPage Water Commissioner Liz Chaplin of Downers Grove, who early on questioned the agency’s administrative practices also sees some merit to the proposal.

“I agree with the basic idea of the county having control over the DPWC,” she said in an e-mail, noting that she had proposed such an action in 2002 and would like to see the commission become a department of county government “with no middlemen and no municipal representatives.”

However, Chaplin questioned the need for the “Water Operations Committee” proposed by Cronin and also expressed concern about the prospects of the commission’s sales tax ending up on county coffers.

“More government that is not needed,” she said.  ” I would like to see the public works of DuPage County take over the commission and report directly to the county board.

“We have exactly what Cronin is suggesting and it has not worked,” Chaplin said. “There are six county-appointed members and the county board has never asked (those) water commissioners  for any reports. I took it upon myself to e-mail my concerns to Chairman (Bob) Schillerstrom.”

“I am also concerned with the additional sales tax going to the county.  Since the county just received a sales tax increase last year I would like the sales tax that was collected by the DPWC abated if this was to pass,” she said.

The matter was sparked by Commissioner William Waldack’s Feb. 2 request to remove four of six Consent Agenda items to the active agenda, citing his strong belief in a one-week waiting period before putting the items to a vote.

Since the council changed its meeting format in January, village staff has been authorized to place routine and non-controversial matters on the Consent Agenda without a waiting period.

The format change was adapted in order to expedite council meetings, “not to get them over sooner, but rather to focus on substantive matters and let routine matters — typical matters, mundane matters that any organization must tackle — be handled expeditiously,” the mayor said.

“We unanimously changed that rule. Unanimously,” he said. When Waldack asked for multiple items to be removed from the consent agenda, Sandack suggested that the prerogative — which goes back to the era of the five-member council –  “ought to be looked at, not to be used as a weapon, but rather a judiciously used rule of procedure, something used with circumspection and particularity.”  Other villages, including Glen Ellen, require two commissioners to agree before an item is pulled from the Consent Agenda.

However, most council members apparently want to maintain their individual right to request Consent Agenda items to be moved to the Active Agenda.

Noting that the council effected the format change only last month, “I’d like us to hold off on another potential change,” Commissioner Bob Barnett said. “Last week wasn’t typical and I don’t believe anyone expects it to be typical. I would hate to react too much.”

Barnett and Commissioner Marilyn Schnell suggested that many concerns over consent agenda items could be allayed by more off-dais dialogue between council members.

“We each bring our own expertise and our own group of people who talk to us, and as long as we take that and dialogue among ourselves and with staff, we will be able to work it through,” Schnell said.

Council members are allowed to discuss matters one-on-one without being in violation of the Open Meetings Act.

Commissioner Sean Durkin expressed concern that requiring two council members to remove a consent agenda item would be “bringing politics back into it with us lobbying each other just to get something off and a simple item into discussion mode.”

Waldack, who doesn’t hesitate to take the occasional minority position, said the rules change would have addressed a “pebble in the shoe with an amputation.”

“That would be the worse of two evils,” he said.

And although he agreed with Barnett that the format change should be given a six-month trial period, Waldack asked the council to discuss the what qualifies as a “routine” item sooner than that.

“I want guidelines for the Consent Agenda and the ability to pull things off that someone out there would like to know more about,” he said, referring to the public.

“Commissioner Tully was known for being verbose, but a strength I heard time and time again from the public was that he took time to explain issues to the public,” Waldack said of former colleague Martin Tully.

“We’ve lost some of that and if all we do is show up to meetings and vote on stuff, we’re not sharing information with each other sand we’re not sharing information with the folks out there,” he said.

Residents Gordon Goodman, Bill Wrobel and Buzz Whowell commented in support of Waldack’s position.

“I’m a great believer in transparency,” Wrobel said. “Having one commissioner being able to pull something off the Consent Agenda in favor of making it transparent to himself and the public and having dialogue with other commissioners, the mayor and staff I think is tremendous.”

Sandack said the council’s intent was “that matters that are non-controversial ought to be done with quickly so we can spend substantive time dealing with matters of a substantive nature.”

Council meetings are as transparent as possible, with each one broadcast multiple times, podcast and available on the village Web site, he said.

Residents are welcome to comment on the format change “with particularity and specificity,” Sandack said. “With respect to this particular item, the council prerogative will continue as it exists, and will only be revisited if there is a reason to revisit it.”

Saying he believes “very strongly” in a one-week waiting period before voting on certain Consent Agenda items, Commissioner William Waldack requested at Tuesday’s village council meeting that four items be moved to the Active Agenda as a prelude to putting them to a Feb. 16 vote.

The items were duly removed from the Consent Agenda, but Waldack’s subsequent motions to get the items considered on next week’s Consent Agenda not only failed to gain the support of  his council colleagues, but also led Mayor Ron Sandack to suggest a rule change may be necessary to prevent a single commissioner from exercising the long-held prerogative. In a typical year, less than a dozen items might be requested moved from the Consent to the Active Agenda.

Waldack said the one-week waiting period, which was standard operating procedure until the council agreed to change its meeting format last month, allows for residents to respond and council members to obtain additional information.

Some of the items in question at Tuesday’s meeting “cost more than what some households make in a year,” Waldack said. “I do not consider them routine.”

The four Consent Agenda items in question were:

B RES 00-04034 A resolution authorizing a fifth addendum to a software maintenance agreement with Crowe Horwath, LLP, in the amount of $24,750.

C MOT 00-04039 A motion awarding 2010 traffic signal maintenance contract to Lyons Electric Company, LaGrange, IL, not to exceed $47,000.

D RES 00-04042 A resolution authorizing an agreement for prosecution services with Linda S. Pieczynski, Attorney at Law, P.C., in the amount of $35,000.

E RES 00-04040 A resolution of intent to continue participation in the Suburban Tree Consortium and to authorize certain purchases for FY 2010 in the amount of  $123,000.

The items had been added to the Consent Agenda on Friday, Feb. 5, and answers to council questions were provided only two or three hours before the meeting, he said. “What we consider routine deserves more consideration than a business day and a half.”

Council rules allow a commissioner to request any item be removed from the Consent Agenda for separate approval. However, in the interest of making meetings more efficient, the council agreed to waive the customary one-week waiting period for routine matters.

Referencing a Consent Agenda item for prosecutorial services, “we want to get it done sooner rather than later and not have to wait one week,” Sandack said.

Waldack, in making his motions to postpone action on the items, had asked village staff whether economic considerations, time constraints or other concerns made it necessary to approve the items immediately. The answer in each case was, “no.”

In his comments at the end of the meeting, Sandack said  he hopes ” it isn’t going to happen that one member of this council is going to use his prerogative to change what we did collectively and what Commissioner Waldack agreed to do because of what he believes isn’t routine.”

“If that’s the case, I’m going to ask my colleagues to consider a rule change because the one-person objecting rule was when we had five council members. We have seven now and I don’t think one person should hold up a Consent Agenda if everyone else thinks it’s a routine matter,” he said.

“This isn’t a threat, its a legitimate request for a rule change if we can’t live up to the rules we just changed,” Sandack said. “We agreed routine items would be on the Consent Agenda and now, a couple weeks into the rule change, it’s being gutted.”

Waldack noted that he expressed concerns about the matter when the meeting format change was being discussed. He also proposed a solution that would place items on the Consent Agenda one week in advance of council action to allow for discussion.

“I have a solution that would maintain efficiency and give adequate public notice and solve the problem,” he said. “There is more upside than the prospect of efficiency. If I need to go home that early, maybe I shouldn’t be here.

Waldack’s request to remove the items from the Consent Agenda came only one week after a similar request from Commissioner Bob Barnett at the Feb. 2 council meeting.

Barnett asked that approval of the Comprehensive Plan Ad Hoc Committee be removed from the Consent Agenda despite the fact that the item had been previously discussed at the Jan. 12 council meeting.

“Absolutely,” Sandack said in response to Barnett’s request.

Barnett went on to propose an amendment that would expand the committee from nine to 11 members, including four at-large members.

The amendment was approved by the council over the objections of Waldack, who felt an 11-member committee would be unwieldy.

Sandack announced Tuesday that he had made the additional two appointments, although he wouldn’t reveal the names publicly. The two members are expected to attend tonight’s Comprehensive Plan Ad Hoc Committee meeting, although they won’t be formally approved by the council until next week.

The walk begins at 10:30 a.m. at the Willowbrook Holiday Inn, 7800 S. Kingery Highway. Those who wish to participate should e-mail the campaign at brian@krajewski4countyboard.com or call  (630) 435-6340.

The Meet and Greet event is being chaired by  Deputy Republican Leader Sen. Christine Radogno, State Rep. Patti Bellock, State Rep. Jim Durkin, Mayor William Murphy of Woodridge, Mayor William Rahn of Westmont, DuPage County Auditor Bob Grogan and DuPage County Forest Preserve Commissioner Linda Painter, all of whom have endorsed Krajewski for the seat.

Tickets are $50 each and sponsorships of the event are available. Contact the campaign at brian@krajewski4countyboard.com or (630) 435-6340 for more information.

Meanwhile, Mayor Ron Sandack, Commissioner Bob Barnett and Jim Russ sent out an e-mail this week to encourage Downers Grove voters to cast their ballots for State Sen. Dan Cronin for DuPage County Board Chairman:

We are supporting Dan and asking others to consider his candidacy for several reasons. Dan is one of two state senators currently representing Downers Grove. He is an honest, sincere legislator who wants to help lead our county forward — preserving the environment of value the county provides. In our experiences Dan has always been responsive to Downers Grove issues and has helped our town in many ways. We believe he can do even more for all of DuPage County as the next county board chairman.

The e-mail invites interested residents to visit Cronin’s “Downers for Dan” Web site to add their names to the list of supporters or to request a yard sign.

The event, which was open to the community as well as Chamber members, sold out earlier today.

This marks the third year Sandack has addressed the Chamber on the state of the village at the invitation of  Laura Crawford, Chamber president and CEO.  The practice is common in many DuPage County communities, including Naperville and Wheaton,  said Doug Kozlowski, village communications director.

The Downers Grove Chamber of Commerce represents “a huge portion of the community,” he said. The village is making a continuing effort to enhance its communication with the public and through its partnerships with the Chamber, the Downtown Management Corp. and the Economic Development Corp.

DGTV, the local cable station, will tape Sandack’s speech for broadcast “as soon as possible,” Kozlowski said. The Chamber also plans to put up podcast of the speech on its site.

Sandack will deliver a second State of the Village speech at a village council meeting sometime in February, Kozlowski said.  In the future, that speech may be scheduled earlier.

“We are trying to get back on schedule after the stub budget year,” he said. “The ideal is to deliver the year-end report or State of the Village address as soon as possible in the new year. ”

The speech is meant to coincide with the publication of the annual report, he said.

The split was unusual and clearly frustrating to some on the dais, as has been reported. In conversations with the DGreport, commissioners offered their interpretations of the rift and the outlook for putting it behind them — and for disenchanted residents to do the same.

Commissioner Marilyn Schnell noted the various commissioners hear from different constituencies within the community, which she considers a positive. Not surprisingly what qualifies as a “core service” to one group, may not be considered such by another.

“The people I’m hearing from are saying in this economy they can’t afford to have property taxes raised,” she said. “My philosophy is to spread (the impact) so no one group in the community is hard hit. It’s not palatable to me or to the people I’ve talked to,” she said.

In the past, there has been more give and take during the budget process, Schnell said. “I’m not knocking anyone, but I don’t think I have had the dialogue I might have wished for.”

This year’s budget has been one of the hardest in Schnell’s 20 years on the council – so difficult that she considered canceling a vacation planned for months. “From the very beginning we said it would be a budget none of us would be happy with.”

“It’s been a very difficult time and everyone is tired,” she said. “Now we need to figure out how we move forward and how to work as a group to represent the entire community. We’re all going to have to dig deep now.”

Commissioner William Waldack also expressed frustration with the limited opportunity for discussion. There was “no attempt to reach consensus,” he said. The mayor “might have brought Schnell or (Bruce) Beckman along if there had been some discussion but he didn’t bother.”

“I agree we have a crisis,” he said. “They have turned it into a disaster to get rid of this stuff…To restore all the cuts would be an additional $15 – the cost of a can of soda a month – for each home valued at $300,000.”

Waldack had suggested raising the maximum levy by that amount in order to allow for more discussion.

“This weekend, someone told me that they watch the council meetings and asked if all those people coming to the meetings and writing us will have any effect on the outcome,” Waldack said. “I took a moment and honestly answered, I don’t think so. The majority has already made up its mind.”

Other commissioners seemed ready to put the contention behind them. “I’d  suggest that seven of us left the meeting frustrated,” said Commissioner Bob Barnett. “While I suspect the same frustrations can be found in our community at large, I do not believe they are debilitating.”

“As a group, this council and as a community, we need to strive for consensus and compromise. There are however, limits to both,” Barnett said.  “To suggest these folks will always compromise on each and every subject is folly…We’ll continue to have subjects arise that we cannot agree on, yet as long as we’re all confident in the intentions and motivations of each other, we’ll move forward just fine.”

A day after the meeting in which his desire to maintain the Department of Counseling and Social Services failed to muster adequate support, Beckman was already looking forward.

“I communicated with (Mayor) Ron (Sandack) and we agreed “let’s move toward a better Downers Grove,” Beckman said.

His vote against the levy “doesn’t mean I won’t support the budget,” he said. “This is an issue I took very seriously, regarding counseling services. I would think if we can do something in the next step that would be great. But if the majority chooses to stay put, that’s it.”

Beckman said his take-away from the Nov. 17 meeting was “I needed to communication more effectively to some commissioners…I think good will come out of (it) for future decisions.”

Commissioner Neustadt, who chairs the Community Events Commission, said he left the meeting resolved to make Heritage Fest the best it can be and also self- sustaining.

“When Commissioner Schnell asked if we can hold the event while we are laying off people – that was a new concept for me, perhaps because of my desire to continue Heritage Fest and maintain the police officers,” Neustadt said. The tentative budget calls for two officers to lose their jobs.

For Commissioner Sean P. Durkin, the debate came down to the definition of “core” services.

“You can argue all day on what a core service is. Unfortunately, it divided the council (Tuesday) night,” he said. “The dividing factor was they didn’t want to make the cuts that majority of us wanted to cut.”

Although he personally believes there was “ample time for discussion,” Durkin suggests his council colleagues may need to clear the air one-on-one and “not in a public forum.”

While acknowledging the stress inherent in budgeting during unprecedented times and in the face of complex challenges, Mayor Ron Sandack said he isn’t concerned about the cohesiveness of the council “or how we’ll relate to one another going forward.”

“Look, all seven of us care deeply about the village and the future of our town, otherwise why serve and spend the time we invest? Does this changing landscape cause some to pause, worry a bit and possibly act out in emotional ways? Sure, me included.”

Sandack said in retrospect he would probably “say some things differently” in his remarks last week, which he used to call out colleagues who saw the process differently.

“The substance of my message however –that the village must re-shape the way we do business and stick to core services because the ‘old way’ is no longer sustainable– would remain. The math is the math,” he said.

“We’ll all continue to try and do our best and I assure you we’ll work just fine together after this budget and levy are concluded. I’d bet on it.”

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.

Sen. Matt Murphy

Sen. Dan Cronin

Mayor Ron Sandack has formally endorsed Matt Murphy for lieutenant governor, according to a press release from the Murphy camp.

Sandack was the only mayor among a dozen state senators and representatives to endorse Murphy, who is unofficially running with gubernatorial candidate Andy McKenna. Sandy Pihos, (R-42) of Glen Ellyn also endorsed Murphy.

“Matt Murphy is a friend,” Sandack said in an e-mail to the DGreport.

“He and I go back prior to either of us getting into public service and I know him to be an honest and smart person. Because he’s a friend, is totally capable of serving, and is the only candidate for Lt. Governor I know, I support his candidacy.”

Murphy, of Palentine, serves the 27th Senate district, which includes Arlington Heights, Buffalo Grove, Inverness, Palatine, Prospect Heights, and South Barrington. He had originally announced for governor before joining McKenna, the former head of the state GOP. The partnership is informal, as the state no longer allows official governor-lieutenant governor slates.

Sandack is also supporting State Sen. Dan Cronin (R-21) in his bid for DuPage County Board Chairman.  “In my opinion, he’s clearly the best candidate to lead the County Board,” Sandack said in his e-mail. ” I believe Dan Cronin has done a terrific job as State Senator representing a portion of Downers Grove over the years.”

Sandack said he isn’t contemplating a wider role in Illinois politics beyond those two endorsements.

Cronin, an Elmhurst Republican,  kicked off his campaign in July. Schillerstrom has thrown his hat into the ring for the GOP gubernatorial nomination, while Durkin has applied for appointment to the District 3 county board seat recently vacated by Kyle Gilgis. Got that straight?

“There’s certainly no secret about the fact that I support Sen. Cronin’s effort…I think he’ll make a great County Board Chairman,” Sandack said. “So I was there introducing Dan to some Downers Grove residents and helping him get a few signatures on his nominating petitions.”