I can't wait to see what Rex has to say about this:
Earlier, as Prussing was being challenged for a second term as mayor, her supporters wrote letters to the editor, bragging about Urbana's unusually vibrant economy.
"Urbana's financial scene is healthy enough it's been able to withstand the blow of the recession in a way very few cities in Illinois can match," wrote David Gehrig, a member of the city council.
Bernadine Stake, a longtime Prussing ally, wrote that Urbana's financial situation "stands in stark contrast to our sister city where the city manager is asking the council to approve fee increases and program cuts and allow 16 staff positions to remain vacant."
So guess who's enacting fee increases – hundreds of thousands of dollars of them – now?
Ron Eldridge, Urbana's veteran comptroller, said that when the city budget was put together in March and April, Urbana's financial numbers still looked better than most other communities in the state, thanks to the sales tax revenue from a new Meijer store and the financial proceeds from a special census. Soon, though, sales tax revenue was down around 5 percent from the year before and income tax receipts were off more than 10 percent. The gloomy numbers haven't begun to turn around.
So Monday night, the city council took the first in a series of steps toward fixing the budget problem – with "revenue increases."
Discuss.
This so called "story" from the News Gazette is first and foremost aimed at insulting Urbana, while providing information is an after thought. I guess at the NG, hating Urbana is a requirement.
To IP who wrote "I can't wait to see what Rex has to say about this:" You should be really be waiting to see what Urbana's citizens have to collectively say. The minimal response which I fear again indicates why Urbana has fallen so far behind Champaign.
To 04:09 PM, Anonymous: Please tell us what in Mr. Kacich's column about Urbana's budget you dispute. Urbana's impending budget difficulties were known by all the mayoral candidates last March. Unfortunately, Urbana's current mayor hoodwinked Urbana's bozo electorate.
During the mayoral campaign Urbana's comptroller Mr Eldridge (and thus the mayor at whose pleasure Eldridge serves) was evasive about Urbana's spending spending patterns and budget situation. Mayoral candidate Durl Kruse during the campaign, wrote:
The mayor's lack of honesty about Urbana's budget reflects poorly on the mayor and city staff.
Urbana's citizens should also be ashamed of the City Council for its implicit complicity with and indisposition to question the mayor.
Mayoral deceit about city finances is neither a Democratic nor Republican issue, and involves neither conservative nor liberal values.
Urbana would be now better served if any of the other three candidates were now mayor.
Michael Fuerst
For Urbana postage stamps, T-shirts and bumper stickers:
http://bozourbana.org/wordpress/?page_id=3
Only the stupid here would fail to see the difference between a "story" and a column, which is what this obviously is.
We should forever be grateful to Urbana since through their historic actions we now have the City of Champaign. The only stupidity in full view is the wastefulness of duplicative public services which continue to advocate private service monopolies for their citizenry.
The naysayers here (those criticizing the N-G's bias and reportage) will not likely be persuaded that the empress's clothes are not of the finest silk.
Yes, I recall a time not so long ago when at least three persons (and one former mayor) attempted to raise a ruckus about budget shortfalls, the disappearing $4.5 million surplus, huge contractual salary increases for no increased services (the "win-win"), pocketing of bonuses intended for civil servants ...
... and that evil, biased newspaper endorsed her.
But maybe they did it cynically, seeing the writing on the wall. Maybe it's been John Foreman's dream, since LP's first election in 1972, to see her go down in flames. Maybe that's why they did it. To set her up for the fall.
The bastards!
Moëtry in the Potion
Only the stupid here would fail to see the difference between a "story" and a column, which is what this obviously is.
Well gee, genius, I wonder why they gave the info as a column instead of a story. News Gazette employee oath: Urbana=liberals=bad
Ooh, ooh.
I just read the commentary. Mistakenly, I thought someone here on IP was finally calling attention to the two newsier news articles from last week. (Same topic, same concepts.)
So now I'm going to commend Urbana government for its work, as reported in the N-G. I think the best taxes provide disincentives for bad behaviors. So I have no problem with:
- increase in parking meter fines (especially if it keeps meters cheaper for patrons of Urbana businesses).
- steeper fines for ordinance violations (I love it; a tax on bothering people. That's perfect government.)
- a vehicle impoundment fee, a vehicle towing fee (I especially like Peoria's impoundment of mega-watt boom-cars)
- a "pavement degradation fee" levied on utilities that rip up city streets to get at pipes and cables. (I guess you'll end up paying for this anyway, but it seems fair. And as long as we're on the subject; can we have our water back, bitte? Danke.)
Moëtry in the Potion
Budget? No problem...we'll just raise taxes again....and just wait till the police contract comes up....we got plenty of money to spend.
Jesus.
Seems as though campaign lies, are not reliable currency.
Not to worry, we only have to spend lies for 4 years, then we will have 98 new businesses or something unsubstantiated like that. We will be flush with cash from all the new developments in Urbana, especially from Tatman and the Atkins group and Menard's and Wal-Mart, and Mejers and any other business that happened under Prussings watch. (You do remember the WUNA meeting, right?)
Don't look for another statue of Peter Fox's wife in Urbana, he has already invested money in Champaign and certainly does not want businesses to develop in Urbana. (did you thank him for his support Laurel?).
Wait, Wait, I don't see that they have any new developments planned....
No matter, Prussing will say they do, just to get elected. And please don't worry about the increased fees and development cost fees, we need to pay for more travel for Laurel, so she can learn how to save us more money and investors will still(?) be rushing to Urbana with millions to talk to Laurel, and the Administrative Officer.....opps scratch that, the newspaperman Chief of Staff. Yep, there is a confidence builder and those increased fees mean nothing........???.......??????
Prussing has been reading Blago's book of good government. Say it is true, say it is paid for, then spend it.
$486,000 for rocks and grass along Philo Road....Hot damn..... Next time you check your credit card bill and see you are in debt $1.3 million dollars, see what your wife has to say about her spending $486,000 on flowers. I am sure your marriage will survive.
With any luck, Urbana will not be in debt, 11 billion dollars.
Here is some food for thought. Laurel Prussing said she was saving the City $150,000 per year because she was acting as the City Administrative Officer. By ordinance those acting duties include:
"To serve as budget director, as such duties are provided for"
and
"To provide for the development and dissemination of sufficient information relating to the business of the city"
Uh oh, this means the Comptroller was acting on information provided by Prussing as the Mayor or as the Administrative officer. Hmmmm. So any budget projections come from anticipated information provided by the Mayor or Administrative Officer. Hmmm.....
Geeze and this also means than anything that is released by Ron E, has to have the approval of the Administrative officer..."dissemination of sufficient information..."
Nah, couldn't be true, Laurel just can't be responsible for this misleading information......can she? Fortunately there is no "Mold problem" or we would have Dr. Jack Kevorkian, in a newly created City Position.
Remember the Godfather symbol with the puppet strings? Here are a couple of the people on the strings....
David Gehrig believed her, and now she has stuck his nose in some "Crow Pie". Dance a little David BoJangles, she pulled your string good.
Charlie S. even wrote a blistering letter to the Editor saying I was wrong, the Administrative Officer was not the "watch dog"......... the City Council was.
$1.3 million dollars........woof woof, Charlie, nice job. Does that also count the $150,000 a year she saved?
You guys should change places with Lewis and Bowersox in the Council Chambers, that way you can "keep your friends close and your enemies closer".
Thank you for your courtesy, time and effort for reading my comments
Rex Bradfield
Thanks REX..great post. I'm still looking for the $13,000 newspaper rack so I can buy a paper.
"Thanks REX..great post. I'm still looking for the $13,000 newspaper rack so I can buy a paper."
Hey -- that newspaper rack was originally proposed at $60,000+, so you're looking at a $47,000 savings right there.