With the old thread on this subject being quite long, I got a request to create a new one for those of you who still want to discuss this.
On Tuesday, the City Council approved in a 5-4 vote a tax levy that is estimated to raise the tax rate by two cents per $100 of assessed valuation. For the owner of a $400,000 home, it only represents and increase of about $25, but that doesn't mean everyone is happy about it.
Councilman Grant Wehrli noted that even though the council expects to abate the increase once it property assessments are issued, it will still result in a tax increase of nearly $1 million.
No one likes to pay more taxes, but do you think it's worth it to preserve city services and city jobs?
"The ax fell at City Hall Thursday." And so it begins. I'm sure that more than one blogger finds great satisfaction in this report.
T minus 1
T minus 6
T minus 8
Despise - verb
To regard with contempt, distaste, disgust, or disdain; scorn; loathe.
Contempt - noun
Lack of respect for something.
The quote is accurate. When 90% of teachers threatened this hard-working community with a strike for more than 5% per year as they did in 2005 at a time when taxpayers were getting nothing, or laid off, they should be despised and viewed with contempt.
Save the quote, Sycophant. I'm certain it will be apropos again in 2010.
P.S. Your bizarre post has nothing to do with the topic or the Lincoln quote.
"For the record, I don't hate teachers. I despise them" M. Davitt January 2008
“Moral principle is a looser bond than pecuniary interest.” - A. Lincoln
Enough
You say that you don't know how someone can come to work and sleep since firefighters have nothing to do. You need to understand what a firefighters day consists of. They don't come to work and go to bed, since I have asked when visited a fire station with my son. I watched as they took care of the station, they have daily training to do, fire inspections of public buildings, live fire training on some days then along with responding to numerous fire alarms, ambulance calls, citizen assists, car wrecks as well as public education, there is little time to spare. Sure, they sleep at night like we do except how do you sleep knowing the alarm can go off anytime for another emergency. Relate it to trying to sleep at home with a young daughter or son very sick in the next room, I think that compares the sleep pattern quite well. Then you take a big emergency that lasts 3-4 hours, you honestly think they get any sleep? At least you can sleep well knowing you are being watched over by the on duty fire and police crews. If I knew what you did for a living, I am certain I could make random statements about a waste of time where your job could be eliminated too.
By Enough on December 22, 2009 4:31 PM "And the article said that Com Ed and not the fire department disconnected the electricity."
Enough, once again you are wrong. Below is the news story. Naperville Fire turned off the power to each of the home and Comed "electricity was disconnected to a transformer in the neighborhood."
"The cause is still under investigation," said ComEd spokesman Peter Pedraza. After fires were reported in the two homes, Pedraza said, "electricity was disconnected to a transformer in the neighborhood."
Enough, please do some research before you comment. Overkill.. NO, doing their job to protect peoples homes...YES.
To Enough:
What qualifications do you have to make the judgement that the response of the fire department was overkill? Do you know the labor laws that govern a fire operation? Do you know what each company is resopsible for?
As for the Chicago fire response video you posted did you listen to the fire chiefs asking for more help thru out the entire video. Seems to me that your saying the Chicago fire department handled the call with the people they had on scene because they are that much better at firefighting then our local fire department. But during the whole video the chiefs were calling for more help that just was not available seems to me in my humble opinion that chicago could have used more help and wanted more help that they did not have.
Experienced
I meant fire.
Anonymous
I saw various news releases. My opinion was and is overkill.
And the article said that Com Ed and not the fire department disconnected the electricity.
Enough,
You missed the point, AND the complete number of firefighters onscene..."A total of seventeen Naperville Fire units responded to the scene of these incidents, with a total of thirty five firefighters involved in the fire suppression effort."
AGAIN, were in the world do you get your numbers from??? Where did you get the "60" from in your post??? Are you just grabing them out of a hat and making bad guesses?? READ THE NEWS STORY, "total of thirty five firefighters involved in the fire suppression effort."
When 17 total vehicles are onscene that includes chiefs, safety officers, and ambulances. This is not the number of fire engines. Naperville does not have 17 fire engines.
Also, Comed.... How quick do you think Comed got there??? Have you ever had to deal with Comed?? They are NOT very quick (personnal history). So, that would mean to me that Naperville Fire had to handle most of this BY THEMSELVES, with out Comed for at least an hour or more.
Now, subtract one or two crews to search and check the other houses on Cohasset Road. One or two crews to check the other houses on Gunston Avenue. You have to remember they had other residents with complains on both of these roads. They had to check the inside, outside and electric for each of these homes. A fire crew is 3 firefighters, so two crews on each road checking other homes would be 6 per road, or a total of 12. 37-12=25
Now take that 25 number and subtract one chief for the entire call, one Battalion chief for each fire, one safety officer for each fire, and one to operate the breathing air tank refill vehicle. 25-6=19
If you look at the numbers, this would mean each fire was handled by 9 or 10 firefighters.
By Enough on December 21, 2009 10:21 PM
Peoples gas (cited in the article) is not the police department as you previously stated.
*****************************
I don't recall referring to the police at all. I did a word search of this page and found the only reference to police to be yours.
To Experienced.
Two points. First, Peoples gas (cited in the article) is not the police department as you previously stated. Same as Com Ed not monitoring their electrical grid (or for that matter, having the ability to do so). I do not think that the actions of CFD are in any way being criticized.
Second, when I googled for the incident, I noted many instances of gas failures, the 1992 is 150 to 200 on the list. It is a larger problem particularly for systems that were original installed in the late 1890's.
my2cents--If you watched the tape, there were far more than 5 houses. But again, are you recommending that Naperville become more inefficient? I think these 136 people did 40 times more than the 60 plus on the cul de sac in Lisle township. That is 12 guys per house plus Com Ed, the real trouble shooters.
I still feel overkill partially because the fire department has nothing to do. I do not know how people can show up to work and sleep. Different culture, one that I am afraid we will not longer be able to afford.
Enough
A Chicago 4-11 is indeed 16 engines (they have hoses and water) + 8 ladder trucks + 4 ambulances + a battalion Chief, Deputy District Chief and a district Chief + command vehicle (a bus) = 32 vehicles. Now in comparison, this is Chicago, they have 5 man engines and 6 man trucks, 2 paramedics per ambulance plus the command staff. This brings the total firefighters on scene to 136 not including command staff.
Do not compare unless you know the facts, AGAIN you are not doing your homework, Naperville's engine and truck companies have 3 per vehicle.
Enough
We are talking about the same blast. Note the following:
"WASHINGTON -- The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) said Peoples Gas Light and Coke Co. in Chicago 'did not adequately train' its personnel to respond to a surge in a pipeline that led to a natural gas explosion and three fatalities.
"After a yearlong investigation, the NTSB adopted on Tuesday a final report that makes several recommendations to Peoples Gas Light and to gas industry trade associations concerning the operation of local distribution company systems."
Therefore, could the increased response in Naperville be a reflection on the lack of response in Chicago? Could the response be a reflection on better training?
Put these two events into context, here is what peoples gas noted.
On January 17, 1992, a gas explosion in a northwestern neighborhood of Chicago caused fires in 18 buildings, the deaths of four people, and injuries to many others. The cause of the fire was a suspected surge in gas pressure. Peoples Gas provided relief support to victims of the tragedy, including a temporary service center, replacement of damaged appliances, and provisions for food and shelter. The utility subsequently replaced the remaining low-pressure gas distribution mains and service lines in the area because they may have been over-stressed when the incident occurred.
As best as I can tell, this entire event was 4-11 alarm. This means that 16 extra engines responded. If you add the original two, you have the same resposne for the electrical fire in Naperville.
But a picture is worth a thousand words, take a look at the actual video of the event.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cVSmVNR7EiE
There was simply no comparison between the two events. The buildings were blowing up all around the area. This is REAL FIREFIGHTING.
I am curious what a real objective analysis of the efforts of the Chicago versus Naperville Fire Departments would disclose. Is it the same disparity between the significant hazards that a Chicago policemen faces compared to the low incidences in Naperville?
Again, be objective. 20 trucks to houses exploding and catching on fire in a 20 block area and problem stopped when gas system was shut down. 20 truckes where five houses were in danger and problem solved by disconnecting the electricity.
By the way, to find this info, I came accross sites with hundreds of gas explosions. One common issue, both utilities did not monitory their infrastructure. Do you think Com Ed will do the same as Peoples?
Enough
I'm not sure what gas blast you are speaking of. The one I found had 10 home set ablaze with a finding by the feds that much of the loss was due to an inadequate response.
By The Journalist Investigator on December 20, 2009 5:11 PM
This is exactly the type of bombast that has no constructive value or respect of anothers opinion. Historical leaders that follow this approach--Stalin, Hitler, Chavez, Castro.
This is why "liberals" want to be called "progressives"?
Enough...
I love human life too much to risk my fellow citizens to save a few bucks. Maybe you should get a second job at another 7-11 to pay for additional tax increases if you are worried about personal bankruptcy.
There was no additional property damage after the first two house blew up, Peoples Gas and the Chicago Fire Department took care of the matter.
Just an observation. A point of view is put forth, maybe we can cut police and fire as well as planners to eliminate the need for tax increases. All of these scare tactics come out of the woodwork. People dying in burning buildings. Amublances taking two hours to respond.
Quite frankly, these comments are simply bombastive and clear overreactions. Just like Obama's comment that the country was going bankrupt if we do not give the dear little boy his health care law.
If people need to stoop to these levels to prove their point, maybe they are hiding something. Maybe these cuts could be made (more appropriately, reveres the increase spending from the last three years) and all of you know that if the "facts" were appropriately reviewed, that would be the outcome. People avoiding an open discussion are trying to ram something down people's throats.
Just my opinion!!
By Enough on December 19, 2009 1:52 PM
*****
I do not recall 20 trucks in the west side of Chicago when the houses were blowing up from failure in the gas pressure mains.
-------------------------
Maybe if they had, there would have been less property loss. I personally was happy to see the loss contained to 2 homes due to the decisions made by the firefighters.
I typed a number I saw from an earlier report in either the Tribune or the Sun. The Sun now shows 40 firemen with 20 piece of equiptment. They make no mention of the Homeland Security detail. I cannot pull up these initial reports. So I either read wrong or the initial report was wrong.
Even four units per house seems to be overkill, they would be parked two blocks away.
No intential lies, just an opinion. I do not recall 20 trucks in the west side of Chicago when the houses were blowing up from failure in the gas pressure mains.
Enough
Obviously you are just throwing out random numbers and making false comments about which you know nothing about. I am tired of debating this with you when you don't really want to keep an open mind about the facts and just throw out random lies that you think are true. Ask any citizen in Naperville, Lisle or Woodridge who has needed assistance from the firefighters or firefighter/paramedics and they will let you know how valuable they are to them. Don't comment unless you want to represent the facts, not spread lies.
Two actual fires but other homeowners reporting the smell of electrical fires also. Com Ed was concerned to the point of disconnecting a transformer. I don't think you can question the response where a whole neighborhood was involved. I would expect nothing less from fire officials under the circumstances. Good Job Firefighters!
"During this response, Naperville Public Safety dispatchers began receiving additional telephone calls from adjacent homes in the area of the fire, reporting electrical odors and power failures. Naperville fire units investigated and found a fire in the rear of the Baumel's home, immediately behind the Gunston Avenue house.
****************
"Meanwhile, Naperville fire units received additional verbal requests to check interior electrical odors in surrounding homes. As a result of these reports, three homes required the electric power to be shut off due to potential problems with the electric service, Zywanski said."
By Enough on December 18, 2009 9:20 AM
"40 trucks for two houses?"
Get your story straight "enough"... This was copied from the city press release. Were did you get your number of 40 trucks?
"A total of seventeen Naperville Fire units responded to the scene of these incidents, with a total of thirty five firefighters involved in the fire suppression effort."
Once again "enough" gets her numbers wrong. There were a total of 37 Firefighters onscene for 2 house fires AND 3 more houses with other "reporting electrical odors and power failures."
"As operations were in progress on the initial fire building, the Naperville Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP) began receiving additional telephone calls from adjacent homes in the area of the fire, reporting electrical odors and power failures. As a result of these reports, three homes required the electric power to be shut off due to potential problems with the electric service."
So, 2 house fires, 3 more homes that had to have the power shut off and several adjacent homes in the area of the fire, reporting electrical odors and power failures. And Naperville Fire Department handled all that.... Sounds like a lot of work chasing power failures and burning orders in several homes throughout the subdivision. It sounds like they did a great job protecting these peoples homes.
Those were bizarre fires, shooting up from the electrical connections.
And just think, all of you Naperville people subsidized the work.
40 trucks for two houses? And a Homeland Security detail. For two elderly families. Sounds like overkill to me. But the the firemen had nothing else to do.
Enough:
DGFD did layoff 3 non-firefighters, get your facts and your grammar straight. The fires today once again shows how Naperville is well covered and protected in fire emergencies including the unincorporated areas. Too bad you were not around to show them how to put it out.
A warning to all.
Downers Grove laid off three people in their fire department. YOu should stay away from their since they are now below NPFW standards!!
enough
You obviously have an issue with firefighters and I wish I knew why. I do not think anyone in Naperville wants to risk having a response time extended by closing fire stations either part of the day or all of the day. If someone needs help for medical or fire assistance, time is the enemy. A fire triples in size every minute and produce more deadly smoke containing hydrogen cyanide gas due to the fact that synthetic materials are used in many furnishings these days. Then you take how long the brain will last during cardiac arrest and waiting longer then 6 minutes for help is unacceptable. Where station 10 is going, it will reduce response times for that area especially the distant areas currently covered by the next 2 closest fire stations, perhaps this is not your concern since it does not apply to you, at least that is how it sounds from your posts but it will help those in that area.
Enough
The ISO for the NFD outside the city limits w/o hydrants is 9.
Do I have insurance? Yes.
Would the rates go up if the ISO (the union operation--NFPA-- is not recognized by the insurance industry)? No, unless the City's firing rating drops below Class 3. Insurance rates for residential customers are the same for Class 1 through 3. Put it another way, did your insurance premium go down when the last fire house was opened?
The unincorporated areas in Naperville are serviced by two fire districts. The Naperville Township portion is served by the Naperville Fire District. Rating--ISO 2 Why? Because the City of Naperville provides the service on contract. These people pay a much lower tax rate than the incorporated area.
The other fire protection district is the Lisle Woodridge Fire Protection District. They have an ISO 1 rating.
Do you feel concerned for your safety until the 10th station opens? Of course not.
I do not think that rethinking the service levels of the police and fire departments should be off limits and with limited risk, tax increases could be avoided. I do not know for certain because nobody has asked the tough questions.
Ignorance is bliss. In this case, ignorance is government in your wallets.
Absolutely correct, insurance rates are based on the ability of the department, manpower, equipment and response times in both busy daytime and slower times of the day. Currently Naperville (City proper, not unincorporated) is designated a 2 in fire protection ratings, 1 being the best and 10 the worst. Reduce stations and manpower and that number would be lowered increasing insurance rates.
my2cents on December 9, 2009 11:40 PM
Enough
I have to ask, do you pay for homeowners insurance? If you do maybe you should cancel it, after all you can put out your own fires, maybe you are wasting money?
____________________________
Just to add to my2cents comment: For those of us wishing to keep our homeowners insurance, I wonder what will happen to our rates if we start closing down fire stations and not following the NFPA Guideline? I assume that rates are at least in part calculated based on ratings that include fire and police protection?
So Enough, you have it all figured out, move to an unincorporated area.
Enough
I have to ask, do you pay for homeowners insurance? If you do maybe you should cancel it, after all you can put out your own fires, maybe you are wasting money?
Experienced
Nothing.
Please refer to this web site
http://www.co.dupage.il.us/soa/generic.cfm?doc_id=3812
Your 2009 Assessed Valuation ($66,080) will be multiplied by 1.018 to come up with total ($67,269). If the 2008 is last years EAV (not AV), then your assessment (basis of tax billing) will increase by 3.6%.
As comparison, this township equalization factor in 2008 was 1.06 or so. I was told that 2009 would be comparable. It could be that the assessments are rolling backward. There is also a new homeowners exemption up to $6,000 (from $5,500) that will offet some.
2009=66,080
2008=64,910
Difference=1,170
Divided by 64,910=1.8% increase
Where am I going wrong?
Can somebody explain to me how our town which is "broke" could spend $60,000 to an outside consulting firm to be told where to cut?
Is this not an example of complete stupidity by our CC?
To Experienced
You need to take the current multiplied and divide by last year's multiplier to come up with the change. 1.36--The assessor's assessments are being increased by 36% through the multiplier.
To the Fireman (annonymous)
Chicago led the way in fire standards. The two mile rule was to address response times. In Naperville, with less density, the distance could be more. You are right on fire staffing, a throwback to the 20's (and those standards you refer to require 4 man staffing per engine--so Naperville is not in compliance!!). Again, you and I have laid out positions. The Wall STreet Journal pointed out the archaic standards that rationalize higher costs. And other communities are downsizing without massive losses. I have read that report (the sources of 200 structure fires). It does not address ways to control costs and impact on standards. The Fire department has been generally given a pass except for one "Deputy".
And GJC and Annonymous
Ask yourself a question. What does the City of Naperville do for me? How is this better than other cities or for that matter the neighborhoods in unincorporated areas (I note in parenthetics the alternatives for unincorporated areas in the Hobson Road corridor)?
Police protection (Sherriff at no cost).
Red Light cameras (None)
Fire Protection (Fire Protection Districts including Naperville--slight property tax)
Water (County has expanded its system or wells)
Sewer (County)
Snow plowing (Township--no extra cost)
The only extra costs for these services in an unincorporated area is the Fire Protection District taxes (0.50 tax rate in Lisle Township) and higher water and electricity rates of the County compared to the City of Naperville. On the other hand, you do not pay the City of Naperville property tax and no utility taxes on electricity, natural gas, telephone or water. And no park district or library taxes. You can get a library card for $250 from Woodridge that has reciprical privileges at Naperville (that would want to charge you at least $1,000).
Does the higher City of Naperville costs for the same services reflect WASTE? And responsible governments do control their costs. They act like businesses.
by
By Anonymous on December 7, 2009 5:23 PM
"Tens of thousands of companies have had to cut back on employees in the last two years. Despite the posturing and rhetoric there hasn't been any serious cut-back in the city budget."
Yes, there should, will and have been cutbacks by the City of Naperville. Last year they cut approx. 5% of the workforce and it looks like they may be cutting a little more than that again this year.
However, to continually compare government to business is simply not living in reality. Businesses change their model to preserve the bottom line. Government should be in the business of protecting you and preserving your community. I am willing to do without non-essential services, but don't compromise my safety. For those who believe the cuts should not affect their service levels, well, good luck with that. The "profit margin/slush fund" went away when homes quit selling (real estate transfer tax) and car sales dropped. And you are clearly not in the loop in terms of the budgetary cuts made over the past 2 years. There will be cuts and you will notice.
It's been quite interesting to follow the new ebb and flow of conversation, but I have one question to ask of nearly all the participants: You do understand that the management of governmental bodies is substantively different than the management of a private or public company, right? You get that?
I'm not saying that it should be, and that lessons shouldn't apply, I'm talking about realpolitik, nothing more or less.
It's different, and most of you instinctively know that, but no one seems to acknowledge it.
By Enough on December 7, 2009 3:37 PM
(the Chicago formula)
And to use your numbers from Chicago.... there would be 5 firefighters on an engine and 6 on a ladder truck, like they do in Chicago. Here in Naperville there are only 3 firefighters on both Engines and Trucks. Naperville staffs their equipment with half the firefighters that Chicago does.
How can you continue to compare Chicago, or Clarendon Heights, or Belmont, Or Darien Woodridge. They are each very different from Naperville. Clarendon Heights and Belmont Fire Districts were only 1.5 square miles, Darien Woodridge is 15 square miles (at best) and Chicago.... you get the point. If you are going to compare, please do it apples to apples.
Your two mile radius has one major flaw.... The standard is not a 2 mile radius. That may be a Chicago rule (I will look that one up, give me a link to prove it) But the national standard set by ISO and the NFPA (agencys who have standards that hold up in court rooms) set the standard by "time of call" to "time on scene", ie travel time. You may not like the NFPA or ISO, but they are the standard that court cases have been based on for years. The day that I can walk into a court room and use "Enough" said that it should be this way, and the judge doesn't throw me out the door, is the day that both ISO and NFPA will not longer be THE NATIONAL STANDARD.
Also, EVERY department head in the city has and does write a detailed report to the council and city manager EACH YEAR. Maybe you should ask a council member for a copy of that report. Further, with the city budget the way it is, the council reviews the department reports even closer now (as did the consultant group).
By Enough on December 7, 2009 3:37 PM
To Experienced
Most of Lisle and Naperville Township was not reassessed. There will be a township multiplier. That will be how the increases are made, just like last year.
*****************************************************
But the Naperville Township multiplier is only 1.36. (I was at the assessors office a few weeks back arguing with them on my personal assessment.) Where did the 6% come from?
Tens of thousands of companies have had to cut back on employees in the last two years. That pain if felt all over Naperville and the entire country. All of these companies have had to struggle to maintain the level of service they provide to their customers because they don't have the luxury of having guaranteed sales (taxes) like a unit of government.
Despite the posturing and rhetoric there hasn't been any serious cut-back in the city budget. If anything there has been a desperate attempt to maintain the status quo. From city staffers, to city managers to city executives to elected council members there is an entire culture of people who just don't get it.
We want change. City government needs to be reinvented. If those in charge can't lead an effective makeover then we need to start replacing a lot of people. Let's start at the top and work our way down.
To JQ Public
The calculation is a little more complicated. All fire houses are suppose to be within a two mile radius (the Chicago formula). The area of a circle is Pie r squared or 12.56 square miles. You would only need three fire stations if you could optimally locate the stations. Ten might be a stretch of reasonableness even with this formula.
To Experienced
Most of Lisle and Naperville Township was not reassessed. There will be a township multiplier. That will be how the increases are made, just like last year.
Naperguy
At that pace, we won't even get to 200. Don't tell the arsonists.
By John Q. Public on December 7, 2009 12:47 PM
Just to point out the correct numbers.... Naperville Fire Department protects 60 square miles. They protect both city and unincorparated areas around Naperville.
Source of this information was CM Bob's post...."We do cover nearly 60 square miles and the overall challenge is to provide the same service to all residents regardless of the frequency."
Now lets do the math on the number of fire stations we should have......
Enough,
You said "I bet most fires are extinguish by the resident without a fire department intervention. We had three fires and were able to extinguished them without calling the fire department."
Since 11/1/09
--Structure fire 8th street
--Structure fire West court
--Explosion, haz mat, and fire on Frontenac Road
--Hazardous Materials Incident at Naperville Water Treatment Facility
--Structure fire Crystal Rock Residence
--Fire Department Extinguishes Fire at Scott Elementary School
--Structure Fire at Phillips Flowers & Gifts
--Structure Fire on N. Washington
--Structure Fire on Stewart Ln
Why don't you swing by these locations and teach the residents/business owners how it's done?
Enough wrote:
If that were the case, we would have 17-18 firestations in Naperville, rather than 10, as Naperville covers 35.5 square miles.
OK, I went to the NFPA web site. The first two things that pop up?
The AFL-CIO and the International Fire Chief Union. Using your statistics, 55% of the organization's membership is the union and the fire chiefs. This is a TRADE ORGANIZATION, not an independent think tank.
But saying this, I read the materials. The key factor is that the FIRE CHIEF should prepare a report and note how it complies with this report. It should addresss all of these matters.
I have never seen a full report presented to the City Council. They take the chief's word. The Clestry study did not address these issues either. It might be useful for the Council to see how well they would meet the "standards" if the service was reduced in the overnights when traffic is lower and units could respond faster. And what is the marginal impact of a slower response time. Damage is 5% higher?
Fire Departments are the second largest cost. And the most devastating fires have occurred where there are no fire hydrandts like the two major fires on the east side of town. With only 200 fires a year (and how many of these are arson), that is less than 2 per month per fire house. And what is the marginal impact of a slower response time. Damage is 5% higher?
I bet most fires are extinguish by the resident without a fire department intervention. We had three fires and were able to extinguished them without calling the fire department.
If there was ever a major fire, my expectations are that smoke detectors and CO2 monitors will warn us and we will get out before any major loss of life. If the fire spreads, I am not counting on the fire department to be able to save anything. Four minutes, 15 minutes, too late. But I am more relying more meaningful building codes and prevention (when a circuit overheats, I call in an electrician to check). I have more of a chance of crashing in a plane accident than my house catching on fire.
Enough
You need to read the entire editorial by the Sun. It did not support the increase, and in fact takes your point of view.
http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/napervillesun/news/opinions/1921558,6_4_NA06_EDITORIAL_S1-091206.article
My comment is that there are way more than 3 people who are against the tax increase on this blog, but only 3 people sought to address the issue before the council. As I said before the hearing, if you don't go to the hearing, don't complain.
On another topic, my research shows an average 1.5% EAV increase this year. Can you point me to the 6%.
Enough,
Why are we back to the FD bashing again…..
By Enough on December 6, 2009 2:12 PM
1) Your info on fire districts is incorrect. Clarendon Heights Fire protection District Merged with Tri-State Fire Protection District due to staffing issues. As a volunteer district they were having trouble staffing their vehicles with only call back personnel. Also, as a very small district they could not provide their residents with paramedic service. A merger with Tri-state provided both full time staffing, paramedic service and the station on 63rd street is still open.
2) As for the Belmont Road Station (station 2) of the Darien Woodridge Fire District, They still man and operate a paramedic equipped fire engine from the Belmont station. Belmont and Downers Grove Estates Fire Protection Districts Merged to become Darien Woodridge Fire Protection. They merged because both covered parts of Woodridge and the city council of Woodridge was complaining about having four different fire districts cover different parts of their town (ie. Lemont, Lisle, Belmont and DG Estates). There was a plan being worked on to further merge the fire districts in the Woodridge area in order to have one or two districts cover that town. The plan is dormant at this time. Under that plan, no fire stations would have been closed as they all would have still been needed.
3) Enough on December 5, 2009 9:39 AM “I also feel that contrary to many of the comments on this page, police and fire could be cut by at least ten percent without any harm.”
As for Naperville fire stations and ambulances, CM Bob already spoke about this item on another thread. Also, the Clerestory Consultant Group has done a study of ALL of the city departments. Why don’t you wait and see what the council does with the information from this study? Or, do you have a better , deeper and more complete study to share?? Is your opinion about fire department staffing just that, an opinion???
"By Councilman Bob on November 19, 2009 5:13 PM
"The problem we have is in covering the geographical area of Naperville even with 7 ambulances it’s a challenge to ensure that all of our citizens maintain an equitable service if and when the EMS call is needed. We will respond with the closest unit on any EMS call and all of our engines and trucks are equipped with advanced life support equipment and paramedics. But many of our calls require an immediate transport unit i.e. trauma, cardiac and respiratory calls and by having to wait even an additional 3-5 minutes for a transport unit to arrive could make a substantial difference in patient outcome. In certain cases, depending on where the mutual aid ambulance is coming from there could be a substantial delay in a transport unit arriving on the scene. Possibly 10-15 minutes."
"We do cover nearly 60 square miles and the overall challenge is to provide the same service to all residents regardless of the frequency."
The city goal is a 6 minute response time, 90% of the time, to emergencies. The Naperville Fire Department covers 60 square miles, city and unincorporated areas, and protects 150,000 people. Or, to put this number another way, each station will cover 6 square miles and 15,000 people (after station 10 opens). The American heart association, the AMA all agree on this number (as well as many others) due to increased death and brain damage rates.
Another factor to look at is NFPA 1710, updated edition dated 2010, staffing standards. Now some people have made comments about the NFPA (and its make up) but here are the stats again....
The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) is an international organization of more than 75,000 individuals and more than 80 national trade and professional organizations. NFPA’s mission is to reduce the worldwide burden of fire and other hazards on the quality of life by developing and advocating scientifically based consensus codes and standards, research, training and education.
Who Is Involved
At the time of the final vote on NFPA 1710, the Technical
Committee contained representatives from seven different
Classes of NFPA members, including Consumers,
Enforcers, Labor, Manufacturers, Research/Testing, Special
Experts and Users. No more than one-third of the voting
Members of the Committee represented one of these
Interests, as explicitly required by NFPA rules. The
Following is a breakdown of the membership:
• Consumers (City Managers), 2, 6%
• Enforcers (Fire Chiefs, including 3 representatives from
The International Association of Fire Chiefs, or IAFC),
10, 32%
• Labor (Union representatives, including 3 from the
IAFF), 7, 23%
• Manufacturers (Trade Group organizations), 2, 6%
Research/Testing, 1, 3%
• Special Experts, 4, 13%
• Users, 5, 16%
Here is a link to the requirements for NFPA Committee membership.
http://www.hemmingfire.com/news/fullstory.php/aid/598/NFPA_Committees_want_members.html
Link to info on NFPA 1710
http://www.iaff.org/tech/PDF/NFPA1710ImplementationGuide.pdf
NFPA is not just fire service people or groups. NFPA is experts in ALL fields.
With the city opening fire station 10, in the next month or so, they will be closer to that 90% number. Further, the city is opening fire station 10 without hiring any new firefighter/paramedics. The station will be opened by moving manpower and equipment from other stations. The only station that once had 8 firefighter/paramedics will now only have 5 persons 24 hours a day. This means that, in general, the city fire stations will only have 5 people per station ( 3 engine and two ambulance ) and in the others without an ambulance will only have 3 (engine only).
“On call during emergencies”….. Are you kidding me. Most of the firefighters that work for Naperville can not afford to live in or near Naperville. Most of the firefighters live a greater distance away. Recall of firefighters would take 45 to 60 minutes, if lucky. Or we can take that Clarendon Heights and not have enough people to staff our fire engines.
Enough, opinions are OK if you can support them with Facts. Can you support your opinions with facts???
To Experienced and the Sun Editorial Board
People better wake up. Since 2000, over 700,000 working people have left the state of Illinois. That explains the shortage of buyers for houses and most of the drop in tax revenues. The only states worst are New York, California, New Jersey and Michigan.
People are giving up on the blue state mentality. Instead, they are moving to the south (population is up in Texas) to get away from these conditions.
College students are leaving in droves. As Robert Reich said about Illinois, "It is a very poor poverty state." What happens when there are no businesses and employed people left to support the rest? Take a look.
Also, the $25 increase is based on no increase in EAV. With a 6% average assessment increase, the actual could be double to triple that amount.
By Enough on December 6, 2009 2:12 PM
And a standby fee for the one catastrophic event every five or ten years? That is really cynical.
--------------------------
I guess we need to discuss what a stand by fee is. A stand by fee as covered by the collective bargaining agreements is an hourly fee paid to employees who must forego their normal activities while not working so that they can be available if needed; i.e., no drinking, the necessity to be close enough to the work station to be able to respond, etc. It's required by the contract and by federal law.
Sun Editorial:
"The property tax levy increase, approved by the council last week, could increase city property taxes by $25, to about $945, next year.
"This minor amount shouldn't be a big deal -- and since only three people showed up at that meeting to protest, it's difficult to get the impression that much of Naperville is worked up about an additional $25 from the owner of an average-priced house."
If you don't attend the tax levy hearing, don't complain.
Comment by Annoymous regarding tax rates
All tax rates have gone down in the last five years on your tax bill, the City's have gone down the least on a percentage since they have been RAISING TAXES. You do the math.
To Naperguy
These pages are to exchange ideas and express an opinion. My opinion is that fire departments are in less demand because of advancements in housing technology and personal behavior (you hear less about people dying from smoking in bed, for example). I also have seen communities that have cut fire departments as financial crisis hit. The Clarendon Hills Countryside Fire Deparment on 63rd Street merged with Tri STate. The Belmont Fire Department on Belmont and 59th merged with Darien Woodridge (the fire house is no longer active, it stores equipment).
My personal opinion is that the standards for firehouses (one in every two mile area) that applies to Chicago where housing is far more dense is not a relevant in Naperville. But Naperville planned and developed the placement and staffing of fire houses based on the same standard. And we have only 200 structure fires. Oh yes, many calls. But how many times have all ten fire houses been out on a call? What percentage of the time are the fire equipment sitting at standbye in the fire house--80%? So it comes down to response time as the only rational to keep as many firemen. One County Board candidate stated that a County wide fire department could reduce fire stations by 25%. Is he wrong?
I would like to see an independent study of the Fire protection system done by a firm and the council evaluate the findings. If there was an objective study, we could move on. Which raises the ugly question--Why hasn't such as study been done? What is the Fire Department afraid of?
And a standby fee for the one catastrophic event every five or ten years? That is really cynical.
Sam says: Once again, the tax rate is not the issue. I pay my taxes in US dollars and the tax bill has gone only one direction: up,up up!
If the county assesor says your house value has increased, you are going to pay more in taxes even with the city's portion of the tax bill going lower. If the school district % rate keeps increasing, you are going to pay more in taxes - and that's about 70% of your tax bill, isn't it?? If I recall people used to brag about how much their home values increased and were banking on that "nest egg" for retirement. Now the times are tough and everyone wants to complain about how the government is robbing them blind.
Good use of buzz words too, zero based budgeting and no conferences or training for a year. How do you anticipate keeping acreditations with no conferences and training? People live in Naperville for the excellent service and high standards provided.
Enough,
"I also feel that contrary to many of the comments on this page, police and fire could be cut by at least ten percent without any harm."
And your qualifications to determine this cut is okay are what?
"If you converted the three fire houses without EMS to be open only 8 hours and on call during emergencies (remeber, in a big fire or catastrophe, all of the other fire personnel could get called out and use this idle equipment)."
Since most firefighters can't afford to live in Naperville how far will they have to drive to get this idle equipment to an emergency scene in a timely fashion? Your thought of trying to save money is good but functionally this isn't a plausible solution.
Once again, the tax rate is not the issue. I pay my taxes in US dollars and the tax bill has gone only one direction: up,up up! Rates are a convenient way to muddy the water. Rates have gone down as the city enjoyed huge increases in the tax base. The city also indulged in a lot of spending that was possible because tax revenues were increasing year over year. They never had the sense to realize that the tax base could not expand forever. Now, reality sets in and we have to pay for our past excesses.
The city claims to be trying to contain spending and, to some degree, it is. As just one example, I recently watched the council debate the need for an entire new bureaucracy to deal with the problem of boarding houses: registration, annual inspection, etc...it may, be worthy, but is is cost justified? No one asked --just attack the "problem", no discussion of costs.
I suspect this is repeated on a daily basis. Want to be serious about cutting? Stop all attendance at conferences for a year. Go to zero based budgeting -- don't begin this year's budget with last year's spending, start with zero and justify every dollar budgeted. That's the real way to control spending.
Instead, our government frets about the "revenue" problem while in reality, it's a spending problem.
My taxes are up for twenty years. Sales taxes are up. Government spending is the reason.
Enough is enough. Another $25 is $25 too much!
Enough
Have you factored in stand by pay costs into your analysis?
Enough, in the past 5 years, the CITY's portion of the tax rate has DECREASED. Where are you getting your facts from?
One other comment.
No one knows if the economy will return to the go-go days of 2006. By taking this approach, instead of inflicting additonal pain through higher taxes, people get relief. (The comment that 50% of the sales tax is paid by outsiders is flawed. Look at Cook County, Schaumburg LOST sales taxes and now has to levy a property tax.)
But if the economy comes back, don't repeat the same mistakes made by Burchard and Krieger, recklessly increasing spending for the last five years and corresponding tax increases. Instead, take increased revenues from other than property taxes and reduce property taxes to eliminate those increases over inflation over the last five years. And if there is still more money, pay down the pension and bond debt.
It will take 20 years to fix the mess created in the last five. If we don't, the City is only headed for worst times.
I agree. But you have to start somewhere.
I also feel that contrary to many of the comments on this page, police and fire could be cut by at least ten percent without any harm. People bet scared when they rattle their sabres, but they are foolish to tolerate such sable rattling.
I qualify my statement since I have not had a chance to check out this National Fire Agency. But I am skeptical since it is "controlled" by the industry and might be biased. Have you ever talked to a "Fire Chief"? The most obnoxious one is Freeman of Lisle Woodridge. He acts as a para military individual.
By the way, my comments about fire departments needed to down size was in a Wall Street Journal artilce published between 1999 and 2002.
If you converted the three fire houses without EMS to be open only 8 hours and on call during emergencies (remeber, in a big fire or catastrophe, all of the other fire personnel could get called out and use this idle equipment). Only one third at most are working at a time, so call the other 2/3rd only when they are needed and pay them overtime. This alone would balance the budget and the unions cannot number of active fire houses.
Anon at 4:44am is exactly right. Non-union workers got 0-1% based on performance one time check that was taxed at 35%. The unions didn't get touched last time in the reduction in force and got raises on top of that.
AND Enough, the council hasn't made their final decisions public yet, but we know that it's coming in January 2010.
I was under the impression that the City of Chicago's extended furlough proposal mentioned above was not adopted once the parking meter fiasco became a deal. Note that furlough days both in Chicago and Naperville would not apply to employees currently under union contracts and that could be a big issue. The major departments within the city of Naperville deal with unions- police, fire, public works, public utilities. How many employees does that leave? Last year the unions all received negotiated raises while non union got Zero to 1 percent based on performance. Unless you want to add more bargaining units, you cannot continually hit up the same limited group of employees.
SPECIFICALLY TO THE TAX INCREASES
What I have failed to see is the City following the leadership of many other governments facing similar shortfalls.
FURLOUGH DAYS WITHOUT PAY
You can take the Chicago model where people are forced to take off 20 days (10% of the time they work) without pay (a base work day after deducting vacation, sick time and holidays) range from 200 to 240 days.
Another model, close City Hall on Friday afternoons and pay everyone for 35 hours rather than 40.
This plan is better than a sales tax or property tax increase. Krieger should take the lead and have his management team take a 10% salary cut.
WHY HAVE WE NOT HEARD THIS?
Great comments. To add some.
Pension benefits for police and fire are set in state statute. This includes the employee contribution, the benefits (2.2% of the best five years of salary times the numbers of years of service--a VERY GENEROUS BENEFIT), early retirement provisions, etc. And I do not believe that these amounts can be reduced by collective bargaining, only enhanced.
Regarding that "Constitional Guaranty" The unions do not feel that the "contract" wording provides enough protection. They wanted a Constitutional Convention in 2010 so this protection could be enhanced.
You ask, what are the concerns. First and foremost, the contract is only as strong as the parties to the contract. The State of Illinois is broke. The contract could be worthless.
Then people will say that the State of Illinois cannot file for bankruptcy protection in accordance with Federal laws. Again, true. But they could be forced to liquidate and reorganize under a "common law" bankruptcy going back to the laws of England. The reason Federal bankruptcy laws were established was to streamline the cumbersome common law process as well as to make it uniform.
Here again, this is what the public unions fear. There is no enforcement to MAKE the state pay no matter what happens.
Another concern about the "constitutional protection" is that it protects what has been earned, it does not prohibit ending plans. That can have a huge reduction to pension liabilities. If an employee has 10 years experience and makes $50,000 (use as the best five years), they have earned a pension benefit when they are 65 of $11,000 per year (10 times 0.022 times 50000) with a three percent increase. If they continue to work until they are 55 and their best five years are $90,000, their pension at 65 would increase to $59,400 (30 times 0.022 times 90,000). Does the Constitution guarantee "unearned benefits" (in this case the difference between $59,400 and $11,000)?
These were concerns raised by the union, not some plotting by Roser's tax group.
So if taxpayers voted to declare Illinois insolvent and as a cure all state pension plans were terminated, a major portion of the future liabilitiy related to provisions that the state does not have the fiscal "ability" to meet could be put into jeopardy.
On first blush, people discount this idea. But the unions aren't, they are genuninely concerned about this issue. The State of Illinois is in worst financial shape than GM. Maybe a restructuring that current taxes can fund would be a better alternative.
GJC
Yes you are correct. Section 5 only pertains to existing benefits for existing employees. The General Assembly could reduce benefits for new employeds. Eventually thru attrition, the pension costs will go down. I just don't know how long that would take and for how many years thereafter there would be retirees on the old system.
Regarding pensions and the recent comments about pensions. Please remember there are two sides to every story. I found this information while researching pensions on union web sites.....Link attached below....
"Pension Reform
Posted On: Oct 30, 2009 (12:37:45)
Throughout this year’s session of the Illinois General Assembly, the AFFI (firefighters union) has made it clear that we will negotiate seriously for long-lasting and meaningful pension reform.
Toward that end we worked hard and in good faith with dozens of Illinois legislators who share our desire to enact reliable pension reforms for those of us entrusted with the public’s safety. In a spirit of cooperation, the AFFI developed a proposal to cap property tax increases at 10 percent for 2010.
The AFFI’s proposal asked for nothing in return except for a good-faith commitment from the municipal groups to negotiate for long-term stability for firefighters as well as the taxpayers we serve. Along every step of the process, the AFFI made it clear we are willing to negotiate reforms but only if local governments are willing to address the defects that got us into pension underfunding in the first place.
Unfortunately, the Northwest Municipal Conference (NWMC) insisted right up to the end of this week’s veto session to push for either a 40-year extension of the amortization period or a multiple year contribution limitation that would drastically increase the unfunded liability in our plans. Neither proposal submitted by the NWMC included any reform measures to address the root cause of our funding issues – responsible long term funding practices.
The headstrong insistence by the NWMC may well have scuttled the efforts of well-meaning legislators to solve, once and for all, the pension shortfalls and funding issues that face almost all Illinois local governments."
http://www.affi-iaff.org/index.cfm?zone=/unionactive/view_article.cfm&HomeID=142615
http://www.affi-iaff.org/index.cfm?zone=/unionactive/view_article.cfm&HomeID=140505
Experienced,
I think the impetus to get the union to agree would be the same as it has been for other unions that have agreed to reduced compensation over the past several decades---fear of dire consequences if they don't agree. After all, there is only so much that can be asked of taxpayers. The key, perhaps, should be to focus not so much on the cost of pensions, as on total levels of compensation. If the unions don't agree to reduced pension benefits and/or shouldering more of the burden of funding, they can expect to have to "pay" in other areas, such as head count, salary, medical benefits, vacation, etc. From a legal standpoint, though, you probably cannot make this a quid pro quo.
In regard to the pension mess, there is still one thing (okay, at least one thing) that confuses me. IIRC, in the article the Sun ran a couple of years ago, Naperville has never taken a "holiday" on it's pension obligations. If that is the case, how did the NFD and NPD plans get so far under water? I would think the actuarial assumptions that are used to calculate the city's annual obligation are standard. Was the accrued liability deficit in 2002 just a result of the stock market having tanked when the dot coms went bust? Did the formula used by the actuaries result in the city making abnormally small contributions in the late 90's when stocks were booming? Does the actuarial profession need to come up with a new model?
-JQP
Bankrupt or insolvent local governments?
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXx
By Experienced on December 2, 2009 10:34 PM
JQP
I don't think it would work because it would only take one person to disagree to upset the plan. Plus I don't know if you can bargain away constitutional rights. But, who knows.
What would be the impetus for a union to agree to reduce pension benefits?
This has been the most enjoyable discussion to read that I have seen in years on this blog. Thanks Chris...
Chris, JQP, Experienced...
I think that we tried to discuss this before, but somehow it got lost in the excess verbiage -
As I understand it [and I am not a specialist in this] Section 5 speaks to people who are already in the system, not those who might be in the future. So existing people are protected, but those coming in to a system might have a different plan moving forward IF the unions were to agree to such a thing, which is a whole different issue and probably a more important one.
The other way to save on pension money going forward is to hire fewer people, of course. That's an even more significant savings than hiring at a lower salary, and avoids the union negotiation in a number of important ways. Of course, the downfall of that is a possible elimination of important services.
It seems to me that the current council is in a really tough place, though that's why we elect them, they have some really important and long term issues to decide on our behalf. I wish I was more comfortable with our leadership.
GJC
JQP
I don't think it would work because it would only take one person to disagree to upset the plan. Plus I don't know if you can bargain away constitutional rights. But, who knows.
What would be the impetus for a union to agree to reduce pension benefits?
Experienced,
Here is the relevant section from the Constitution:
Your legal knowledge is certainly superior to mine, but it seems to me the purpose of this section is to protect pension beneficiaries from having their benefits unilaterally reduced. If the pension beneficiaries agree to the reduction, is that really a violation of this section? Or, what about a union contract that reduces the benefit levels for new hires only?
At current savings (debt retirement) rates, consumer spending which accounts for 70% of the economy will return to pre-bubble levels in 7-8 years. Example: auto sales peak bubble 17M units, current run rate 10-12M. New normal for the next 7-8 years 10-12M aka "The New Normal"
Housing foreclosures, 5 million down, 5 million to go
Housing devaluation, approx 30% down, another 20-30% to go reaching pre-bubble 1997 levels.
Unemployment rate 10% plus under-employment rate (engineers scooping ice cream because their job was exported) another 7-8%. Total unemployment rate = 17%, almost all of it in the private sector.
Most people in the private sector have had wages and or benefits cuts and are working more hours and faster.
Government is still going strong with 3% Federal Pay raises, trillions at near zero interest for their banking buddies, trillions more for all of the corporate winners lined up for the "Cap and Trade" invented by ENRON and national force you to buy insurance from giant insurance companies and get less for your money bill now in Congress.
The Federal Government, and other Governments, are sinking the taxpayers in debt faster than they are paying their credit cards off; the faster we run, the further our children and grandchildren fall into greater debt.
Perhaps the $25 a year increase can be sold as only 7 cents per day or one penny every 3.5 hours.
JQP
I don't think one can negotiate the pension benefits. They are guaranteed by the Constitution not to be diminished and the benefit level set by statute.
It's not the $25, it's a question of transparency and efficiency in government. If the council could financially manage the city in an open and effective way, they would have the support of the residents and the need for $25 more wouldn't be an issue. It's a question of re-earning the trust of the electorate.
In regard to pensions, I think there are two ways available to the city to bring the costs down:
1) Lower the salaries on which the pensions are based. This can be done for employees in any pension plan.
2) Renegotiate union contracts to change the retirement ages, pension benefit levels, etc. This can be done for the NPD and NFD pensions, but not, I think, for the IMRF.
Of course both of these are much more easily said than done.
-JQP
Chris, you are correct. All of the governmental pensions are controlled by state statute and the Department of Insurance, except for the actual decision to invest the funds once collected. The state dictates how much to collect from the employees, how much to collect through taxes, and how much the pension benefits are.
Chris,
Briefly so as not to start any further talk, the state has rules on pensions to which the city is bound. However, since the pension obligation is based on pay, each city can control the amount of new future pension obligations by negotiating a pay scale which better takes the pension into account. (Lower pay = lower pension obligations). So while Naperville does not control the state law, it does take part in the contract negotiations with the groups getting pensions.
The city may also be interested in how the Police Pension Board (2 mayoral appointees, 2 active fund participants, and one beneficiary) chooses fund managers. The FF board composition is a little different, although there the composition appears in favor of the present and future beneficiaries also(40 ILCS 5/4‑121).
-1
We had a column in the paper recently (it may have been Wednesday's paper) where the writer said the pension funding was controlled by the state, and that Naperville's top legislative priority is to change this policy. It sounds to me like the city doesn't control the money it spends on pensions, despite all the rhetoric that has been posted on here to the contrary.
Anne E is exactly right, the City and the Schools simply need to become realistic in the way they spend the taxpayers money. I don't know anyone who isn't willing to pay an extra $25 if it will help maintain the Cities superior services or educational opportunities, but most of us do want to be sure that we are getting our monies worth, and that it isn't being wasted or spent foolishly. Government offices in general tend to spend whatever they have - when times are good they build empires per se, and are hesitant to give up what they have created when the times call for it. I hope that the study the City contracted for has uncovered some of this, and that the cuts they are thinking of making reflect that. If a person or position has been completely non-productive for a significant amount of time, it needs to be eliminated regardless of whose power structure is rattled or how uncomfortable it might be to make that call. Services are very important, maintaining the status quo is not. I hope that what we see going forward is a very real effort by both the City Council, and City Management to maintain a high standard of City Service, without concern for ego or maintenance of what they built which is no longer a necessary function.
I think it's CRIMINAL to raise taxes during this recession. This is especially true considering the fact that property taxes are already in outerspace in Naperville. The real truth, I suspect, is that the council is too lazy to renegotiate the city's pension benefits, further reduce planned new construction projects, or use some imagination in promoting efficiency. I'll be remembering this on the next election day.
I agree with idea that our city council has to have some accountability for their spending. I, too, feel there is a lot of fluff and that it's time for them to tighten the purse strings just like many taxpayers are doing.
I hate to see how this economy is affecting the elderly. They seem to be forgotten. I'm talking about the people who have lived in Naperville for a long time, worked their whole lives, and are now living on a pension, a portion of a pension, or are still working because they can't afford to retire. Their property taxes have escalated. The proposed health care plans basically do nothing for the elderly. Is society telling them they are expendable?
It's not an issue of whether or not another $25.00 will put someone on the street. The sad issue is that our local governing bodies like to spend spend spend on the stupidest things that give crappy ROIs.
Then, to cover up the ineptness, they 'threaten' to cut vital services which can be more than paid for if they simply stopped the binge spending and could have been paid for with far less tax money.
It is a disappointment to think of any increase at this time, but there is also the reality of "one foot in front of the other" and working on all sides toward getting through this difficult time. Will $25.00 put someone out of their home? Probably not. Will the expected 1 million in additional taxes collected help Naperville's deficit? Marginally. It's a two way street to get to a solution. I would like to see the city continue to evaluate and review systems, spending and cuts, positions that could be cut if they are really able to be done by fewer staff. We would all have great compassion for those that are cut, but going forward it's what many companies and municipalities need to do. We should not expect to bounce back to a time when spending and increases in salaries and staff are expected and the norm. As a society I feel it's time to be more careful in all areas, even with a recovering economy.
Now, $25.00 with additional increases from the state, federal and school systems will add up, no question. I agree with posters on the previous thread stating that the school systems really need to also get on the re-evaluation bandwagon. These two school boards have been criticized for years and yet have they made changes on behalf of their communities and residents? Do test scores reflect the millions in spending and building increases? Things have happened between 203 and 204 in the past years that I believe could have really been handled more carefully. We have many topics in the archives about this.
I would like to see those that collect my money spend it as carefully as I do myself, at home and with my business. Is that so difficult? Put a face on the funds and realize that it's your neighbor that pays for your whims, kids. And, vote, no one is keeping us from voting.