BY MIKE CETERA
Aurora is No. 3 -- in terms of what it spends on lobbying efforts, anyway.
Just in time for the continued local debate on the cost, value and political ramifications of paid lobbyists, the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform has put out a report on government lobbying efforts. The group wants to see statewide reform to give citizens more information on who is spending what for what.
The finding of interest locally: The city of Aurora spent more money than all but two other municipalities in fiscal year 2007 on lobbying efforts (Only Chicago and Crestwood spent more). Among all units of government, Aurora ranked 15th with $102,101 spent on lobbying. UPDATE: Beacon News staff writer Dan Campana has seen the invoices used by the group; the number is off. Aurora paid $95,101 in fiscal 2007. The change does not affect the city's ranking.
Other items of note: Dan Shomon, Inc.-- the lobbying firm for the city of Aurora -- is listed as one of the top-earning firms in the state when it comes to government contracts. Shomon had three municipal clients, and reported more than $115,000 in income (the firm also represented Bartlett and Cordova -- the smallest town in Illinois with a paid lobbyist, "population 651 in Rock Island County with $7,500 paid," according to ICPR.
Also: Mayor Tom Weisner's former assistant chief of staff, Gerry Galloway, is listed among the firm's "contractual relationships."
Other notable communities with lobbying contracts:
* Elgin -- $27,500
* Naperville -- $32,220
* Rockford -- $5,000
* West Chicago -- $18,000
What is Aurora getting for the money? Not only is that a fair question for aldermen to ask, so, too, is: Why is Aurora paying so much for Shomon's services in comparison to other communities?
Further, it's clear most towns don't have their own hired lobbyist, which means one of two things: Aurora is paying for something it doesn't need (albeit a small price to pay in comparison to the entire budget) or the city's leaders are proactive unlike most other communities. I imagine the position you take depends on how well you think this administration has handled taxpayer money..
I think your story in today's Beacon provides a lot of insight into the why.
I also think it is interesting we only spend 25K less than the city of Chicago, yes Crestwood also spent more than us but I think they were trying to get a casino.
Does anyone think we are getting a good bang for our buck with this?
I would like to see a list of what benefits the city has received because of lobbying. Does anyone have that?
If we are the second largest city in Illinois, it would be logical to think that our funding for a lobbyist could be proportionate.
The data suggests Shomon is underpaid.
I hope the Aldermen aren't shooting us in the foot by bringing up their "concerns" about Shomon. I guess they were just looking for some issues to debate for the upcoming elections.
I think Aurora could have found a good lobbyist that was not also one of Weisner's campaign contributors. It seems like Weisner is giving jobs for payments, sounds a bit like Blago.
Well apparently the city council feels his services are valuable as they voted to retain him by renewing his contract of which I agree with. Please note it was the city council that voted to hire him the first time and the city council that voted to renew his contract, not the Mayor.
Oh please. The mayor put the Shomon deal together, Wes. The City Council approved it like they approve most everything the mayor proposes.
CK, you are beginning to sound like a conspiracy theorist. I suppose the City Council doesn't approve some projects the Mayor puts forward so that it doesn't look suspicious?
The City Council would have approved ANY lobbyist. But it just so happens that this lobbyist worked with the Mayor and donated to his campaign. Any coincidence there? Any coincidence that the city does not competitively bid any of it professional services jobs out? (Not to mention the lobbing contract just awarded to Shomon.) Talk about the openness in government; it seems to be seriously lacking here!
Clark,
It doesn't matter who put the deal together. The fact remains that the City Council made the decision. The City Council, not the Mayor. And no I don't subscribe to your bizzare fantasy that the Mayor has mind control over the City Council or that they are sheep that just follow along.
Anonymous @12:16,
Ya know you can use a name, I'll bet we won't figure out who you are by your first name, but it would be a lot easier to answer you using your name. Now please tell me what openness is lacking. Hmmm maybe it's that we don't know who contributes to campaingns. Nope, not that. Maybe it's how contracts are awarded. Nope, not that. And what professional services are you referring to that are not bid?
Wes, “Openness that is lacking,” are you kidding! I guess you haven’t read about the clinic fiasco: How the city refuses to release documents based on FIOA requests; how the city issues gag orders on it’s employees; How the city can’t get pull the correct ordinances for property in the city. Why remain in darkness if the City has nothing to hide. Oh, well, I digress.
Back to the issue at hand: Professional services contracts. Please read the Beacon article titled, “Lobbyist for Aurora says his past not 'relevant,' but current work is”
Here is a link: http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/beaconnews/news/907471,2_1_AU22_SHOMON_S1.article
Note particularly the following: “Ergo said professional and consulting services are generally not put out for bids.”
Now in regards to campaign contributions:
Point your browser to: http://www.elections.il.gov/CampaignDisclosure/CandidateSearch.aspx
Search for Weisner
Click on Tom Weisner
Then click on Friends of Tom Weisner
Go to the report for 1/1/2006 – 6/30/2005
Scroll Down and look for “Dan Shomon Inc.”.
You will see the contributions that I am referring to. You can search for anyone candidates’ contributions from here. I would suggest that you take a good look at who supported the Mayor and who is getting work in the City of Aurora. There is a connection.
It’ hard to argue with the truth now isn’t it!
Chad,
I have read about the Planned Parenthood clinic if that is what you are referring to. What part did the city play in not being open? They hired two lawyers to investigate Planned Parenthood and our States Attourney also investigated. Wheather you like it or not Planned Parenthood followed the law, rather in a sneaky manner but still within the law. What was the 'fiasco'?
Show me the proof that the City of Aurora has refused FOIA requests. Let's see the documentation.
Show me the proof that the City of Aurora has placed gag orders on any city employees. Please provide names of the city employees.
Quote "How the city can’t get pull the correct ordinances for property in the city." Please explain this one, I have no idea what you are referring to.
Thanks for pointing me to the article about Shomon's first contract. I stand corrected, the City Council did not vote on that contract but did vote to renew his contract.
In regards to campaign contributions I was being sarcastic. I'm not sure why you are pointing out the contribution made by Shomon. That was my point, campaign contributions are totally open to the public. Looks pretty open to me.
Well I contributed to his campaign and I don't work for city. Ya, the connection is that most of the companies getting contracts with the city are the same companies that got contracts under Stover and Pierce. Gee do ya think it might be that these are local companies that have proven track records. Wait, I have an idea let hire unknown companies with no experiance, I'm sure that would work out better.
And one more point. It's the City Council who votes on approving contracts, not the Mayor.
Chad, when you actually provide some real facts, not inuendo then you can refer to the truth.
Wes,
In regards to the PP mess, find me any statement by Bill Weit. I’ll bet the Beacon requested him to speak many times. He was the one that signed the application which approved the zoning; so his opinion has the greatest weight of anyone’s. Then review the notes from the ZBA where the City fought vehemently to keep him from being deposed. The sheer silence from Weit is defining.
I’m sure I could dig you up a link to a Beacon article, but frankly, I haven’t got the time to look that up at the moment—since the beacon only keeps two weeks’ worth of content on the website.
So onto the zoning errors by the city: Here is the evidence that shows the incompetence from the city's attorneys and their expert zoning attorneys.
See Page 2 - Where attorney Luetkehans cites 093-123 as the controlling ordinance on September 17, 2007 - http://www.aurora-il.org/documents/clinic/Luetkehans%20Report.pdf
Then for the first time on December 11, 2007
See Exhibit A2 - were the city now cites ordinance 93-124 as the controlling ordinance. - http://thomasmoresociety.org/briefs/Aurora_Exhibits_Part_A1-I_12-12-2007.pdf
So was the city correct in September of 2007 or were they correct in December of 2007 after they had months to review this. I'll bet they finally got it right.
Personally, I don't believe the city ever provided the two outside attorneys with the correct Zoning ordinance; especially based on the statement from Luetkehans, “We have not yet received all the information requested from City staff.”
In any event, the reports from all attorneys are grossly flawed based on this zoning admission from the city. The city and the administration knew this, as it was in plain English on the bottom of the report; yet, the Mayor broke the four-minute-mile to call a press conference and sign the occupancy permit.
Now tell me, how many times do you think the pro-life groups and the media filed FOIA requests for this material? How many times did the city botch that up? I’d bet it was in the tens if not hundreds of times. So, there's your refusal(s). Blame it on incompetance if you like.
Wes, I can even show you cases where the city back dated occupancy permits to provide PP more time to operate their facility.
Now you show the link (as you like to say innuendo) between Pierce/Stover and companies contracted with the city; however, can you also show me where those same companies contributed to Pierce or Stover’s campaigns?
Now there are excellent companies vying for city work, are you telling me that it just so happens that the companies who supported the Mayor seem that have the best bids?
Now you stated that, “It's the City Council who votes on approving contracts, not the Mayor” yet in a prior sentence you also stated, “Thanks for pointing me to the article about Shomon's first contract. I stand corrected, the City Council did not vote on that contract but did vote to renew his contract.” So, Wes, tell me, which is it?
Sounds like there is a lot of weight which the Mayor throws around.
Wes, here are some real facts. Just like the articles I have shown in the beacon. You can either accept them or dismiss them, but they are the truth.
Coming from someone who has lived in Chicago; Wes you are a bit naive on Politics. The Mayor is the one who orders what streets get fixed, who does work for who, and puts the money in the budget. It seems, like with the money for McCarthy park, that it can just appear to help an alderman, and not appear for a different alderman. The Mayor is pulling all the strings behind the curtain, and the aldermen will follow if they want perks and rewards for their areas. It happens all the time in Chicago, and Aurora is just catching up. Remember Pierce? If you weren't in his favor, your streets didn't get repaired. It's an old system of power, and in Aurora the Mayor does hold all the power. It's a bit foolish to think other wise.