Blogs

Patrick Thompson was just acquitted.  It didn't sound like the state's case was very strong, so I think this is the right verdict.  There's a story in the News-Gazette at http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2008/05/16/jury_acquits_thompson_of_sexual_abuse_after_an_hour .  Apparently, it didn't take the jury long to decide.

Peggy Noonan: 

Most party leaders in Washington are stupid – detached, played out, stuck in the wisdom they learned when they were coming up, in '78 or '82 or '94. Whatever they learned then, they think pertains now. In politics especially, the first lesson sticks. For Richard Nixon, everything came back to Alger Hiss.

They are also – Hill leaders, lobbyists, party speakers – successful, well-connected, busy and rich. They never guessed, back in '86, how government would pay off! They didn't know they'd stay! They came to make a difference and wound up with their butts in the butter.

And:

"This was a real wakeup call for us," someone named Robert M. Duncan, who is chairman of the Republican National Committee, told the New York Times. This was after Mississippi. "We can't let the Democrats take our issues." And those issues would be? "We can't let them pretend to be conservatives," he continued. Why not? Republicans pretend to be conservative every day.

Yep.

Friday, May 16, 2008.

That was the response of more than one expert I talked to in the last week about the costs of obtaining our Certificate of Need and subsequent work.  That's even after some of the complicating issues.  Of the $600,000 that we have paid Duane Morris, approximately $400,000 was related to our Certificate of Need, alterations to the same, and then followup work on our final cost report and compliance.

So what's the going rate for doing this work from people who actually do this work?  How about $25,000-$50,000.  That's right.  And some of these experts actually work for, can you believe it, a FLAT fee.  For example, DeKalb County, a county which we are looking to as a model for our own, paid about $30,000 to their consultant for their Certificate of Need 9 years ago.

As one person put it to me,  it appears that we paid for the education of Duane Morris.  This becomes painfully obvious when you consider that they weren't even aware of the impact of the new rules on our project. 

I have no idea why we have this firm representing us.  And after hiring them, I have no idea why we kept them after their deficiencies became painfully obvious.  Earlier this week I gave Julia Rietz a letter asking her for examples of other work that Duane Morris has done along the lines of what we were asking them to do.  I also asked for some names of the State's Attorneys who so highly recommended their services.  I'll let you know if and when she responds.  The audio below is Ms. Rietz with another empassioned attorney defense.

For those Saturday Night Live fans:

long post with with hopefully some answers...

I have been reading with interest the continual comments about the County Wide Schools Facility Tax. It has now been approved by every school district in the county by, I believe, a unanimous vote by each individual board. I certainly see that there are myriad questions about the tax and just as many perceptions good and bad about the potential for the tax.

Though I cannot speak for any other school district besides Unit 4, I will try to answer some of the comments that have been asked on this blog...

1. Why go for the Max 1%? 
   Frankly, I don't think the ILGA intended for the TAX to be used as a mechanism for Property Tax relief. I think they intended to try and help school districts by providing another mechanism to fund capital projects. I may be wrong in that belief, but that is what I think. That being said, when the districts in Champaign County got together at the Regional Office of Education to discuss this tax, the key thing that we in Unit 4 talked about was that we would not support this new tax without some kind of relief for property owners. We feel that it is imperative that any reductions that can be made are made. IF we were to ask for 1/4%, we would be able to abate the same 9-10 cents /100 EAV that we are allowed to with this tax (AGAIN IT IS ONLY FOR CONSTRUCTION DEBT AND FACILITIES ISSUES, NOT SALARIES). That abatement in Unit 4 is approximately $15M. That is all the debt we have out and al we can abate with this potential revenue source. People can say all they want that it is not enough and I would totally agree. However, it is all we can do.

   If our only goal was to abate property taxes, then we would simply go for 1/4%. actually it begs the question if we are not going to do anything new other than pay off one type of debt with a different revenue stream, why would any district do that. In order to have construction bond debt, a district had to ask the voters for approval for property tax increases to begin with. Why would a district go back to the voters to ask for approval to do the same thing with a different source of income. Doesn't make sense to go back ask for something you already have

   This revenue source can be used for additional stuff, hence the 1% request. In Unit 4, we can dramatically increase the efficiency of our bldgs and put in A/C. Everyone of us works in an air conditioned environment and I often wonder why teachers and students should be asked to do something different than what we all do... We can also satisfy the consent decree requirements for the additional seats north of university ( yes I know that not everyone agrees with this, BUT it is a legal settlement that past boards agreed to and it is not open for contestation in court). We can update the infrastructure to support the computers needed for today's learning environment. We could build a school south of University if needed. More to come later on this subject. 
   If another district wants to post about their plans, that would be great.

2. Why are you doing to reduce the cost of doing business?
   Since I have been on the board, we have delayed a textbook adoption by one year, saving the interest on $700,000. We have refinanced debt at a much lower rate saving several hundred thousand dollars in interest payments. The night I was elected the previous board cut $2M in annual expenditures, We have bought lower priced energy through co-op arrangements, we have not filled at least 15 positions that I am aware of off the top of my head that have been vacated and we decided not to fill them to save money. Just a name a few of the items...

   Each year staff throughout the district ask the board for programs to increase this or that. The vast majority have been met with good idea, but we can't afford it right now. Even this week we were presented with middle school athletic program additions, last month it was additional foreign language offerings.

   All of these ideas are terrific and the vast majority need to be added as soon as possible. However, they can only be looked at as part of a total budget package. An individual request for $100K in expenditures seems insignificant in a $95M operation, but we get 10 such requests/ideas a month. Those add up to a major deficit.

   2 months ago the board was asked to give a list of programs we would like to add because they are things that community members have asked us to do. That "dream sheet" combined with staff requests added up to close to $28 Million dollars for year!!!! Obviously there is no way we can or will approve that kind of increase.

   On another note, Schools are highly regulated about how we spend and collect taxes. The hold the line/reduce costs items are typically found in the Education fund/Transportation areas. Taxes are levied into individual funds and increases are limited by PTELL. Those hold the line/reduce costs are not generally found in the O and M and Health Life Safety areas. These are generally low Levy's and are not near enough to pay for recurring costs as facilities get older and older. Look at some of the facilities in Unit 4 and the county and you can see just how much cost reduction there is when it comes to stretching the maintenance dollar. Those folks are masters of stretching a dollar for building issues.

3. This is simple a "Bait and Switch"For some this is a tax increase. (those who don't own property in Champaign County)

   For others this will be a tax decrease (those who own property in a district that plans to abate some portion of the property tax bill related to construction debt and who don't spend as much on the retail goods) I suspect a good portion of the 'middle" class will fall in this area at least in Unit 4)

   For others it will be a wash. It will reduce property taxes and you will spend enough on taxable items to negate the property tax savings.

   If anyone is saying that some will not pay additional money in their total tax package (property, income, sales, etc) they are wrong. Some will pay more and some will pay less, most will probably pay about the same... those are the facts.

   However, for the same amount for the property owner, the schools throughout the county could be greatly improved.

   If facilities don't matter, than why do so many people ask me why we can't have facilities like Normal Unit 5? I am asked that often.

I am sure that I will have more later. Especially a detailed plan about how we in Unit 4 will spend this revenue if approved. Including a mechanism for accountability.

If you have any questions, you can feel free to contact me at tomlindw@comcast.net or 217-202-6841

Dave Tomlinson, President
Champaign Unit 4 Schools Board of Education

Another school board goes on the record supporting a massive tax increase, hoping to distract voters by talking about miniscule property tax relief.

Board members voted 5-0 at a special Wednesday meeting to support the tax. Members Val Woodruff and Tom Harpst were absent.

The 1 percent tax has enough support for the Champaign County Board to put it on the November ballot.

Board member Max McComb wanted to know when the district would reveal a plan for what it would do with the tax money if it passes, especially related to property tax relief.

If this were really about property tax relief, then the districts should ask for a smaller sales tax increase which is more nearly the equivalent of the property tax reductions being promised.

But it's not about property tax relief.  It's about getting the maximum possible tax increase, much larger than necessary to provide the maximum allowable property tax relief.

From today's News-Gazette:

The Illinois House on Tuesday passed legislation appropriating $25 million for the design and construction of the school, which would be the first of its kind in the state. The bill now goes to the state Senate.

"We're excited to get to this step," said Greg Wolfe, Oakwood School Board president. "It's what we've been hopeful for and working towards. ... We can't foot this on our own. It's critical that we have state assistance."

State Rep. Bill Black, R-Danville, introduced House Bill 628 in February 2007. It originally appropriated $15 million for the project, but the amount was increased to $25 million.

In 2006, Black laid the groundwork by spearheading the passage of a law that makes cooperative high schools eligible for some of the same incentive funding offered to districts that consolidate.

Didn't I just see a letter to the editor from the Vermilion County Democratic Chairman stating that Bill Black was too old to effectively serve in the legislature?

I wrote yesterday about Julia Rietz and the attorneys she supports.  I’ll add a little more perspective later on the outrageous fees they’ve charged us overall.  But today I want to focus just on the costs associated with the fine from the Illinois Health Facilities Planning Board.

If you recall, last year the County Board learned that they would be subject to fines for failing to inform the Illinois Health Facilities Planning Board about changes they made in the Nursing Home project after it was approved.  I predicted that it would happen a year earlier and even suggested on more than one occasion that our legal counsel was not doing a good job for us.  In my mind, they were the primary cause for our fine for their failure to properly inform us of our obligations under the new rules as well as to give us sound advice about the old rules.

For a year and half it’s been clear to me that this firm was in over their head.  They claimed to be experts but weren’t.  Even hiring someone away from the HFPB didn’t seem to help us.  So the idea that somehow their incompetence would result in us paying $50,000 seemed ridiculous.

At the County Facilities meeting on Tuesday, we were tol that we have apparently reached a deal on the fine with the HFPB.  It will be discussed at the full County Board meeting next week.

But perhaps the most outrageous part of this whole thing is what we are going to pay to try to get out of this fine.  In the months of November, December, January and February, Duane Morris had already charged us $26,529.42 to try to fight the fine.  That figure doesn’t include probably another thousand or so dollars in the October billing that appears to be related to our compliance problems.  And it doesn't include the amount they are going to bill us in March, April and May for the completion of this whole mess.

So we're likely to have legal fees in excess of $30,000, perhaps even $40,00.  Plus, we’re likely to still have to pay a fine.  It is very likely that the total package will exceed the original fine.

But no one should be outraged, no should ask questions, and certainly no one should think they’re out to get us.

Thursday, May 15, 2008.

Patrick Thompson's third trial has begun:

Thompson, a member of the Visionaries Educating Youth and Adults group, which tried to shed light on local police interaction with young black men in the summer of 2004, is charged in connection with an Aug. 24, 2004, incident in which he is alleged to have entered his neighbor's apartment at 1702 E. Colorado Ave., U, without her permission and fondled her.

His first trial in July 2005, in which he represented himself, ended in a mistrial when a jury couldn't come to a unanimous verdict. Represented by Urbana attorney Harvey Welch, Thompson was retried in July 2006 and convicted of the Class X felony of home invasion and the less serious criminal sexual abuse charge.

Thompson then hired Kirchner and Wyman in August 2006 to represent him. They filed a post-trial motion asking for a new trial, alleging ineffective assistance by Welch. In April 2007, Clem granted the new trial.

Discuss.

UPDATE:  One charge dismissed:

Judge Harry Clem said the prosecutor had not presented enough evidence on the count of home invasion lodged against the 39-year-old Champaign man to even send it to the jury.

Conviction on that charge would have meant a mandatory prison sentence of six to 30 years for Thompson. The trial on the remaining charge of criminal sexual abuse, alleging Thompson fondled the woman in her Urbana apartment on Aug. 24, 2004, will go forward Thursday. That is a Class 4 felony with penalties ranging from probation to one to three years in prison if convicted.

RSW mentioned this in a previous post and some of you might have  heard some of these comments on WDWS.  I've put a media file link below that hopefully you can listen to, although I'm hardly a pro in such things.  The gist of it is that Julia Rietz at last week's County Facilities meeting tore into those who would dare to question how much our attorneys are charging us.  There's a lot to get into here, and I'm going to try to do it over the next couple days.  Suffice it to say in this post that we've now paid Duane Morris over $600,000 to represent us on various issues related to the nursing home.  Not only should County Board members be questioning that, they'd be remiss if they didn't.

The editors at NRO wrote a bit about McCain's recent speech, and his cap-and-trade policy proposal.  They were not impressed.  Their piece concludes:

The scariest sentence in the speech was: “If the efforts to negotiate an international solution that includes China and India do not succeed, we still have an obligation to act.” This is posturing in the place of thought. It puts us in the worst possible negotiating position, and confirms that Sen. McCain is not engaging practically with the costs and benefits of his own policy. It indicates a foolish willingness to sacrifice trillions of dollars on the altar of fashionable, though uniformed, opinion and political expediency.

Once you leave reason behind, there is no logical stopping point, and his Democratic opponent will always be willing to one-up him. Sen. Clinton’s reaction to his speech (literally before it was even delivered) was: “Senator McCain’s proposal simply does not go far enough…”

Wednesday, May 14, 2008.

Anyone want to guess when the national Republicans are going to learn their lesson?

Democrats picked up a northern Mississippi House seat in one of the most conservative-minded districts in the country Tuesday night -- an upset  that will reverberate darkly through a House Republican caucus already reeling from losses in special elections in Illinois and Louisiana.

With 411 of 462 precincts reporting, the Democratic nominee, Prentiss County Chancery Clerk Travis Childers, leads Republican Greg Davis, 52 to 48 percent.  The Associated Press has called the race for Childers.

The victory marks the Democrats’ third straight special election pickup in three months. It will be a serious blow to the Republican Party’s already-flagging morale and will surely prompt a new round of finger-pointing among the already fractured GOP caucus.

The special election was held to fill the seat of former Rep. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), who was appointed to serve out the remainder of Sen. Trent Lott’s term last December. Wicker had never faced a competitive race since first elected in 1994, and the district gave President Bush 62 percent of the vote in 2004.

My guess is 2012.

UPDATE:  A remarkable statement from the Chair of the NRCC:

Think about this Cole statement - "Democrats are running as conservatives, and Republicans can't beat 'em." So take that club out the GOP arsenal heading into November.

That tells me two things.  The first is that conservative ideas are still popular, at least in some parts of the country.  And the second is that national Republicans have no credibility to claim that they're conservative and Democrats aren't.  And the reasons for that are clear:  earmarks, corruption, out-of-control spending, entitlement expansion, border security, energy policy.  And the list goes on and on.  National Republicans, especially in the House and Senate, don't stand for anything.  And when you don't stand for anything, you will be beaten in surprising places and in surprising ways by people who do stand for something, and you will have no standing to criticize them for doing so.

Both Champaign Unit 4 and Rantoul Township High School boards have voted to support a November ballot question asking voters for a one percent sales tax increase to support education.  Both Districts are using a miniscule amount of property tax relief to mask their request for the largest-possible tax increase, as have most other area school districts, and most media reports are emphasizing the property tax relief as if it somehow offsets the sales tax revenue which will be generated.

It will be interesting to see if the County Board puts the full one-percent increase on the ballot, or if they settle for a smaller amount.

And it will be interesting to see how long the "this is about property tax relief" storyline is allowed to play out before people realize that the sales tax revenues of a one percent increase are several times larger than the maximum amount of property tax relief allowable.

THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES

Tribune Co. Chairman Sam Zell has rejected former Gov. James Thompson's secret plan to acquire and renovate Wrigley Field for at least $400 million without raising taxes and now plans to package the Cubs and their landmark stadium in a private transaction, sources said Monday.

...

But sources said Zell has rejected the state's proposed terms because it relies on a novel and untested financing plan: the sale of individual seats at Wrigley as if they were condominiums.

Zell, Cubs Chairman Crane Kenney and their advisers have concluded that the equity plan and its tax ramifications would violate both the Internal Revenue Service code and the rules of Major League Baseball, the sources said.

They said Thompson's plan called for selling several thousand seats to raise money for ballpark renovations. The purchase of the ballpark could have been covered by state bonds backed by future ticket revenue.

But the plan could have driven away potential buyers of the franchise. The next Cubs owner could have been denied revenue from the best seats in the house.

Since Gov. Thompson could not fund the deal with a sales tax, he had to find another source of funding, so he came up with this wacky idea.  The whole Wrigley Field sale has been a huge mess.

Tuesday, May 13, 2008.

The forces of reason and common sense have won a rare, if temporary, victory.

A proposed ordinance banning cell phone use while driving might be put off indefinitely by the city council.

Alderman Charlie Smyth, D-Ward 1, who proposed the ban, said the city might instead opt to take some interim steps while gathering information about how often traffic accidents occur due to cell phone use while driving.

In the meantime, the city council will consider enacting a distracted driving ordinance under which a person who gets into a traffic accident while talking on a cell phone or similar activity would be subject to a traffic ticket with a substantial fine of $500 or more, he said.

Yea!

Good article:

This coming fiscal year, Urbana expects to allocate $300,000 toward social service grants. That's an increase of $12,000 compared with the current fiscal year, which ends June 30.

That level stands in contrast with Champaign, which this coming fiscal year plans to spend $113,000 on social service grants – but has announced that such grants will be ended, starting July 1, 2009.

Discuss.