The Home Rule Referendum and City Ordinances

Earlier this year the City of Freeport received certified notice that the city's population had fallen below 25,000, triggering an Illinois Statute which requires the municipal clerk to place a referendum on the next general election ballot asking residents if they wish to remain a home rule unit.

Suddenly, now that home rule is a ballot issue subject to a forthcoming referendum, the Freeport City Council wants to "talk" about the vast and liberal powers home rule bestows upon the Freeport City Council.

Despite the fact the Freeport City Council has been using home rule powers very liberally for the past 30-years, they've never wished to discuss how home rule was being used until it became a referendum issue.  Tutty can only remember one time home rule was publicly discussed on the council floor in the past three decades.  That time was during the Jim Gitz administration when he, as Mayor, vetoed the budget brought forth by the council because it contained a home rule sales tax increase.  Mayor Gitz publicly proclaimed that he thought raising the sales tax without referendum approval was an improper use of home rule powers.

Now, suddenly the City Council is adamant amount discussing home rule authority, as a matter of fact, as part of the Strategic Plan being brought forward at the November 15, 2021 Council meeting using city resources for a "Home Rule Campaign" is part of the strategic plan.

What's more,  according to approved meeting minutes from the City Council's strategic planning sessions on September 10 and 11, "Protecting and promoting Home Rule....is important."

And then there are all the public utterances recorded during council meetings citing the importance of retaining home rule powers.

The Freeport City Council, and perhaps more importantly, their high-paid legal counsel from Rockford, do not seem to realize that it's very likely unlawful for the Freeport City Council to take a stand on a referendum issue. 

Did any member of the Freeport City Council or their attorney even consider these facts?  Has the attorney being paid by public dollars even bothered to review Freeport ordinances regarding the subject?  To Tutty, it appears not.  Here's why.

Chapter 218 of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Freeport is meant to keep the Freeport City Council from using their official duties and our tax dollars to play politics and is vividly clear. 

Chapter 218 defines "Prohibited political activity" as "Campaigning for any elective office or for or against any referendum question." as well as "Managing or working on a campaign for elective office or for or against any referendum question."  Among many other things.  Tutty would encourage, the Freeport City Council, the Mayor, the City Manager and their attorney to familiarize themselves with the City of Freeport's Codified Ordiances.

Tutty sure wants to know how the City Council plans on "Protecting and promoting"  home rule and not be in violation of local ordinance and state statute.  Will the Council also hold a vote to endorse congressional candidates?

Last Spring our state's attorney as well as our state senator and representative went crazy with public pronouncements at the mere complaint of electioneering.  How is this not a clear violation of Freeport City ordinances as a public body is blatantly using public resources to "protect and promote" a referendum issue.

Also of note,  Chapter 218 also states that "A person who intentionally violates any provision of Section 218.02 may be punished by a term of incarceration in a penal institution other than a penitentiary for  period of not more than 364 days, and may be fined in an amount not to exceed two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500).

So perhaps the mayor and city council might want to think long and hard before officially approving any documents claiming to support a "Home Rule Campaign".  

As always, yours in honesty, Tutty Baker, tutty.baker@gmail.com 

Facts or Fiction about Home Rule in Freeport, Illinois?

Since learning that the certified population of Freeport, Illinois has fallen below the 25,000  threshold the Freeport City Council has publicly talked more about home rule the fast few months than in all the preceding 30-years, despite using the vast powers of home rule regularly and liberally.

A year from now, at the general election, Freeporters will be voting on whether or not they want to remain an Illinois' home rule unit of government.  As such it will be imperative for citizens to have credible and accurate information about the topic at hand.

Our current city manager has been seen on Rockford TV news and has written an article for the City of Freeport Newsletter for November on the topic of home rule.  In both these instances Freeport City Manager Randy Bukas has purported that losing home rule would cause the city to lose the sales taxes that the city council has created without referendums.  According to the city manager, this will cause property taxes to rise.  Here is an excerpt from Manager Bukas' column from the city newsletter.

First, Tutty, and the public at large deserve a more authoritative source than the current city manager.  Maybe this is true, maybe it is not, but in either instance the public should know how and why.

Second, Manager Bukas implies that property taxes will rise.  How will this happen?  Stephenson County voters approved the Property Tax Extension Limitation Law (PTELL) many moons ago.  PTELL limits how much local units of government can raise property taxes.  Because the City of Freeport is home rule they have not been bound by PTELL.  Losing home rule would cause the City Council to be bound by the same property tax laws as every other unit of local government and school district wholly contained within Stephenson County. 

What's more, if the citizens actually see a need for more revenue the Freeport Council could hold a real referendum and ask the public themselves how they feel.  Despite the fact Freeport has a page full of taxes and a mountain of public debt, there has not been one binding referendum on a tax and spend issue in Freeport in 40-years, thanks completely to home rule powers.

Third, in 1992 the Freeport City Council used home rule to create the property transfer tax.  Many other home rule municipalities had or did create similar taxes.  This caused the Illinois' realtor lobby to push for a change in state statute which would preempt the power of home rule units to create such taxes.  Just because the law has changed to now require a referendum to create such a tax, Freeport did not lose the ability to enforce a previously enacted tax.

The citizens of Freeport need authoritative answers to numerous questions, most of which the city manager alone is not equipped to handle.  Of course he wants home rule, what city manager wouldn't?  Home rule has been a financial get out jail free card for the Freeport City Council for the last 30-years.

Can citizens of Freeport count on the City Council to get us authoritative answers to these questions and many others?  What do you think.

As always, yours in honesty, tutty.baker.gmail.com 

"A Government Works Best When it Values Citizen Input" Really?

Most every registered voter in this vicinity received a mailing, at taxpayer expense, from State Representative Andrew Chesney, a Republican residing within Freeport.

Representative Chesney's oversized postcard urged his constituents to take a survey and noted that "A government works best when it values citizen input."  Here is a photo of the pertinent part of the mailing.

Tutty agrees wholeheartedly with our state representative, citizen input should not only be valued, it should be the driving factor behind the operations of any unit of local government, especially locally.

That said, can Tutty and his fellow citizens expect our representative to come out against retaining home rule power for the City of Freeport?  Clearly--and Representative Chesney has first hand knowledge--the City of Freeport has used home rule every way possible to completely exclude "citizen input" from the decision making process.

Without home rule Freeport would have a general obligation debt limit of  8.625% of its present equalized assessed valuation. (1)  Home rule units, because they have the power to tax, have no debt limit, therefore the Freeport City Council blew through this debt limit several years ago.

And not one single dollar of Freeport's massive debt load came as the result of a referendum of the taxpayers.  Not one single dollar.

Because of home rule the Freeport City Council  can not only borrow money without a referendum.  They also use home rule to skirt the requirements of Bond Issue Notification Act and don't even provide formal notice to Freeport citizens that they are borrowing money.

Now that Freeport's population is officially certified to be below 25,000 the "municipal clerk shall certify for submission to the voters of the municipality at the next  general election following such determination of population, in the manner provided by the general election law, the proposition of whether the municipality shall elect not to be a home rule unit" 65 ILCS 5/1-1-9.  This is the first time since Illinois adopted the Constitution of 1970 that a home rule municipality has fallen below this threshold, activating the cited statute. 

If Representative Chesney really wants to lead by example why does he not move to modify the Bond Issue Notification Act to preempt the power of home rule units? The General Assembly has the power.  Then, at the least, the City Council would have to provide himself and his fellow citizens with notice that they are borrowing money against our ability to pay taxes.

This is a perfect opportunity for Representative Chesney to walk his talk and to prove to his constituency that he,  and his fellow Republicans in Stephenson County actually do believe in limited government influence over our lives.

As always, yours in honesty, Tutty Baker tutty.baker@gmail.com

1) Home Rule and Intergovernmental Cooperation and Conflict, Kurt P. Froehlich, 2000, Illinois Institute for Continuing Legal Education.

Is Freeport's Mayor An Honest Advocate for Voting?

Tutty about choked on his coffee Sunday morning reading the column written by Freeport Mayor Jodi Miller and appearing in The Journal Standard.

Mayor Miller wrote that "Voting provides us with a voice in building the city, state and the country we want to live in..." The mayor continued from her sanctioned soap box, "I believe that every eligible resident has the opportunity to participate and make your voice heard through your vote."

If our mayor feels this way, why does she sit back and say nothing when the city manager proposes using home rule authority to bypass referendum requirements on tax and spend issues?

Since 1992, if you take an honest look, the City of Freeport (mayors, city council members, city managers; collectively known "the corporate authority) have taken dozens of actions that if Freeport were not home rule would have required referendum approval.  There would of had to have been at least one referendum thus far in 2021 if not more.

In the mayor's defense, and it's not a good defense, like most members of the corporate authority she probably has very little understanding when an action is dependent upon home rule powers and when it is not. Just this past Monday they did a deed transfer that would have been illegal for a non-home rule unit of local government. Tutty surmises that not one city council member understands why, this type of naivety makes the council ripe for city manager manipulation.

None, zero, nada, of Freeport's corporate authority over the last thirty years has shown Tutty an ability to govern without home rule.  Need a new tax or couple million dollars?  No problem.  "We're home rule, we'll just borrow millions of dollars and then create a new tax to pay for it all and the best thing is, we don't even have to provide the governed with official notice."

There was a time during one of the terms of the administration of Mayor Jim Gitz wherein the city council passed a budget that included raising Freeport's sales tax, an action that would require referendum approval in a non-home rule community.  Mayor Gitz vetoed the budget, suggesting cuts in spending and claiming that he thought using home rule to raise the sales tax without a referendum was an improper use of this broad power.  The council, some of whom don't even live in Freeport anymore, overrode the mayor's veto and raised Freeport's sales tax.

Freeport's purported city "leaders" are always quick to talk about the benefits of home rule yet none, zero, nada, ever talk about how home rule has been used as a club over the head of Freeport citizens for three decades now.  The message coming from the corporate authority has always been "we're going to do this and you're going to pay for it, like it or not."

Another problem, home rule has effectively alienated rank and file residents.  If Freeport had arrived at this point, huge amounts of public debt and a plethora of taxes to cover the same, by referendums rather than by a vote of the city council, don't you think residents would have more ownership in the problems we face?  As it stands now everything is in the lap of the corporate authority and today's city council, mayor and city manager are as responsible as all those who have come before.  That's the law for a public body operating under perpetual succession. 

I guess Tutty would really like to know if Mayor Jodi Miller is a true advocate for voting rights and honestly believes that "The right to vote freely and fairly is sacred to our nation's character." 

How about it Mayor Miller?  How has excluding Freeport voters from every tax and spend issue of the last thirty years affected Freeport's character and is that affect positive or negative?

As always, yours in honesty, Tutty Baker tutty.baker@gmail.com

Proper Use of COVID Relief Funds?

For Tutty, the saddest part of the Stephenson County Board's proposal to build water and sewer for a public utility owned by the City of Freeport is knowing how many more things this money could be used for that would actually benefit residents of Stephenson County and Freeport rather than spending millions of dollars on something just not necessary.

Tutty is somewhat familiar with the rules regarding this federal money coming courtesy of the American Rescue Plan Act, known as ARPA funding.  There are 36-pages of triple-column text regarding how this funding may be used.

Using this money for a speculative economic development project is clearly not what these funds were designed to provide.

How many lead water service lines are there yet in Stephenson County?  This money could be used to assess the water systems throughout Stephenson County and upgrade the places found to be most problematic.  How many problems within Stephenson County communities could be addressed with this funding rather than funding a project that's just not necessary?  Replacing lead service lines is constantly cited as a priority in the rules mentioned above.  This issue, because of the inherent public health risks for children,  should rank far above an unnecessary and speculative economic development project.

The City of Freeport itself has no business building out a water and sewer system that is constantly under duress.  How can you fight a major fire in the Arcade neighborhood with four-inch water mains?  Our water and sewer system in Tutty's Town has needs that will not be addressed by making the system larger.  Especially in an area where there are so very few potential new users.

The money could be used to expand broad band internet across our rural county, do some things that are an actual benefit for our friends and neighbors.  Just do a few Google searches and see what other counties in Illinois are doing with ARPA funds to benefit their residents.

It's so sad, before any county board members or city council member even had a chance to look around their neighborhoods and assess their local needs, the Greater Freeport Partnership hijacked any potential talk of using this money for anything more than a pie-in-the-sky economic development project.

They've been holding secret meetings closed to members of the Stephenson County Board and Freeport City Council, much less the general public.  There are no meeting minutes or official calculations to review of how they arrived at their $6 million figure.  Tutty believes that figure has no basis in any actual calculation of cost, that number was simply used to induce an affirmative vote from the Stephenson County Board and now the Freeport City Council.

Basically, the Greater Freeport Partnership is being used as end run around Illinois statutes that require openness of government, while the county board and city council, shrug their shoulders.

Other communities in Stephenson County should be as much the beneficiaries of these funds, they could be better used to upgrade the water and sewer systems in Stephenson County that currently exist.  Surely there are some areas that are under duress and could use some attention.  The existing population needs their necessities much more than an unnecessary build out of Freeport water and sewer lines.

Can you imagine that?  A Stephenson County Board and a Freeport City Council that actually put their constituents in front of the Greater Freeport Partnership and what is nothing more than a speculative (at best) project that could very easily do more to shovel another scoop of dirt on top of Freeport than remedy any current problem.  And that is terribly sad in Tutty's opinion.

As always, yours in honesty, Tutty Baker, tutty.baker@gmail.com

A $25 Million Public Expenditure Drawn Up on a Napkin

The paragraph that follows is an excerpt from a memo to the Freeport City Council regarding a proposed intergovernmental agreement with Stephenson County (hereinafter referred to as the "IGA") that, if approved, would result in the largest build out of water and sewer in Freeport's history. All the way in to the Forrestville Valley School District.

 "City staff and the Mayor have had several discussions with County representatives on extending our utilities to Mill Race.  The planned route  would go down Lamm road.  I have reviewed the draft IGA and Recapture Agreement with Mark Williams and Adam Holder.  The county attorney drafted the document and the County Board has formally approved it."

First off, Freeport Water and Sewer is a public utility essentially owned by the users of the system.  We all need potable water and the ability to flush our toilets.  And in Freeport it costs about  five-times as much for water and sewer as it did 20-years ago.

Apparently, for the Stephenson County Board and the Freeport City Council "several discussions"  behind closed doors at the Greater Freeport Partnership is good enough reason to justify the expenditure of $25 million on what is little more than speculation at best.
 
Tutty has been told "it won't cost that much"... well, if it's not going to cost $25 million then tell the owners of the public utility exactly how many fire hydrants will be required and what will be the water flow rate (necessary for assessing fire insurance) at each, how many man hole covers will be required , what about lift stations?  This buildout will pass through some of the lowest land in Stephenson County.

The IGA claims (Section 5c) "that the terms of this Agreement are the result of ongoing and extensive negotiations between the Parties, both of whom are represented by independent counsel and that this Agreement is a compilation of said negotiations."

Funny,  Manager Bukas' "several discussions" have now become "extensive negotiations"

Let's also keep in mind that these "extensive negotiations" have all been conducted not only out of public view, but out of the view of the Stephenson County Board and the Freeport City Council.  For these public bodies to allow this is nothing less than pathetic.

Who were the county negotiators and how were they chosen?   No one on the county board represents anymore than a single district.  When was it decided and who decided what attorney Stephenson County was going to hire and is it legal to hire an attorney to represent Stephenson County without full board approval?  These are not decisions which should be made by three guys drawing it up on napkin behind the backs of both the Stephenson County Board and the Freeport City Council.  Tutty just doesn't see this as responsible local government.

But that's exactly what is happening here.  There are no formal plans to review, therefore there can be nothing close to an actual known cost.  With what Tutty knows, Tutty says it will cost at least $25 million for water and sewer to Mill Race Crossing.  And without an actual feasibility study there is no way possible for the Freeport City Council to determine the type of risk they are taking with our public utility.  It could very easily be more than $25 million for as much as Mayor Miller and the Freeport Council actually know and can prove up.

And if you're wondering what will occur when there are cost over runs, all the IGA states is the project will be "at a cost anticipated to be in excess of six million dollars" which anyone half-way familiar with water and sewer infrastructure would know is a laughable number--used here to induce a positive vote from both the Stephenson County Board and the Freeport City Council.  This number, $6 million, is nothing more than fiction and it's irresponsible for any public official or attorney to claim otherwise,.

What will happen when the County runs out of money before the project is complete?  Stephenson County will just be able to use the City of Freeport's home rule power to issue non-referendum debt.  Whenever the City of Freeport enters into an intergovernmental agreement with any other unit of local government the other unit of government is allowed to share in the City's home rule power with regards to the subject matter of said agreement.

Should Tutty be surprised that the State's Attorney has never formally and publicly informed the Stephenson County Board of this fact?  Well, he is a young attorney and maybe just didn't know. 

In Tutty's opinion, the original Intergovernmental Agreement that created Mill Race Crossing should be rescinded.  The City of Freeport has abused home rule powers enough.  Stephenson County already used home rule to borrow $6 million in non-noticed, non-referendum debt in 2006 using the City of Freeport's home rule powers.

This is far too large and too speculative of a project to hang upon the citizens of Freeport and all of Stephenson County without so much as a feasibility study.   And how happy should the residents that live outside of Freeport be about Stephenson County subsidizing Freeport's water and sewer, very likely to a much greater amount than the current Stephenson County Board can imagine.  What, if anything, is the County doing for the water and sewer systems in Lena, Orangeville and German Valley?  Why should residents of these communities subsidize Freeport and Forrestville Valley School District?  Maybe you should ask your county board members.

What we really have here is a huge build out of public utility and the only real plans have been drawn up on a napkin by the City Manager, the executive director of the Freeport Partnership Mark Williams and Adam Holder.  Three men that no one voted for...way to shirk responsibility and accountability Stephenson County Board and Freeport City Council.

Why do we even need elected officials when the Greater Freeport Partnership can draw up a $25 million project on a napkin and you just nod your heads?  

We deserve better.

As always, yours in honesty, Tutty Baker, tutty.baker@gmail.com

Who Controls Freeport's Water and Sewer Bills?

Tutty reads meeting agendas of the local units of government and their subcommittees.  If a person wants to be informed about local government, they have to, traditional media in Freeport, newspaper and radio are nothing more than a joke, designed to sell advertising and that's all, informing you what local officials are doing doesn't even come up.

Anyway, Tutty was shocked when he looked at the agenda for the Planning and Development Committee of the Stephenson County Board.  On the agenda for the body's July 12, 2021 meeting under new business was "Approval of Intergovernmental Agreement with the City of Freeport for Water & Sewer to Mill Race Crossing."

Excuse me, but last Tutty knew, Stephenson County did not own water lines or a sewage treatment plant.  

So why is a subcommittee of the Stephenson County Board discussing the largest build out of water and sewer in Freeport's history, before the Freeport City Council has even examined the feasibility of running water and sewer into the Forrestville Valley School district Freeport City Council?

Has the city manager been negotiating this agreement behind the scenes Freeport City Council?

When are the owners of this public utility, the citizens of Freeport going to be told about these plans Freeport City Council?

How can such a massive build out begin without a bona fide feasibility study Freeport City Council?

How many lift stations will be required to pump sewage through the lowest parts of Stephenson County City Council?

How many manhole covers will be required Freeport City Council?

At the maximum, how many new water and sewer hook ups will this amount to Freeport City Council?

How will you pay for this more than $25 million project Freeport City Council?

How much will this increase our water and sewer bills so we can subsidize economic development for a neighboring school district Freeport City Council?

And Freeport City Council why haven't you answered these questions before this issue was in front of the Stephenson County Board?  

Has the Freeport City Council simply deferred its position as an authoritative body over the actions of the city manager?

The City Council had better reign in this cavalier city manager and while your at doing that ask an attorney where the city manager derives the legal authority to negotiate capital improvements behind, apparently, the backs of the Freeport City Council.

As always, yours in honesty, Tutty Baker
tutty.baker@gmail.com

Home Rule Misinformation From the City Manager

 Last week Freeport City Manager Randy Bukas appeared on a Quincy Media Rockford television station to, more or less, spread misinformation regarding the City of Freeport's status as a "home rule" municipality under the Illinois Constitution.

Clearly, Manager Bukas, needs better legal advice.

He was, nearly immediately, called out as a liar by The Kraver Report blog which can be found at thekraverreport.blogspot.com

City Manager Bukas implies that taxes created under home rule authority will automatically cease.  That is not necessarily the case at all.  Tutty would suggest that the city manager and his legal counsel study Royal Liquor Mart v. City of Rockford that came about after Rockford lost home rule powers in 1983.  You can Google it.

Another faulty implication made in the news story by Quincy Media was this statement: "The drop below 25,000 (in population) would eliminate Home Rule and potentially  mean a major hit  to homeowners  and their wallets"

First off, you can never automatically lose home rule powers.  An Illinois municipality automatically has home rule if its population increases to more than 25,000 but that's not the case in a drop to below 25,000.  If Freeport is below the 25,000 threshold with the next official census, due in September, the Freeport City Clerk is then statutorily compelled to place the home rule question upon the next general election ballot.  Here is the actual Illinois statute:

Randy Bukas, bless his heart, has not been in Freeport long enough to begin to understand all the ways home rule power has been abused in Tutty's town.  It's funny that he wants to talk about home rule now,  but not last month, when he was encouraging the Freeport City Council to use these vast powers to borrow $2.5 million in general obligation debt because they could.

Without home rule all general obligation debt would be subject to referendum approval.  Imagine that, asking the people which must retire the debt before taking it on.  Here in Freeport they not only use it to avoid a referendum but also public notice through publishing or a public hearing.

In many past instances of bond issues the Freeport City Council has suspended the rules and borrowed money with only one reading of a bond ordinance.

Please Freeport Council and Manager Bukas, explain to Tutty and friends what part of this is accountable local government?

And if you can just borrow $2.5 million at the drop of a hat, how is we are not being taxed too much?

Home rule has been used as a club over the citizens heads since 1992, and Tutty is willing and capable to expound.  It's been a "get out jail free card" for the Freeport City Council for the past 30-years.  Times get tough, create a new tax and borrow more money.  Freeport is drowning in debt and zero of that debt was created by referendum.  It was all created, using home rule, by a mere handful of citizens acting as the corporate authority.  

And yet they wonder why citizens feel disenfranchised, we didn't create the problem, home rule and cavalier leaders did, home rule must go.

As always, yours in honesty, Tutty Baker  tutty.baker@gmail.com

Election Shenanigans in Tutty's Town?

 Last Tuesday's consolidated election seems to have churned up some controversy here in Freeport, Illinois.  An investigation has been demanded, so let's investigate by thoroughly reviewing the events as they unraveled, in chronological order, on election day and beyond.

After polls had been open just more than two hours, Stephenson County State's Attorney Carl Larson took to his Facebook page with a public statement claiming "I've received several phone calls today asking about the law in Illinois concerning electioneering."   State's Attorney Larson's post went on to give his opinion on "electioneering" without citation to pertinent statutes or court precedent.

Tutty found Mr. Larson's post to be out of the norm.  Most competent attorneys don't take to Facebook within hours of being brought concerns, without first exercising a modicum of effort to ensure the substance and veracity of the complaints.  Secondly, who calls the Stephenson County State's Attorney first, with such concerns?  Why not speak to an election judge or call the Stephenson County Clerk and Recorder?  Tutty just can't believe that many concerned citizens would reach out to the State's Attorney first regarding such purported impropriety.  Mr. Larson did not mention if  he had reached out to the County Clerk and Recorder before intervening in the statutory duties the Clerk.

A few hours later, with more than six-hours before polls closed, 89th District State Representative and chairman of the Stephenson County Republican Central Committee, Andrew Chesney, used his Facebook page to purport that, "Local Freeport Democrats are breaking the rules (again) and appear to be unlawfully electioneering around polling places." and provided a link to State's Attorney Larson's post in an apparent effort to substantiate his claims.  How, exactly, Representative Chesney knew the concerns voiced to the state's attorney originated within Freeport precincts, or who it was partaking in the questionable behavior, is at present an apparent mystery.  How much communication there was between the chairman of the Stephenson County Republican party and the State's Attorney throughout election day and the exact nature of that communication is an important question for any investigator.   Here is a picture of Representative Chesney's post.

Representative Chesney continued to pour it on throughout election day, stirring up his Facebook followers and others in the community.  He made two more Facebook posts on Tuesday before the polls closed.  Both posts alleged that a candidate for mayor was partaking in criminal activity.  The state representative's posts were shared by dozens of Facebook users.

The media was also hounded by Representative Chesney to cover what he had been purporting throughout day to be "illegal" and "unlawful" behavior.  To their credit the local media that did cover the state representative's allegations were much more reserved.  News directors and editors like to consider the veracity of what they are being spoon fed by a partisan politicians.   Representative Chesney can spout all the misinformation he wants on social media, trying to get those same lies on traditional media is much more difficult. A Journal-Standard news story on the subject did state, "Police did not receive any requests Tuesday from an election judge."

Tutty finds it rather odd that Representative Chesney could see so much wrong doing from behind his phone yet Stephenson County election judges didn't see any violations worth reporting.  And it wasn't even a busy election day.

Even when election day was over and there was no dispute over winners and losers  Representative Chesney refused to let go of his unfounded allegations.  He recruited State Senator Brian Stewart and together they issued a joint press release.  According to the document the "Legislators are calling on the public to share additional evidence as part of an investigation into election hijinks from the Freeport Consolidated General Election n Tuesday, April 6."

Representative Chesney implored, "We've heard rumors of this kind of illegal activity occurring in Chicago, but we've never had this problem here until now."  Senator Stewart is credited with stating, "I join Representative Chesney in urging a full investigation into these reports and gathering evidence toward filing criminal charges against the perpetrators."  Damn senator, you went from "investigation" to the "filing of criminal charges" in one sentence, not too prudent in Tutty's humble opinion.  Secondly, if the legislators are alleging there was a murder, yet they have no body, not even a missing person...they really look silly.  Fact; Tutty is laughing out loud.

The Stephenson County State's Attorney also offered up a Facebook post the day after the election.  State's Attorney Larson dubbed it "A Deeper Dive on Electioneering" and it began like this, "We, here at Stephenson County, received many phone calls from citizens who were distressed and angered by campaigning which was occurring at or near the polling places during yesterday's election."  I think the state's attorney means that  these citizens were "distressed and angered by campaigning which (was purported to be) occurring at or near polling places...".  Without adding the words in parenthesis the states attorney has effectively turned hearsay into authoritative fact.  This is not very becoming for someone practicing a learned profession.

State's Attorney Larson went on, "As far back as we can remember this has never happened before in Stephenson County and it is fair to say that these tactics were outside of the normal custom and practice for political campaigns in Stephenson County."  While Tutty doesn't know who the "we" the state's attorney includes in his post consist of, it is obvious he's not working alone.  What's more, "we" do not have a very long collective memory.

Tutty doesn't think Senator Stewart will deny that he hasn't ever given rides to the polls in all his years in elective office.  It's been a long tradition in Freeport for candidates in local races to pick up those without the ability to drive and take them to the polls.  So if it is somehow improper to stand outside a polling place, possibly interacting with voters, why is it not improper for candidates on the ballot to drop voters off at the door?

Do we need an investigation into what happened during Freeport's consolidated election on April 6, 2021?  Tutty thinks it would be a good idea.  Under Illinois ethics statutes no legislator should "engage in conduct which is unbecoming of a legislator or which constitutes a breach of the public trust."  Tutty believes that accusing your constituents of being criminals based upon hearsay, unverified and unsubstantiated complaints is behavior unbecoming to the offices of Representative Chesney and Senator Stewart.

As for State's Attorney Carl Larson, when the events of election day are taken as a whole, and based upon only what we know from public utterances, it would seem State's Attorney Larson has an awful strong personal interest in promulgating the narrative pushed by the Chairman of the Stephenson County Republican Central Committee.  It would be interesting for an investigation to discover how much and the exact nature of the two gentlemen's communications throughout the chronological time frame contained herein.

Freeport voters deserve to know just how much hijinks went on and how much of it was perpetrated by elected officials allegedly sworn to uphold a higher standard.

As always, yours in honesty, Tutty Baker

tutty.baker@gmail.com 

Keeping Property Taxes Elevated, It's Their Job

Later today the Freeport Park District Board of Commissioners will vote to issue $546,765 worth of what are known as "General Obligation Limited Tax Park Bonds".

Essentially, Illinois statutes allow park districts to issue General Obligation (GO) debt in amounts that are "limited" based upon the districts' overall equalized assessed valuation (EAV).  $546,765 is the maximum amount the law allows the Freeport Park District to borrow.

It's a foregone conclusion that the Commissioners will vote to approve this debt, they do it every year.  There will be no discussion on the possibility of reigning in spending to the tune of $50,000 per month, why would commissioners contemplate giving property tax payers some relief as we attempt economic recovery from COVID?

Fact:  If the commissioners vote this proposition down, property taxes will decrease.  Therefore, this has been an annual tax increase to keep the park district collecting as much money as possible from Freeport residents.  Here is a picture of tonight's agenda

While we have an excellent park system it is no secret the park board of commissioners have been spending like drunken sailors for at least the past 20-years.  How many capital improvement projects have been done?  Zero with referendum approval.  How many properties have been purchased, often times requiring demolition, to increase the park district's foot print, while the number of people the district serves has declined.

I think every park commissioner should explain to the Freeport public why they can't reduce their budget by $50k per month.  There are serious questions as to the amount of subsidy provided the golf course every single year; do the commissioners still unlawfully provide themselves with golf passes?  If the park district wants to complete a capital improvement, what would be wrong with engaging the public through the referendum process?  Maybe they don't need those eight golf carts this year (see agenda). It's our park district, not theirs.

Another pertinent question is where are our state legislators?  Why haven't Senator Stewart or Representative Chesney at least tried to reign in the authorizing statue?   Do Illinois park districts need the ability to issue limited GO bonds annually, or should it be something that should only be utilized periodically, say every five-years?

Or why can't our state senator and representative use their bully pulpits to weigh in on this issue?  They are both always saying that property taxes are a high priority for them, yet when they have a chance to actually be effective, they're missing in action.  Just about a year ago both Senator Stewart and Representative Chesney used their bully pulpits to publicly inject themselves into an issue with the Freeport School Board, while this issue was emotional it involved no public expense or borrowing against our property. 

So what are the honest motives of our state legislators?  Play on our emotional sides for votes or protect us from cavalier units of local government?

As always, yours in honesty,

Tutty Baker  tutty.baker@gmail.com

*complete attribution available within 24 hours of request