Wheatland Township

[macrockett]

www.wheatlandtownship.com/about-us

It never ceases to amaze me. Behind every government entity there is someone ready to waste your money. This time it is Wheatland township. The Supervisor, Todd Morse, and two of the trustees plan to spend about $1.5 million for a new township building after already buying land. The size of this building is estimated at 7300 SF, versus the existing 1200 SF bldg.

There is no question the existing facility is small and decrepit but the issue is this: for almost 1/3 the cost, the township can purchase one of the Macom properties, now in foreclosure, by the walking bridge over 59 (a larger facility than the proposed bldg). Even if this building is not suited for the purpose, there are many existing vacant buildings of similar size that can be purchased for a fraction of the cost.

There are also alleged conflict of interest issues swirling around, but as yet unverified. There will be a special meeting announced to discuss this issue. I will keep you posted. Wheatland township runs west of eola, north to 87th, south to 135th and east to Modaff.

If you are within those boundaries, I would recommend attending the special meeting. Expect some fireworks.

[macrockett]

As another issue, you may or may not know that Illinois is trying to get rid of township government. There is currently a Bill running through the system.

Like every fiefdom, townships have their own association. www.toi.org/

The TOI is worried it will be defunct should townships disappear, it is fighting mad. See the discussion on the home page. It appears the Democrats are leading the charge on this and the Reps are voting against it. I'm sure both parties are voting the way they are for political advantage, but in the end, less government is better.

There are about 1433 townships, each with about 3 officers and 4 trustees. And yes, almost all collect pensions! Change is occurring however. Just 3 days ago the NTRO )(Nap twnshp rep org) front ran the voters attempt to get a referendum on ending pensions for part time employees.

You can see the article on both WTRO and NTRO in the Patch, which I might add, is much better than the shrinking prune Naperville Sun in reporting local politics.

The Patch:

naperville.patch.com/articles/wheatland-township-transparency-group-looking-for-attorney

The Herald also had articles:

www.dailyherald.com/article/20110413/news/704129659/

www.dailyherald.com/article/20110413/news/704129659/#ixzz1JSR9NCG1

(Part of an email I received re the NTRO episode--cannot verify tho)

Mr. Dorr also asked the Township board if they had a written policy in place barring the hiring or appointing of family members to the Township Board. When informed the Township had no such policy in place, Mr. Dorr suggested the board should institute such a policy. After the meeting was over I heard Warren Dixon, the Township Assessor, approach Mr. Dorr and call him an ****** in front of several witnesses. We were all shocked that an elected official would talk to a constituent in that manner. I believe it is time for Mr. Dixon to move on. We can no longer afford politicians in office that treat taxpayers with such contempt.

[macrockett]

Every government level has it's hands in your pocket. If you don't get involved they will clean you out.

www.dailyherald.com/article/20110410/news/704109945/print/

Township leaders' benefits
By Jake Griffin

Taxpayers spent more than $1 million last year to cover health care benefits for 77 elected leaders in suburban townships.

Those same officials paid nothing for their insurance coverage.

An investigation of insurance costs for 50 suburban townships showed 29 offered health care coverage at no charge to elected officers who held full-time positions like supervisor, assessor and highway commissioner.

Four townships — Addison, Downers Grove and Naperville in DuPage County as well as Leyden in Cook County — even offered free coverage to trustees, whose main responsibility is to appear at a dozen or so meetings a year.

“That's ridiculous,” said McHenry Township Supervisor Donna Schaefer, whose township offers health care benefits to full-time elected officials but requires them to cover some of the costs. “That's what gives township government a bad name.”

The total combined bill to taxpayers in those 29 townships was $1,013,589 in 2010.

The Daily Herald obtained the information through a series of open-records requests to the townships in six Chicago-area counties.

The effect on taxpayers is different from place to place.

In Naperville Township, nonelected employees were forced to begin contributing to their health care costs the same year trustees approved free health care coverage for themselves and other elected leaders.

Some Maine Township trustees receive health care benefits worth nearly five times their annual $5,172 salaries.

Coverage for four elected officials was responsible for more than 60 percent of Fremont Township's $119,268 total health care costs in 2010.

National studies indicate it's becoming more uncommon with each passing year for employers to offer health care coverage at no cost to employees.

Offering the free benefit to trustees at all has become even more rare over the years as townships tighten their belts. However, some township officials defend the practice.

“I'm somewhat surprised some of the larger townships wouldn't be offering it to trustees for what we do and the amount of hours we put in,” said Maine Township Trustee Peter Gialamas, who pays a portion of his coverage.
Ending the perk

Some taxpayers are taking a stand.

In Naperville Township, where both full-time elected officials and part-time trustees take advantage of the free health care coverage, Kurt Dorr is championing a proposal that would ask voters if they want to stop covering health care costs for trustees.

“I think it's a waste,” said Dorr, a Republican precinct committeeman. “I feel like it's a theft from taxpayers.”

On Tuesday, Naperville Township residents can vote at the township's annual meeting whether to put the issue on the November ballot. The meeting is slated for 7:30 p.m. at the township's highway department offices located at 31W331 North Aurora Road, just west of Route 59. Any registered voters from Naperville Township may participate.

Several elected township officials say they're on board with the idea and claim they are as eager as Dorr for the practice to end, though nothing's stopping them from doing it themselves.

“We are going to put that on the agenda,” said Fred Spitzzeri, a two-term trustee. “My motion will be to do away with health care benefits for trustees, and other elected officials should pay as well. I thought this was a benefit all employees got.”

But it's not.

Up until about six years ago Naperville Township employees did receive free health care coverage. That all changed when elected officials started getting it for free, employees there said and Spitzzeri confirmed. Since then, township employees have had to pay 10 to 15 percent of the premium, according to documents sent from the township. During that same time, Spitzzeri has cost taxpayers $110,000 for his coverage, the records show.

Spitzzeri defended the perk.

“To a certain extent these jobs are what you put into them,” he said. “We've been very fiscally responsible. We cut insurance and salary benefits for the elected officials by $200,000 last year. You can always criticize someone by line item, but in general, we've been very frugal and fiscally responsible.”

The combined cost of health insurance coverage for Naperville Township's eight elected officials was 31 percent of the organization's $396,000 insurance spending in 2010, according to the documentation.

“For part-time positions in governments to be granted benefits merely because they have the authority raises the question of whether they're really in tune with the taxpayers,” said Laurence Msall, president of the Civic Federation, a Chicago-based government accountability organization and think tank.

Elsewhere in DuPage County, Addison Township Trustee Gus Leventis and Downers Grove Township Trustee Williams Swanston received $8,300 and $1,800 worth of insurance coverage free in 2010, respectively.

In Cook County, Leyden Township trustees Ron Klinger and Marilynn May each received free coverage to the tune of about $7,500 in costs to taxpayers in 2010.

Trustees in Cook County's Wheeling, Schaumburg and Maine townships also took advantage of health care coverage, but had to pay some of the premium.

Trustees in Kane County's Aurora Township and Lake County's Fremont Township also take advantage of taxpayer-supported health care coverage.

“We do pride ourselves on fiscal responsibility,” said Maine Township's Gialamas, who paid for about 5 percent of his $24,461 township insurance premium in 2010. “We don't spend money we don't have.”

Even the unpaid collector's post in Maine Township received the same health care coverage as the trustee, records show.
Mounting costs

The full-time elected supervisor, assessor, highway commissioner and clerk have access to taxpayer-supported health care coverage in most of the 50 townships surveyed.

Only a few don't offer coverage.

Elected officials in Cook County's Palatine Township could receive the health care benefit if they were willing to pay the full premium. Clerk Lisa Moran said that's been the practice as long as she's been there and there's never been discussion to change the policy.

“I would say it's because Palatine Township has historically been a fiscally conservative unit of government and remains so today,” she said. “We would never consider it with this board.”

In Kane County's more rural western townships like Rutland, Virgil, Big Rock and Hampshire, no one receives health care coverage.

The idea of elected officials receiving free health care coverage is archaic in the insurance industry. According to a national employment poll conducted by the Kaiser Family Foundation last year, only 5 percent of the country's employers offered family coverage at no cost to employees. Only 16 percent of employers — which included local and state governments — offered free single coverage. Insurance experts believe the percentage would be lower if government employers were taken out of the equation.

The poll also showed the average cost to American workers for single coverage in 2010 was 19 percent of the premium. Workers pay an average of 30 percent of the premium for family coverage. The foundation is a nonprofit health care research institute based in California.

The data is not surprising to insurance experts, who also claim it benefits employees to pay something toward their insurance coverage.

“They have a little skin in the game then,” said Tom Manno, an Oak Brook insurance broker. “Free coverage is a rarity in the private sector these days. It's sad that we need a crazy recession like this for people to wake up and see what the government is really spending our money on.”

Watchdog groups suggest ending taxpayer-supported health care benefits for all elected township posts.

“They shouldn't be offering it at all to elected people,” said Jim Tobin, president of Taxpayers United of America, based in Chicago. “That's something that shouldn't be paid for by taxpayers. This is the reason why our taxes are so ... high.”

Townships are not alone in offering these types of health care perks to elected officials, but the practice is coming under fire and being increasingly scrutinized.
Government relic?

State Sen. Terry Link didn't single out townships in his bill calling for a special commission to be empaneled to cut or consolidate some of the state's nearly 7,000 governmental entities.

“But you know who were the first ones to complain about the bill? The townships,” the Waukegan Democrat said. “The bill doesn't mention anything about townships, but there they were putting up a fight.”

Spending taxpayer money to pay for health care coverage for elected officials adds fuel to the argument, critics say.

Township officials say they do plenty for residents and are more than the political party proving grounds that critics make them out to be.

“There are places where there are no townships and the work done there costs more money to taxpayers,” Naperville Township Supervisor Gary Vician said.

Vician points to the social services townships provide for the poor and elderly. Most townships run food pantries as well as transportation programs for senior citizens.

Link said townships were designed to be the local government for rural areas that didn't have easily accessible or nearby local government. That's not the case anymore, he said.

Offering free health care perks to elected officials may not win much support from taxpayers, watchdog groups warn township leaders.

“That is not something that is traditional in the private sector, or even modern governments,” the Civic Federation's Msall said. “Most health care experts will tell you requiring co-payments is an important way of not just balancing costs, but appropriate utilization of those benefits.”

[southsidesignmaker]

Hopefully these same politicians that vote in raises and wonderful benefit packages for themselves, will see it in their hearts to reduce these expensive perks. Obviously the general voting public is still oblivious to the seriousness of the situation at hand.... Just look at the recent voter turnout / voter apathy.

[Arch]

Maybe the majority of the people thought they were doing a good job and wanted them to keep up the 'good work'.

[southsidesignmaker]

Agreed Arch, that most definitely must be it.

[macrockett]

A special meeting is scheduled on May 23 at 7PM. There may also be another special meeting scheduled as well. I will keep you posted.

The main concern is a new proposed town hall that is being rammed through without any due diligence as to need, size or cost. If you live in Wheatland Township please attend on the 23rd.

[refbasics]

May 3, 2011 12:03:23 GMT -6 macrockett said:

A special meeting is scheduled on May 23 at 7PM. There may also be another special meeting scheduled as well. I will keep you posted.

The main concern is a new proposed town hall that is being rammed through without any due diligence as to need, size or cost. If you live in Wheatland Township please attend on the 23rd.

------------------------
napervillesun.suntimes.com/news/5480504-418/wheatland-voters-to-decide-fate-of-town-center.html?print=true


Wheatland voters to decide fate of town center

By Dan Cassidy

[e-mail]

Last Modified: May 23, 2011 01:45PM
A longtime goal and a recent controversy will collide Monday night during a special meeting in Wheatland Township.

The meeting at 7 p.m. at the Wheatland Township Administration Center at 31W236 91st St. in Naperville centers on the question of whether the township should build a new $1.5 million headquarters and community center at Route 59 and 103rd Street.

The agenda for the meeting was recently approved. The items to be voted on include stopping all expenditures of money on the project; directing the township to provide detailed estimates of money already expended, construction and operating costs; the formation of a space needs committee of trustees and citizens to study space needs in both the short and long term; prohibiting any action on the property already owned by the township until the space committee makes its final report; and also a discussion according to the agenda “stemming from media reports of potential conflicts of interest and other ethical concerns related to the subject property.”

The Monday meeting is a gathering of “electors.” Electors are all registered voters in Wheatland Township. At the meeting, the electors themselves will vote on the questions set forth on the agenda.

A little history

The idea of finding new space for the township offices goes back more than 12 years. The current facility was built in 1977 as a garage for the township’s Highway Department and morphed into the administration center.

Some township officials have long contended the building is too small. In 2003, trustees set aside $71,000 to start looking at options, including whether to buy land, build on the site of the current office or form a partnership with another government agency to get more office space.

At the spring 2004 town meeting, the electors voted 18-2 to move forward with a new township building.

For the next few years, the township looked at renting space or leasing space in a new building, as well as ideas for building a new structure.

In 2008, the township spent $350,000 on a piece of property owned by the city of Naperville near Route 59 and 103rd Street. In 2009, a new Wheatland Township Highway Department facility was built on the land.

In 2010, the board looked at purchasing an existing building at 3440 Lacrosse Lane, but the electors voted against the move.

Planning moved forward on a new administration building on the property near 103rd Street, and the township set aside $1.5 million for the project. The proposal that came forward was for a 7,300-square-foot building with space for offices, public meetings and activities and programs, mainly for seniors and young people.

At the annual town hall meeting in April, however, a majority of the electors voted to block plans to construct the new building. Those voting to stop the plans had many concerns, including the cost of the project, whether a new building was needed, about whether leasing or renting space made more sense, and more.

A couple of other meetings were then held to come up with the agenda for Monday night’s special meeting.

Talking points

Wheatland Township has been conducting what it calls an informational campaign including ads in local newspapers to lay out its reasons for a new building.

According to the ads, “the current building is a converted garage and does not adequately meet the office and meeting space needs of our growing township.”

Township officials have said the new building would allow it to provide more services.

The campaign points to the fact that since the township already has the land and the money to build the structure, there would not have to be a tax hike to pay for construction. It also points out that the average taxpayer only pays between $35 and $55 a year for township government.

The campaign is being funded by $5,000 the township board approved recently to explain the need for a new structure. According to Wheatland Township Supervisor Todd Morse, a public relations firm has not been hired, however the township has given money to an individual with marketing skills to “help with the campaign.”

“We are trying to get the word out,” Morse said.

Wheatland resident Julie Berkowicz, however, has concerns about the campaign. She is not sure the township should be using tax dollars to push its desire for a new building.

“I don’t know how that fits into Wheatland Township’s responsibilities,” she wrote in an e-mail to the township.

Differing opinions

When asked whether the township needs a new building, Morse said “absolutely.”

“I believe, personally, that a new facility is going to give us the opportunity to better serve the residents and provide more services,” he said. “There are so many things we can do.”

Those extra services would include programs for seniors and youth that the township just doesn’t have space for in its current building, Morse said.

Some residents, however, believe the township doesn’t need to be offering more services. Berkowicz said there are already park districts in Wheatland providing programs for young people and seniors.“Why do they want to duplicate those (programs)?” she said. “They are not in the business of providing youth programs.”

The issue dovetails into the belief of some residents that township government itself is an unnecessary level of government that is just a waste of tax dollars.

Morse contends, though, that township government costs very little, and provides a number of services that other government entities would have to pick up, he believes at a higher cost.

Some residents are also concerned about whether the township can actually build the new facility for $1.5 million. Resident Mike Crockett noted that it cost $3.5 million to build the new township highway building on the property.“There are worries that all of a sudden they are going to find out that they can’t finish it for ($1.5 million),” he said.

He is also concerned about whether the township has done “due diligence” in planning for the new building. He said that is why many residents are concerned about the plan.

“People started questioning (the process),” he said.

Crockett said he is worried that the township wants to “press forward” with the building no matter what. He believes the mood at the April electors meeting was clear.

“We need to stop this thing,” he said.

According to Crockett, the agenda items to be voted on Monday simply call for a re-examination of the plan and a study of options with the results shared with the people.

Big Monday

In many ways, the whole issue of the new building comes down to Monday night’s meeting.

The meeting is open to all registered voters in Wheatland Township. There were some concerns raised after the meeting in April that some who participated might not have been residents. Township officials say that everyone who participates on Monday night will be checked to make sure they are residents of the township.

As for the meeting itself, Morse said the approved electors agenda will be the only thing voted on.

He noted that the township board voted “to not proceed” with its own agenda for the meeting.

There are two main outcomes from the meeting: either the township will move ahead with its plans for a new building, with work beginning this year with an opening in 2012, or the electors’ agenda items will be approved, meaning there will be an examination of options through a new space committee.

The committee would be obligated to bring back its findings and recommendations to a meeting of the electors no later than Aug. 11.

For Crockett, Monday night’s gathering has a special significance.

“This meeting is about putting this back in control of the people,” he said.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Copyright © 2011 — Sun-Times Media, LLC
---------------------------------


Bill Status of SB3010 96th General Assembly

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

www.ilga.gov/legislation/billstatus.asp?DocNum=3010&GAID=10&GA=96&DocTypeID=SB&LegID=50343&SessionID=76&SpecSess=
Short Description: TOWNSHIP HALL-NO REFERENDUM

Senate Sponsors
Sen. M. Maggie Crotty

House Sponsors
(Rep. Dan Brady - Kevin A. McCarthy - Al Riley)

Last Action
Date Chamber Action
7/29/2010 Senate Public Act . . . . . . . . . 96-1397


Synopsis As Introduced
Amends the Township Code. Authorizes a township, by ordinance or resolution, to build, purchase, or lease a township hall, a multi-purpose senior center, or a combined township hall and multi-purpose senior center within the township without referendum approval, if the township hall, multi-purpose senior center, or combined township hall and multi-purpose senior center is paid or provided for with funds that are not the proceeds of specified bonds. Authorizes any township whose boundaries are coextensive with the limits of an incorporated city, by ordinance or resolution, to build or purchase a township hall without referendum approval, if the township hall is paid or provided for with funds that are not the proceeds of specified bonds. Authorizes a township, by ordinance or resolution, to purchase, erect, equip, remodel, or renovate a community building without referendum approval, if the community building is paid or provided for with funds that are not the proceeds of specified bonds. Effective immediately.

Actions
Date Chamber Action
2/4/2010 Senate Filed with Secretary by Sen. M. Maggie Crotty
2/4/2010 Senate First Reading
2/4/2010 Senate Referred to Assignments
2/24/2010 Senate Assigned to Local Government
3/4/2010 Senate Do Pass Local Government; 007-001-001
3/4/2010 Senate Placed on Calendar Order of 2nd Reading March 9, 2010
3/11/2010 Senate Second Reading
3/11/2010 Senate Placed on Calendar Order of 3rd Reading March 12, 2010
3/15/2010 Senate Third Reading - Passed; 039-004-000
3/16/2010 House Arrived in House
3/17/2010 House Chief House Sponsor Rep. Dan Brady
3/17/2010 House Placed on Calendar Order of First Reading
3/17/2010 House First Reading
3/17/2010 House Referred to Rules Committee
4/8/2010 House Assigned to Counties & Townships Committee
4/23/2010 House Rule 19(a) / Re-referred to Rules Committee
4/30/2010 House Added Alternate Chief Co-Sponsor Rep. Kevin A. McCarthy
5/4/2010 House Final Action Deadline Extended-9(b) May 8, 2010
5/4/2010 House Assigned to Counties & Townships Committee
5/4/2010 House Motion Filed to Suspend Rule Rep. Barbara Flynn Currie
5/4/2010 House Motion to Suspend Rule 25 - Prevailed
5/4/2010 House Added Alternate Chief Co-Sponsor Rep. Al Riley
5/4/2010 House Do Pass / Short Debate Counties & Townships Committee; 007-000-000
5/4/2010 House Placed on Calendar 2nd Reading - Short Debate
5/4/2010 House Second Reading - Short Debate
5/4/2010 House Held on Calendar Order of Second Reading - Short Debate
5/5/2010 House Placed on Calendar Order of 3rd Reading - Short Debate
5/6/2010 House Third Reading - Short Debate - Passed 098-019-000
5/6/2010 Senate Passed Both Houses
6/4/2010 Senate Sent to the Governor
7/29/2010 Senate Governor Approved
7/29/2010 Senate Effective Date July 29, 2010
7/29/2010 Senate Public Act . . . . . . . . . 96-1397

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Home | Legislation & Laws | House | Senate | My Legislation | Disclaimers | Email

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


This site is maintained for the Illinois General Assembly by the
Legislative Information System, 705 Stratton Building, Springfield, Illinois 62706
217-782-3944 217-782-2050 (TTY)

[refbasics]

May 23, 2011 17:09:42 GMT -6 refbasics said:

May 3, 2011 12:03:23 GMT -6 macrockett said:

A special meeting is scheduled on May 23 at 7PM. There may also be another special meeting scheduled as well. I will keep you posted.

The main concern is a new proposed town hall that is being rammed through without any due diligence as to need, size or cost. If you live in Wheatland Township please attend on the 23rd.

------------------------
napervillesun.suntimes.com/news/5480504-418/wheatland-voters-to-decide-fate-of-town-center.html?print=true


Wheatland voters to decide fate of town center

By Dan Cassidy

[e-mail]

Last Modified: May 23, 2011 01:45PM
A longtime goal and a recent controversy will collide Monday night during a special meeting in Wheatland Township.

The meeting at 7 p.m. at the Wheatland Township Administration Center at 31W236 91st St. in Naperville centers on the question of whether the township should build a new $1.5 million headquarters and community center at Route 59 and 103rd Street.

The agenda for the meeting was recently approved. The items to be voted on include stopping all expenditures of money on the project; directing the township to provide detailed estimates of money already expended, construction and operating costs; the formation of a space needs committee of trustees and citizens to study space needs in both the short and long term; prohibiting any action on the property already owned by the township until the space committee makes its final report; and also a discussion according to the agenda “stemming from media reports of potential conflicts of interest and other ethical concerns related to the subject property.”

The Monday meeting is a gathering of “electors.” Electors are all registered voters in Wheatland Township. At the meeting, the electors themselves will vote on the questions set forth on the agenda.

A little history

The idea of finding new space for the township offices goes back more than 12 years. The current facility was built in 1977 as a garage for the township’s Highway Department and morphed into the administration center.

Some township officials have long contended the building is too small. In 2003, trustees set aside $71,000 to start looking at options, including whether to buy land, build on the site of the current office or form a partnership with another government agency to get more office space.

At the spring 2004 town meeting, the electors voted 18-2 to move forward with a new township building.

For the next few years, the township looked at renting space or leasing space in a new building, as well as ideas for building a new structure.

In 2008, the township spent $350,000 on a piece of property owned by the city of Naperville near Route 59 and 103rd Street. In 2009, a new Wheatland Township Highway Department facility was built on the land.

In 2010, the board looked at purchasing an existing building at 3440 Lacrosse Lane, but the electors voted against the move.

Planning moved forward on a new administration building on the property near 103rd Street, and the township set aside $1.5 million for the project. The proposal that came forward was for a 7,300-square-foot building with space for offices, public meetings and activities and programs, mainly for seniors and young people.

At the annual town hall meeting in April, however, a majority of the electors voted to block plans to construct the new building. Those voting to stop the plans had many concerns, including the cost of the project, whether a new building was needed, about whether leasing or renting space made more sense, and more.

A couple of other meetings were then held to come up with the agenda for Monday night’s special meeting.

Talking points

Wheatland Township has been conducting what it calls an informational campaign including ads in local newspapers to lay out its reasons for a new building.

According to the ads, “the current building is a converted garage and does not adequately meet the office and meeting space needs of our growing township.”

Township officials have said the new building would allow it to provide more services.

The campaign points to the fact that since the township already has the land and the money to build the structure, there would not have to be a tax hike to pay for construction. It also points out that the average taxpayer only pays between $35 and $55 a year for township government.

The campaign is being funded by $5,000 the township board approved recently to explain the need for a new structure. According to Wheatland Township Supervisor Todd Morse, a public relations firm has not been hired, however the township has given money to an individual with marketing skills to “help with the campaign.”

“We are trying to get the word out,” Morse said.

Wheatland resident Julie Berkowicz, however, has concerns about the campaign. She is not sure the township should be using tax dollars to push its desire for a new building.

“I don’t know how that fits into Wheatland Township’s responsibilities,” she wrote in an e-mail to the township.

Differing opinions

When asked whether the township needs a new building, Morse said “absolutely.”

“I believe, personally, that a new facility is going to give us the opportunity to better serve the residents and provide more services,” he said. “There are so many things we can do.”

Those extra services would include programs for seniors and youth that the township just doesn’t have space for in its current building, Morse said.

Some residents, however, believe the township doesn’t need to be offering more services. Berkowicz said there are already park districts in Wheatland providing programs for young people and seniors.“Why do they want to duplicate those (programs)?” she said. “They are not in the business of providing youth programs.”

The issue dovetails into the belief of some residents that township government itself is an unnecessary level of government that is just a waste of tax dollars.

Morse contends, though, that township government costs very little, and provides a number of services that other government entities would have to pick up, he believes at a higher cost.

Some residents are also concerned about whether the township can actually build the new facility for $1.5 million. Resident Mike Crockett noted that it cost $3.5 million to build the new township highway building on the property.“There are worries that all of a sudden they are going to find out that they can’t finish it for ($1.5 million),” he said.

He is also concerned about whether the township has done “due diligence” in planning for the new building. He said that is why many residents are concerned about the plan.

“People started questioning (the process),” he said.

Crockett said he is worried that the township wants to “press forward” with the building no matter what. He believes the mood at the April electors meeting was clear.

“We need to stop this thing,” he said.

According to Crockett, the agenda items to be voted on Monday simply call for a re-examination of the plan and a study of options with the results shared with the people.

Big Monday

In many ways, the whole issue of the new building comes down to Monday night’s meeting.

The meeting is open to all registered voters in Wheatland Township. There were some concerns raised after the meeting in April that some who participated might not have been residents. Township officials say that everyone who participates on Monday night will be checked to make sure they are residents of the township.

As for the meeting itself, Morse said the approved electors agenda will be the only thing voted on.

He noted that the township board voted “to not proceed” with its own agenda for the meeting.

There are two main outcomes from the meeting: either the township will move ahead with its plans for a new building, with work beginning this year with an opening in 2012, or the electors’ agenda items will be approved, meaning there will be an examination of options through a new space committee.

The committee would be obligated to bring back its findings and recommendations to a meeting of the electors no later than Aug. 11.

For Crockett, Monday night’s gathering has a special significance.

“This meeting is about putting this back in control of the people,” he said.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Copyright © 2011 — Sun-Times Media, LLC
---------------------------------


Bill Status of SB3010 96th General Assembly

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

www.ilga.gov/legislation/billstatus.asp?DocNum=3010&GAID=10&GA=96&DocTypeID=SB&LegID=50343&SessionID=76&SpecSess=
Short Description: TOWNSHIP HALL-NO REFERENDUM

Senate Sponsors
Sen. M. Maggie Crotty

House Sponsors
(Rep. Dan Brady - Kevin A. McCarthy - Al Riley)

Last Action
Date Chamber Action
7/29/2010 Senate Public Act . . . . . . . . . 96-1397


Synopsis As Introduced
Amends the Township Code. Authorizes a township, by ordinance or resolution, to build, purchase, or lease a township hall, a multi-purpose senior center, or a combined township hall and multi-purpose senior center within the township without referendum approval, if the township hall, multi-purpose senior center, or combined township hall and multi-purpose senior center is paid or provided for with funds that are not the proceeds of specified bonds. Authorizes any township whose boundaries are coextensive with the limits of an incorporated city, by ordinance or resolution, to build or purchase a township hall without referendum approval, if the township hall is paid or provided for with funds that are not the proceeds of specified bonds. Authorizes a township, by ordinance or resolution, to purchase, erect, equip, remodel, or renovate a community building without referendum approval, if the community building is paid or provided for with funds that are not the proceeds of specified bonds. Effective immediately.

Actions
Date Chamber Action
2/4/2010 Senate Filed with Secretary by Sen. M. Maggie Crotty
2/4/2010 Senate First Reading
2/4/2010 Senate Referred to Assignments
2/24/2010 Senate Assigned to Local Government
3/4/2010 Senate Do Pass Local Government; 007-001-001
3/4/2010 Senate Placed on Calendar Order of 2nd Reading March 9, 2010
3/11/2010 Senate Second Reading
3/11/2010 Senate Placed on Calendar Order of 3rd Reading March 12, 2010
3/15/2010 Senate Third Reading - Passed; 039-004-000
3/16/2010 House Arrived in House
3/17/2010 House Chief House Sponsor Rep. Dan Brady
3/17/2010 House Placed on Calendar Order of First Reading
3/17/2010 House First Reading
3/17/2010 House Referred to Rules Committee
4/8/2010 House Assigned to Counties & Townships Committee
4/23/2010 House Rule 19(a) / Re-referred to Rules Committee
4/30/2010 House Added Alternate Chief Co-Sponsor Rep. Kevin A. McCarthy
5/4/2010 House Final Action Deadline Extended-9(b) May 8, 2010
5/4/2010 House Assigned to Counties & Townships Committee
5/4/2010 House Motion Filed to Suspend Rule Rep. Barbara Flynn Currie
5/4/2010 House Motion to Suspend Rule 25 - Prevailed
5/4/2010 House Added Alternate Chief Co-Sponsor Rep. Al Riley
5/4/2010 House Do Pass / Short Debate Counties & Townships Committee; 007-000-000
5/4/2010 House Placed on Calendar 2nd Reading - Short Debate
5/4/2010 House Second Reading - Short Debate
5/4/2010 House Held on Calendar Order of Second Reading - Short Debate
5/5/2010 House Placed on Calendar Order of 3rd Reading - Short Debate
5/6/2010 House Third Reading - Short Debate - Passed 098-019-000
5/6/2010 Senate Passed Both Houses
6/4/2010 Senate Sent to the Governor
7/29/2010 Senate Governor Approved
7/29/2010 Senate Effective Date July 29, 2010
7/29/2010 Senate Public Act . . . . . . . . . 96-1397

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Home | Legislation & Laws | House | Senate | My Legislation | Disclaimers | Email

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


This site is maintained for the Illinois General Assembly by the
Legislative Information System, 705 Stratton Building, Springfield, Illinois 62706
217-782-3944 217-782-2050 (TTY)

-----------------------------------
with the dire situation we're in now, you would think this isn't a good time to be building, and esp with all the vacant buildings/office space in wheatland twp.. why not lease?

also isn't there an IL bill being worked on to get rid of some of our townships... i could see the need for a twp in the rural areas but why in naperville... seems that wheatland twp should be downsizing, not growing.. adding services....

[refbasics]

plainfield.patch.com/articles/bill-to-trim-taxing-bodies-bombs

Bill to Trim Taxing Bodies Bombs
Here's how much we'll keep paying to keep Wheatland Township working.

By Robyn Monaghan | Email the author | May 6, 2011



Tell Your Neighbors About Patch Township officials are high-fiving each other this week, celebrating the failure of the bill that could have abolished thousands of small taxing bodies in Illinois.

Illinois Senate Bill 173 went down Tuesday on a vote of 14 to 30, with two senators, including our own Sen. A.J. Wihelmi (D-Joliet), voting present, which in political speak means he didn't vote at all.

Township officials were calling senators in “droves,” according to an announcement on the Township of Illinois Web site. They are publicly thanking their legislative consultant Tim Bramlet, who “worked tirelessly on helping get the bill defeated.” You have to wonder who’s footing the bill for that.

Township highway districts recently overcame a roadblock, too. There was no support last month for Sen. Michael Noland's (D-Elgin) amendment that would have eliminated all township road districts with 32 miles or less in counties of 500,000 or more. That bill did not come to a vote.

So we’ll go ahead and keep paying the $64,000 salary of Wheatland Highway Commissioner Dayton Jarnagin to keep up a little more than 60 miles of road. That is, of course, unless you lip off to him, like Plainfield resident Chuck Miller did, and then Jarnagin might threaten not to plow your street. But don’t worry. That Jarnagin is quite the kidder.

The Wheatland Township highway commissioner has a brand new $3 million building in which to keep his equipment. And he can’t maintain those roads all by himself. He has a foreman who makes $52,000 a year, an administrator who makes $39,500 and three maintenance workers who draw combined annual salaries of nearly $116,500, according to information Plainfield Patch obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request.

That may have cost, you, too, because in the past Wheatland Township has run FOIA requests past their attorneys before granting them.

The township staff does not have a new building, but they are trying hard to build one to the tune of at least $1.5 million of your money. That way they will have a pleasant environment to work while they earn their paychecks.

Wheatland Township Supervisor Todd Morse makes $29,000 a year, assisted by two
administrators who together make about $74,000 and an office manager who makes $41,000.

Each of four trustees makes $5,500 a year and the township clerk gets $11,000. Township assessor Kelli Lord makes $54,000, with six employees who draw added paychecks of just over $200,000. At least in Wheatland they actually assess, unlike Plainfield Township, where they haven’t done mandatory four-year assessments for maybe 30 years.

Let’s all call Tim Bramlet and thank him, too.

[macrockett]

Well Monday night was a small step for the conservative. In Wheatland Township we shut down the plan to build Wheatland's version of the Taj-Town Hall. It was a testament to what could happen when people believed their vote meant something.

plainfield.patch.com/articles/wheatland-voters-say-no-to-new-town-hall-move-forward-on-needs-assessment

napervillesun.suntimes.com/news/5492731-418/residents-put-brakes-on-wheatland-township-building-proposal.html

[doctorwho]

May 25, 2011 14:54:32 GMT -6 macrockett said:

Well Monday night was a small step for the conservative. In Wheatland Township we shut down the plan to build Wheatland's version of the Taj-Town Hall. It was a testament to what could happen when people believed their vote meant something.

plainfield.patch.com/articles/wheatland-voters-say-no-to-new-town-hall-move-forward-on-needs-assessment

napervillesun.suntimes.com/news/5492731-418/residents-put-brakes-on-wheatland-township-building-proposal.html

official notice to Curt and minions-- the world is changing and the days of all this backroom bullshit and drunken sailor spending are over. Even Mayor Daley knew to get while the gettin' is good. The parents and taxpayers will take back 204 shortly and will remember ( and help others remember) what you have done to this district.

[southsidesignmaker]

Wheatland Township building proposal remains in spotlight

By David Sharos For The Sun June 9, 2011 9:36PM

napervillesun.suntimes.com/news/5852499-418/wheatland-township-building-proposal-remains-in-spotlight.html

Updated: June 10, 2011 2:29AM


The proposal to build a new headquarters building and community center for Wheatland Township remains a hot topic of conversation in the south end of Naperville.

During the public comment portion of the regular monthly meeting of the Wheatland Township Board Thursday night, there were a number of remarks regarding the controversial proposal for a new facility at Route 59 and 103rd Street.

At a town meeting last month, residents voted to stop all expenditures of money on the project; directed the township to provide detailed estimates of money already expended, construction and operating costs; formed a space needs committee of trustees and citizens to study space needs in both the short and long term for the township; and prohibited any action on the property already owned by the township until the space committee makes its final report.

On Thursday, both Jane Hodgkinson, executive director of the Western DuPage Special Recreation Association, and Laurence Gentile, president of the Wheatland Athletic Association, spoke in favor of a new facility, while promising to participate both in its planning as well as offering some financial support.

“The WDSRA is a group that connects nine different park districts to form an association, and the largest group of people we serve are from Naperville,” Hodgkinson said. “A lot of people in our area have moved to Naperville because of the schools, and the largest number of complaints we get about lack of programs and facilities is from people from south Naperville. We can’t serve all the youngsters and adults we have due to a lack of facilities.”

Gentile said the Wheatland Athletic Association has worked with a number of park districts and other groups in the past “in order to serve the 13,000 to 14,000 kids the Wheatland Athletic Association has in its programs.”

“We have donated and built structures and we asked the Naperville Park District to partner with us in a structure that was to be built a few years ago on 95th Street and they turned us down,” Gentile said. “The fact is, a facility is sorely needed, and we would love to partner with someone to build some sort of gymnasium.”

Michael Blaylock, a resident of unincorporated Plainfield, said he has been coming to township meetings regularly. Blaylock said a large group of residents in the area still object to any proposed building, based on possible tax ramifications and also because many remain convinced that a true needs assessment has not been done.

“The economy right now raises questions about adding a new facility and I think I speak for a lot of people in the area when I say many of us remain unconvinced that a complete exploration of alternative facilities and space options has been completed as yet,” Blaylock said. “The other issue is that Wheatland Township is not set up like a park district, it doesn’t have the resources to run programs and deal with all the indirect costs. You can’t outsource everything.”

An update from the space committee on its work is expected in July at a public meeting. The committee is expected to have its recommendations ready for a public meeting in August.

[southsidesignmaker]

“The WDSRA is a group that connects nine different park districts to form an association, and the largest group of people we serve are from Naperville,” Hodgkinson said. “A lot of people in our area have moved to Naperville because of the schools, and the largest number of complaints we get about lack of programs and facilities is from people from south Naperville. We can’t serve all the youngsters and adults we have due to a lack of facilities.”

Gentile said the Wheatland Athletic Association has worked with a number of park districts and other groups in the past “in order to serve the 13,000 to 14,000 kids the Wheatland Athletic Association has in its programs.”

“We have donated and built structures and we asked the Naperville Park District to partner with us in a structure that was to be built a few years ago on 95th Street and they turned us down,” Gentile said. “The fact is, a facility is sorely needed, and we would love to partner with someone to build some sort of gymnasium.”

*****************************************************************************

Rent the gyms from the school district, we have many underutilized buildings at present.


Along with a "needs ASSessment" let the tax payers know who is going to staff this new shiny building and the cost to do so... Please don't leave out any ASSociated costs including legacy pension and benefits packages going 30-40 years into the future.

[EagleDad]

They just don't get it, do they. Just stop already.

You have been ordered by your electorate to do so. What don't you understand?!?

Do you need an "Overspending for Dummies" book or something? I don't care if you are the super-mega-executive-co-regional-director of overspending (it's just a bigger pension to me).

Put the nails in the coffin of this one. It is done. Maybe someone needs a memo to realize that.