Friday, November 24, 2006

House Keeping

We're moving!

Well, not really. Everything here at the Truth Detector will remain the same, but we are moving our Home Page web site to www.woodfordtaxfacts.org.

The old site, at www.woodfordtaxfacts.com will remain up and running for a few weeks and eventually will just point over to the new site anyway, so this shouldn't cause any major problems.

We believe the Domain change from .Com to .Org better reflects our non-profit status. The new site also enables a few bells and whistles which our previous server prevented.

If you receive the Truth Detector Newsletter, you will notice the sending address has changed. You might want to ensure it isn't flagged by your anti-spam filter. (You can sign up for the news letter at the site, or just email us).

Continue to forward your much appreciated suggestions!

"Eureka Park District" WannaBes Meet


Recently seventeen folks got together at the Eureka City hall to discuss how to best proceed with the creation of a new taxing district.

The Legal Record says that Tiera Darnall-Charlton of Secor, who ran unsuccessfully for the Woodford County Board in the Republican primary, "was chosen chair of the 'committee".

Why someone that lives in Secor and works in Bloomington would chair a committee for a Eureka park is a puzzlement. Is that how big this proposed tax district is going to be? We think not, but these folks seem to believe that a taxing authority encompassing essentially what is the CUSD #140 area might fly.

Unspecified "Eureka city officials" have said without the formation of a park district, out-of-city program participants might be forced to pay additional park usage fees in the near future. So, let's see . . . we can pay extra fees or have a Park District taxing authority? We choose the extra fees, thanks very much.

Others in this committee's rogues gallery apparently include EYRA president Bill Schulz (president of the Eureka Youth Recreation Association), Gerald Moxley(athletics?), Sherry Silverthorn(Tri-County Planning Commission?) and Jerry Babbs(CUSD #140?).

Hold on to your wallets, folks.

Woodford County Unemployment Drops; Illinois' Lowest Rate


Economist Dr. Arthur Laffer (the "Laffer Curve") was on the radio the other day talking about the current state of the U.S. and world economies. In the course of his discussions he made an interesting and basic analysis of the unemployment rate in the U.S. and average or median wages (for this example, take your pick).

Many decry that wages aren't growing at a faster rate. Laffer says with virtual full employment that's what you'll have because previously unemployed workers enter the statistical base and lower the average. He says, "Which would you rather have though, an unemployed worker or one that is employed with an entry wage? He maintains that slowing or static wages is GOOD! (as long as unemployment is low).

But we digress. Unemployment in Central Illinois, while likely to tick up over winter as always (due to construction jobs) dropped again.

McLean County tallied a 2.7 percent jobless rate last month, down from 3 percent in September. McLean County tied with DuPage, Moultrie and Piatt counties.

The national jobless rate in October was 4.4 percent, slightly above the Illinois rate of 4.1 percent.

Woodford and Brown counties had the lowest rate, at 2.5 percent in October. Woodford County posted a 2.8 percent rate in September.

DeWitt and Ford counties' unemployment each dropped from 3.6 percent in September to 3.2 percent last month.

LaSalle County's jobless rate dropped from 4.5 percent to 4.3 percent in October.

Unemployment decreased in Livingston County to 3.2 percent, from 3.7 percent in September.

In Logan County, unemployment fell from 4.1 percent in September to 3.7 percent in October.

Tazewell County's unemployment rate dropped from 3.4 percent to 3.2 percent in October.

Thursday, November 23, 2006

President's Thanksgiving Proclamation


As Americans gather with family and friends to celebrate Thanksgiving Day, we give thanks for the many ways that our nation and our people have been blessed.

The Thanksgiving tradition dates back to the earliest days of our society, celebrated in decisive moments in our history and in quiet times around family tables. Nearly four centuries have passed since early settlers gave thanks for their safe arrival and pilgrims enjoyed a harvest feast to thank God for allowing them to survive a harsh winter in the New World. General George Washington observed Thanksgiving during the Revolutionary War, and in his first proclamation after becoming President, he declared November 26, 1789, a national day of "thanksgiving and prayer." During the Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln revived the tradition of proclaiming a day of thanksgiving, reminding a divided nation of its founding ideals.

At this time of great promise for America, we are grateful for the freedoms guaranteed by our Constitution and defended by our armed forces throughout the generations. Today, many of these courageous men and women are securing our peace in places far from home, and we pay tribute to them and to their families for their service, sacrifice, and strength. We also honor the families of the fallen and lift them up in our prayers.

Our citizens are privileged to live in the world's freest country, where the hope of the American dream is within the reach of every person. Americans share a desire to answer the universal call to serve something greater than ourselves, and we see this spirit every day in the millions of volunteers throughout our country who bring hope and healing to those in need. On this Thanksgiving Day, and throughout the year, let us show our gratitude for the blessings of freedom, family, and faith, and may God continue to bless America.

Now, therefore, I, George W. Bush, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim Thursday, November 23, 2006, as a National Day of Thanksgiving. I encourage all Americans to gather together in their homes and places of worship with family, friends, and loved ones to reinforce the ties that bind us and give thanks for the freedoms and many blessings we enjoy.

In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand this sixteenth day of November, in the year of our Lord two thousand six, and of the independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-first.

George W. Bush

Wednesday, November 22, 2006

More On "Hyper-Local" Governance


Because it is an extremely important issue (and perhaps due to recent federal and state elections portend no tax solutions there) some follow up on the discussion here will continue to be forthcoming.

There was a four part series in the Herald & Review last June/July called "Big Government" which discussed at length Illinois' penchant for multitudinous taxing authorities. (Unfortunately it appears to no longer be available online.) It pointed out that Illinois has some 8,500 units of government - the most in the country. Pennsylvania is second with around 2,100.

As we've seen, there are those that applaud this feeling that it brings democracy and accountability closer to the citizen. In theory, this seems correct. However, it does not take into account the complexity which this system has bred. There is a fascinating summary of the Herald & Review's articles here:


Public must take lead to cut surplus government

A FOUR-PART series in the Herald & Review, "Big Government," ends today. The series examined the large number of local governmental units we have in Illinois, its effects and what can be done about it.

Two conclusions can be drawn from the series.

First, there is a need to study the issue of how to reduce the number of governmental bodies, not only statewide, but in Macon County. But this issue deserves more than study. It also deserves action.

Second, change will not be easy and will have to come from the voters.

As the series pointed out, Illinois has nearly 8,500 units of local government. That's easily the most in the nation; Pennsylvania is second with about 2,000 fewer units of government.

Macon County alone has about 170 taxing districts, not including 63 drainage districts.

The problems with this system are obvious. First, it grossly inefficient. Second, it's costly. Third, it doesn't serve the public well at all.

There are those who say the numerous units of government are a good thing - that it brings democracy and government service closer to the people.

Really? Quickly, name your township supervisor? Who do you call if you have a mosquito problem? Know anyone at the local mosquito abatement district? Got a drainage issue? Know anyone at one of the county's 63 drainage districts?

OK. Now name the mayor of Chicago. The truth is Richard Daley is more accountable to the people he serves than most other local government officials.

The system of government is so complex that in some cases, taxpayers are paying twice for the same service. Some residents in Long Creek, for example, pay for fire protection from the city of Decatur and the Long Creek Fire Protection District. The only way to get out of paying twice for the same service is to go to court - a process that can cost hundreds of dollars in legal fees.

How democratic is that? How sensible is that? Is that serving the public?

The fact is, multiple units of government make it more difficult for citizens to get their problems solved.

The multiple units also have to be frustrating for developers who want to build new houses or create jobs in a community. Can you imagine trying to wade through the many governmental bodies necessary to get that kind of work done?

The system is also expensive.

"Each one takes a bite of the tax apple," said former Decatur Mayor Terry Howley, a proponent of studying unified government. The bites may be mere nibbles, but they add up.

Although a study by the Indiana Policy Review Foundation concluded that cutting taxes was usually not the result of consolidation attempts, we have to believe that Illinois would be different. With so many taxing bodies - each with overhead - tax savings would have to be a part of the equation.

The lack of tax savings in consolidation attempts also says more about government than it does about consolidation. A business consolidation almost always includes programs to increase customer service and reduce costs. We have not seen that sort of objective in many government consolidations.

Any logical person would look at the Illinois system of local government and conclude there has to be a better way. So, why hasn't anything been done?

The answer is simple. Leaders in each of these local governments receive a salary, giving each a vested interest in maintaining the status quo. "In many cases, you've got too many chiefs and not enough Indians, and the chiefs don't want to become Indians," Howley said.

It's clear there is little momentum toward reducing the number of governmental units. The Illinois General Assembly approved a commission to study the issue nearly a year ago. But the commission hasn't met because Gov. Rod Blagojevich hasn't made any appointments to the group.

In an administration where an education plan can be thrown together in a matter of days to answer a potential political opponent, the lack of action on government consolidation shows a lack of interest.

But there also is a lack of interest locally. Although there is a degree of cooperation among local officials, it isn't normal operating procedure. All governments, for example, are facing increased health care costs, but none of the governmental units have discussed working together on the issue.

It's clear change is only going to happen if voters demand it. One expert quoted in the series said it would take a catastrophe - government going bankrupt - for change to occur.

But change can happen before a catastrophe, if the voters demand it. Think taxes are too high? Demand that elected officials quit paying lip service and do something about the state's number of governmental units.

Macon County can't wait for Illinois to take action. One way to transform government in the county is to put forth a reform plan that will reduce the size of government and lower taxes. A good start would be to consolidate all of the various taxing districts into at least the township level. Secondary steps would be to incorporate township functions into the county; look seriously at a consolidation of law enforcement agencies; merge the Decatur Park District with the city of Decatur.

Nothing will happen if we wait for governmental leaders. The voters must demand reform or forever be faced with a governmental system that is inefficient and expensive.


Woodford County Sex Offenders


After the recent WHOI News piece on Peoria and Bloomington sex offenders living near the schools we thought it appropriate to list just the Woodford County information from the Illinois State Police site:



25 Offenders found. Page of 1
Name Address City


ADKINSON, CHRISTOPHER LEE
Sexual Predator
1945 MADISON ST LOWPOINT 61545


ALEXANDER, KEVIN L
Sexual Predator
351 OLD GERMANTOWN EAST PEORIA 61611


ALLEN, GREGORY
Sexual Predator
205 HILLSIDE DR EAST PEORIA 61611


ARMSTRONG, ERIC
57 W 4TH
Apt. C
EL PASO 61738


ATKINS, RICKY H
Sexual Predator
206 1ST SOUTH ST KAPPA 61738


BRASSARD, RICHARD P
1787 COUNTY RD 2900E MINONK 61760


CRAWFORD, ERIC F
Sexual Predator
120 CHERRY LN EAST PEORIA 61611


DANNER, MICHAEL R
Sexual Predator
243 E TEN MILE CREE EAST PEORIA 61611


DOSS, LESTER C
Sexual Predator
399 N COUNTY RD 1125E DEER CREEK 61733


GALE, CHRISTOPHER L
Sexual Predator
206 S GARFIELD WASHBURN 61570


HARSHBARGER, JOHN
111 W NICHOLS SECOR 61771


KOCH, DANIEL C
Sexual Predator
207 N FRANKLIN ROANOKE 61561


LOVINGS, ROBERT L
Sexual Predator
201 E FIELD ST SECOR 61771


NIBBELIN, PAUL W
90 S RIVERVIEW EAST PEORIA 61611


RIDGEWAY, DAVID RAY
506 E SMYTH ST SECOR 61771


RODRIGUEZ, NOE F
1378 HICKORY HILLS METAMORA 61548


SCHAFFER, SCOTT ROBERT
Sexual Predator
100 N DOUGLAS
Apt. B
EL PASO 61738


SCHEER, EMERSON L
131 W WALNUT MINONK 61760


SECKLER, NICK E
1794 CENTER ST CAZENOVIA 61545


SMITH, TIMOTHY A
252 S GRIMM RD CONGERVILLE 61729


STRIEDER, JEFFREY SCOTT
Sexual Predator
1353 N FORREST DR METAMORA 61548


SURRATT, GARLAND E
104 SUSAN LN METAMORA 61548


UNDERWOOD, CHARLES M
Sexual Predator
816 JEFFERSON ST MINONK 61760


WILLIAMSON, GILL E
13 BIRCH CT GOODFIELD 61742


WINKLER, BRANDON MICHAEL
109 E PARTRIDGE ST METAMORA 61548

Tuesday, November 21, 2006

Remember Woodford County's "40 Acres" and a mewl?


There is apparently a Champaign County Board meeting tonight on "Township Boundary changes". That seems to be code for land use restrictions on a County-wide basis.This should sound familiar to property owners of Woodford County as we dealt with it a year ago. From a poster over at the IlliniPundit:

“This issue of preserving prime farmland by relinquishing the owner’s property rights is a huge issue. How would you like to be a landowner and have your county board dictate new zoning regulations that restrict your ability to sell off home sites? Ten years ago a one acre home site was legal by right. Today the new zoning text amendments are proposing to restrict the landowner to one lot per forty acres with a maximum of four additional lots per tax parcel.

Here’s an example; if you owned sixty acres you could have a minimum six, possibly more home sites. If the new regs went through, you would be limited to one home site. How can the county board even consider doing this to the citizens of this county?

Especially when you see that the loss of farm land is not a big issue outside the urban sprawl of CU. CU is the culprit, not the rural landowners."

Brush up on the information because this issue will not go away quietly in Woodford County. Certain Board factions will be back again with something this next year.

[ UPDATE - 11/22/06]:

There was a large turnout for Champaign County's meeting and the ordinances will not be changed - for now; demonstrates what citizen turn-out can do at local meetings.

Is NEA Reading Its Own Research?

Fom our good friends over at the Education Intelligence Agency:


Last week, the National Education Association released its latest edition of Rankings & Estimates with the headline: "Teachers Take 'Pay Cut' as Inflation Outpaces Salaries." The subhead reads: "NEA President Warns Students Pay the Price with High Teacher Turnover."


I suppose it's hopeless to point out that NEA mistakes cause for effect. "High teacher turnover" means high-paid teachers retire and are replaced by low-paid rookies, thereby reducing the growth in the "average" salary. If I have two teachers earning $70,000 each, and one retires and I replace her with a teacher earning $35,000, the average salary has been reduced by 25 percent, but that's hardly an argument for a hike in pay.


But there's an even bigger reason why the average teacher salary doesn't rise to reflect the amount taxpayers are sinking into public education. NEA's own research provides it, but the union's self-interest prevents it from highlighting it in any context whatsoever.


America continues to hire armies of teachers.

EIA has illustrated this before, but public appear to school district hiring and firing practicesbear no relationship to the one factor that should drive them: student enrollment.


According to NEA's own estimates, student enrollment in the United States will grow this school year by a total of 349,452 students (0.7 percent). The number of classroom teachers is expected to grow by 62,443 (2.0 percent). That, my friends, is one new teacher for every 5.5 new students.


That's not even the most ridiculous statistic. Most of the enrollment growth is in secondary school, as the last of the Baby Boomers' children work their way through high school. Secondary school enrollment is expected to grow by 1.4 percent, while the number of secondary school teachers is expected to grow by only 1.0 percent.

Elementary school enrollment is expected to grown by only 88,595 students (0.3 percent), but we're planning to hire 49,965 more elementary school teachers (2.8 percent). That's one new K-8 teacher for every 1.8 new K-8 students.


This simply cannot be sustained. It's not beyond the realm of possibility that someday soon the marginal increase in teachers – in actual numbers, not percentage - will exceed the marginal increase in students.


This is not a new problem. In the last 10 years, elementary enrollment increased by a total of 4.2 percent. But the number of elementary school teachers increased by 19.1 percent.


Is any of this sinking in? I don't know, but last week's newspapers were filled with "surprising" enrollment figures from all across the country:

* "Florida school enrollment far below projection"

* "HISD enrollment down by 7,000 for fall semester" (Houston)

* "Traditional schools in DPS up 2 pupils" (Denver)

* "San Diego Unified, like many districts throughout California, is in a chronically declining enrollment phase."


Average salary increases will always appear smaller when spread among a growing number of employees. Once hired, there is a significant "enrollment lag" before the size of the labor force reflects a decrease or slowing in student enrollment. Thanks to tenure protections, reducing the workforce generally can happen only two ways: retirement and layoff of probationary teachers. Or what some people might term "high teacher turnover." We'll see more of it in the coming years.


The emphases are our own.

Monday, November 20, 2006

Township Newsletter Example


Now here's an example of an Illinois Township keeping the folks in the loop via a newsletter and website.

Hyper-Local Government


We just had an interesting discussion with a friend regarding our rants against the proliferation of taxing authorities in Illinois and Woodford County.

He says, "Yes we have around 140 taxing districts in Woodford County. Ain't it great? That means the taxing is closer to the people and more accountable. The further consolidation that occurs and the further up the government ladder it goes - towards County and State - the more expensive and less responsive it becomes."

We said, "Yes, but the problem is that every taxing authority thinks their mission is the most important on earth!" The response? "Their mission is the most important. That's the way it's supposed to work. We, the voters, chose to set up a fire district, or an ambulance district, or build infrastructure. We thought we needed them!"

We're paraphrasing.

We were, as was the intention, stunned. This is a very attractive idea on the surface of it. After consideration it makes more and more sense. After all, keeping political power and decision making "close to the ground", so to speak, is incredibly desirable. We think conservatives and libertarians should probably sign on to this idea, with a few caveats.

One is that voters get their act together with regard to Township government in Woodford County and the property appraisal process. After all, this is what fills the various purses. There are too many elected appraiser slots unfilled. That doesn't mean no appraiser; just one that's not elected.

The townships need to do much better communicating to the public what they are doing. When's the last time you got a newsletter of notice of a meeting from your Township Board?

Transparency and accountability is a two-way street. The voter has the responsibility to be the ultimate insurer of local government's responsiveness.

Secondly, and perhaps this is the same thing - after those decisions to implement fire or police or ambulance taxing districts, there must be better oversight, reporting, and measurement of the performance of said authorities. The voters shouldn't necessarily have to beg to get this from those authorities which they themselves set up.

At this time of property tax extensions from the various bodies being revealed, it is appropriate that we examine the Townships more closely. This we shall endeavor to do in the next few weeks. Please feel free to chime in.

Thanksgiving Transcends Politics

Thanksgiving Transcends Politics

(Andrews in Denver Post 11/19, also Townhall.com 11/18)

Gloomy, dejected, defeated? Not this Republican. It’s Thanksgiving, and I have too much to be grateful for.

Yes, the Democrats elected a governor, gained legislative seats, and took Congress. Yes, our judicial term limits proposal lost, and few ballot issues went as I hoped. And no, the GOP currently doesn’t have the “got’em where we want’em” defiance of John Elway’s old Broncos.

So why am I not down? Because before I am a Republican I’m a conservative, and I am an American before that. At bedrock, prior to anything, I am on a lifetime enlistment as a servant of my Maker and a soldier of the Cross, poor though my example may be.

Through such eyes, the blue wave and red rout of Nov. 7 have no more finality than a chess king tipped over at game’s end. We’ll vow to do better next time, of course – but with light hearts in the joy of a world too bright for any election to darken.

The common-sense recognition that politics isn’t everything happens to be a distinctively American trait, just as Thanksgiving is a distinctively American holiday. The day’s occurrence so soon after votes are counted is helpful in reminding us what really matters. While congratulations are due Bill Ritter and all the winners, along with condolences to Rick O’Donnell and others who lost, this week is about giving thanks for the bigger picture.

We give thanks for constitutional government and democratic capitalism, the framework of liberty and law that has made these United States the freest, most prosperous, most open, most generous, most decent, and most powerful nation the world has ever seen. We hear the voice of conscience bidding Americans always use that power for good.

We give thanks for a stable, competitive, mutually respectful two-party system that forces consensus toward the center and fairly registers the people’s choice, so the trustees of power can be turned out when they lose touch or break faith – and the reins of authority can then be peacefully transferred. Much of the world lacks that.

We give thanks for the blessings of material abundance, opportunity, tolerance, innovation, cultural creativity, and the most optimistic educational system on earth, adding up to a magic escalator for group after group from marginal status to full participation in American life – minorities, women, immigrants, the disabled, who next? The striving of millions to come here isn’t just a policy problem, it’s an accolade to us.

We give thanks for living in the most religious nation in the world, a country where humanity’s restless search for God is unfettered by state-sponsored churches or compulsory worship, a country where much individual conduct is still regulated by the sense of moral obligation before an eternal Judge, allowing government’s hand to rest more lightly on our lives.

We give thanks for freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, and the right to petition the government for redress of grievances. This daring, exuberant, risk-defying openness gives our system an almost miraculous capacity for self-criticism, self-correction, and self-renewal. This is what doomed slavery and defeated communism. It makes tyranny unlikely here. It is the jewel of humility in America’s crown.

We give thanks for our families. Parents and spouses, babies and elders, siblings and kids, eccentric uncles and cousins, grandparents and grandchildren, foster and adoptive relatives, those difficult in-laws, that couple who fits no conventional definition but just undeniably belongs together, the “stray” at your Thanksgiving table who doesn’t need to be blood to have a place in your heart – what would we do without them? Family transcends all politics, thank heaven.

But consider the last phrase. When “Oh thank heaven” can become a convenience-store slogan, America’s problem isn’t theocracy, it’s superficiality. Too many of us bring only a Hallmark faith to Thursday’s national feast.

The mere attitude of gratitude is not enough. As the turkey is carved, remember that thanks are meaningless unless given TO someone – in this case to the Creator of all things. “Our fathers’ God to Thee, Author of liberty, to Thee we sing.” From our house to yours, happy Thanksgiving.

Posted by John Andrews in Andrews in Print

A happy and blessed Thanksgiving to all from Woodford Tax Facts.

Sunday, November 19, 2006

The French Have Some Sense


Charles De Gaulle:

"I have come to the conclusion that politics are too serious a matter to be left to the politicians."

Friday, November 17, 2006

Wind Full Of Hot Air for Farmington


The Farmington School District, Abingdon, Knoxville, Galesburg and ROWVA Districts, and Sandburg College spent $70,000 and a year of study time to figure out that local generation of power from wind wouldn't pay off.

The PJS article says:
Part of the study looked at the possibility of the schools sharing the benefits of a wind farm, but the cost of getting electricity to the different schools appears to have nullified potential cost savings.

Apparently they think they could get something working with grant money to the tune of around $2 millions per turbine. Uhhh-huuhh.

Any takers?

Electric Bill Savings


If you haven't looked at florescent lighting lately, you are in for a real treat. These energy savers used to be slow to light, dim, and huge. They now come in bright, compact (same size as your incandescents), "decorator", and even dimmable versions.

Regardless of what happens in Springfield in connection with the electrical rate "freeze" you can save some big bucks by switching.

At an electric rate of seven cents per kilowatt hour (kWh), using a 75 watt incandescent light bulb for 5 hours per day will cost $9.58 per year to run.

Replace it with a 20 watt compact fluorescent light bulb, the annual electricity cost will be $2.56.

That's a savings of $7.02 per year. Over the life of the bulb (6,000 hours is the lowest rated life for most compact fluorescents), the savings will total $38.50. That's $38.50 per bulb, folks!

Plus, and this is a big selling point for us, you don't have to change the things every couple of months like "regular" bulbs!

Thursday, November 16, 2006

More pay for all in Springfield



Even though they can't seem to find funding for paying Illinois' bills (like Medicare payments and pension contributions for down-state teachers), the General Assembly in Springfield didn't balk at giving themselves $5 millions a year in raises.

Here was the "hard work of the people":

Gov. from $150,700 to $165, 150

General Assembly from $57,600 to $63,150

Lt. Gov., Comptroller, Treasurer from $115,250 to $126,300

Att. General, Sec. of State from $133,000 to $145, 700

The vote also raised salaries for other top elected officials, including judges and states attorneys. At least they work full time and it's clear what they do to earn the dough. Salaries for those public officials vary, but many of them earn more than legislators. (this would indeed fall into the category of "unfunded mandates")

This is just bad, bad, bad.

School District 140 avoids "Truth in Taxation" - barely


Eureka-Congerville-Goodfield CUSD #140 is asking for around $270,000 more with their property tax extension levy this year versus last. That's about $165 per student enrolled.

The tax increase is around 4.3 %. Is it co-incidental that it comes in just under the 5% level which would trigger public hearings?

The District School Board would have us believe that there is no tax increase, because the tax rate won't change much, but as always, the budget and the extension tell the true story; not the rate, not the EAV, not abatements.

The Board is pocketing the tax rate ($4.48 per $100 EAV) multiplied by the increase in the value of property taxed. It's a built in budget increase every year for ALL taxing authorities.

Unfortunately, our property tax bill goes up no matter what they call it.

Some folks retort, "hey - your home is WORTH more! You should pay more."

We say something only has value when it is sold. Tax us then. Otherwise, you're taxing our savings and retirement - our assets, and we can't keep up. The CUSD 140 extension over the last ten years has doubled. And they, comparatively, do a GOOD job.

Wednesday, November 15, 2006

ComEd and Ameren monies plugged in




From the aforementioned Board of Elections site, these are 2006 to date contributions $10,000 and above:






Ameren PO Box 66892
St Louis, MO 63166
$20,000.00
10/12/2006
Individual Contribution
The Illinois Chamber Pac



Ameren P.O. Box 66892
Saint Louis, MO 63166
$10,000.00
5/2/2006
Individual Contribution
Friends of Blagojevich



Ameren P.O. Box 66892
Saint Louis, MO 63166
$15,000.00
10/30/2006
Individual Contribution
Friends of Blagojevich



Ameren PO Box 66892
St. Louis, MO 63166
$10,000.00
9/30/2006
Individual Contribution
Democratic Party of Illinois



Ameren PO Box 66892
St. Louis, MO 63166
$15,000.00
11/2/2006
Individual Contribution
Democratic Party of Illinois



Ameren 607 E. Adams Street
Springfield, IL 62739
$10,000.00
3/1/2006
Individual Contribution
Republican State Senate Campaign



Ameren 607 E. Adams Street
Springfield, IL 62739
$10,000.00
9/22/2006
Individual Contribution
Republican State Senate Campaign



Ameren P.O. Box 66892
St. Louis, MO 63166
$10,000.00
9/19/2006
Individual Contribution
Citizens to Elect Tom Cross



Ameren P.O. Box 66892
St. Louis, MO 63166
$10,000.00
2/27/2006
Individual Contribution
Citizens to Elect Tom Cross



Ameren P.O. Box 66892
St. Louis, MO 63166
$15,000.00
10/11/2006
Individual Contribution
Citizens for Emil Jones



Ameren P.O. Box 66892
St. Louis, MO 63166
$10,000.00
10/23/2006
Individual Contribution
Citizens for Emil Jones



Ameren 607 E. Adams St.
Mail Code C100
Springfield, IL 62739
$10,000.00
3/6/2006
Transfer In
Citizens for Frank Watson



Ameren P.O. Box 66892
St. Louis, MO 63166
$10,000.00
3/6/2006
Individual Contribution
House Republican Organization



Ameren PO Box 66892
St. Louis, MO 63166
$10,000.00
3/8/2006
Individual Contribution
Friends of Michael J Madigan



Ameren 607 East Adams
Springfield, IL 62739
$25,000.00
3/1/2006
Individual Contribution
Ameren IL PAC



Ameren PO Box 66892
St. Louis, MO 63166
$10,000.00
9/27/2006
Individual Contribution
Friends of Michael J Madigan



Ameren 607 E. Adams St.
Springfield, IL 62739
$15,000.00
3/7/2006
Individual Contribution
Illinois Senate Democratic Fund



Ameren 607 E. Adams St.
Springfield, IL 62739
$10,000.00
11/3/2006
Individual Contribution
Illinois Senate Democratic Fund


ComEd PAC 1 Financial Place 33rd FL.
Chicago, IL 60605
$14,000.00
9/18/2006
Transfer In
Citizens for Emil Jones



ComEdPAC 1 Financial Place 33rd FL
Chicago, IL 60605
$10,000.00
10/3/2006
Transfer In
Manufacturers PAC (MPAC)



ComEdPAC 1 Financial Place
33rd Floor
Chicago, IL 60605
$10,000.00
9/22/2006
Transfer In
Illinois Merchants PAC Team

ComEd looks cheap compared to Ameren, huh?

Today in the Illinois Senate we saw what PAC money did for the mimimum wage hike. We'll soon see how the Electic Rates come out.

S(c)hocked


While trolling through the campaign contributions at the Illinois State Board of Elections Campaign Disclosure site, we were a little surprised to find this last minute contribution to Citizens for Schock:

Khazzam, Alexis N

$16,000.00
11/2/2006


We were, frankly, also a little surprised at this one:

Illinois PAC for Education (IPACE)

$10,000.00
11/1/2006

seeing as how they usually fund Dems a little more heavily. A little further investigation reveals that Big Education did fund Republican candidates a little heavier this time around, but only if they were incumbents. Next to nothing went to Republican challengers. Interesting.

We will be posting some more numbers (what we were originally searching for) in the near future.

Peoria Chronicle Skewers PJS


Here's todays impalement of the Peoria Journal Star on its recent stand regarding the bonds for District 150:

Journal Star could use some remedial civics classes itself

Speaking of the Journal Star’s editorial yesterday, they sum up their case for PBC funding with this condescending paragraph:

But again, the primary criticism comes from those who’ve never quite come to grips with the fact that they live in a republic, not a direct democracy. Should District 150 regain its PBC connection, perhaps it should spend those funds constructing a building in which they teach civics, the lessons of which seem lost on a certain segment of the population.

Translation: if you’re against the school being able to get funding through the Public Building Commission (PBC), then you’re an ignorant boob in need of remedial education.

Maybe the editors of the Journal Star should attend those civics lessons instead. They can start by studying the words of Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence, where he says that governments “deriv[e] their just powers from the consent of the governed.” Thus, if the people don’t want the school board to have the power to spend tax money on new schools without a binding referendum, that is perfectly within the rights of the citizens of a republic.

Indeed, one needn’t throw out the school code or the Constitution, nor do they need to resort to direct democracy, in order to place reasonable limits on their representatives in our current form of government. In the case of the PBC, these limits already exist, and those who oppose PBC funding are not arguing for new legislation, but the status quo.

And since when is it the job of our legislators to represent other municipal corporations? Are Schock and Shadid representatives of the school board or the people? In this case, they’re acting as representatives of the school board, since the people clearly don’t consent to additional bonding authority being given.

And since the Journal Star thinks PBC funding should be available to all, why are they in favor of SB2477 which would only grant this bonding authority (a) for 5 years, and (b) only for Peoria Public School District 150? The Journal Star should be fundamentally opposed to this abridgment of our republic and advocate instead a bill that would completely repeal the 1993 law that stripped all school boards from using the PBC. Of course, such a bill would never pass the legislature, because it’s easier for representatives from elsewhere in Illinois to pass laws that don’t affect their constituents.

Here’s another civics lesson for the Journal Star: citizens of Illinois have the right under Illinois’ constitution “to make known their opinions to their representatives and to apply for redress of grievances.” In other words, voting our representatives out of office is not our only avenue for participation.