Wednesday, July 20, 2022

Home Rule and Associated "Negativity"

Freeport officials seem to  constantly be lamenting on the "negativity" of Freeporters.  

And why shouldn't we citizens of Freeport be negative?

For 50-years the Freeport City Council, with little to no input from citizens, has used home rule powers to build the city they wanted.

Every single tax and spend issue in the City of Freeport has been decided by the Freeport City Council.  Despite an astronomical amount of public  debt (well beyond the legal limit for non-home rule municipalities) as well as a plethora of home rule created taxes there has not been one binding referendum.  All tax and spend decisions have been made  by the Freeport City Council, completely excluding the public that must pay the consequences of often poor decisions.

Not only has home rule permitted the Freeport City Council to borrow money without a referendum.  Home rule even allows the city council to get around statutory protections put in place for the public that require public notice when borrowing money from citizens.  That's right they can borrow money without even providing formal notice or a public hearing.

Non-home rule units of government are bound by the Bond Issue Notification Act (BINA) 30 ILCS 352/.  Under BINA any "governmental unit" that proposes to take on public debt must first provide published notice as well as a public hearing.  Because BINA does not specifically pre-empt home rule powers, it is not binding upon home rule units.  Therefore, the Freeport City Council simply ignores this clear and concise Illinois Statute.

Perhaps former city council member Peter McClanathan, who just happens to be running for judge in the 15th Judicial Circuit Court can explain to the public how this was proper use of home rule powers. 

Why hasn't another former city council member, Andrew Chesney, who currently serves as Freeport's state representative and is running for state senator, not made a proposal to make BINA binding on home rule units too?

Both gentlemen should be able to explain their position on using home rule for a city council to avoid the public notice requirements of BINA.  They've both taken part in approving bond ordinances that used home rule to bypass the BINA requirement, so I would like to hope that men in their positions could speak to the specific issue at hand.

With home rule there is absolutely no city council accountability to the public at large.  In 2003 a huge issuance of public debt was passed on first reading after suspending city council rules.  More than half of the Freeport City Council that approved this 30-year bond issue is either dead, or has moved out of Freeport, leaving the rest of us to retire the debt they thought necessary. 

I asked that very question in an article in the Register-Star way back in 2005.  I'm still waiting to hear a coherent response from any Freeport City official charged with representing the public.


Is it any wonder Freeporters have a bad taste in their mouth?  And wouldn't citizens be more likely to have a better attitude if it was some of their decisions which got Freeport to this point?  But it hasn't been...at all.  The public has been kept out of every major tax and spend decision because of home rule. 

Please, anyone, explain how home rule has been anything more than "Get out of Jail Free" card for the Freeport City Council while the public at large pays the the price.

As always, yours in honesty.

John Samuel Cook

6 comments:

  1. Thank you for sharing this information.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I am not a fan of Home Rule. I believe the citizens of Freeport deserve to be heard.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Quite informative. Thank you for sharing this.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This is the dumbest bit of hogwash I have read today. You act as if the members of the city council are a bunch of carpet baggers and not public officials elected by the public. It sounds suspiciously as if you don't believe in democracy. If you don't like the bums in office, get together with a bunch of like minded fellow citizens and vote them out. That's how these sorts of issues are supposed to be resolved.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You must be one of the bums we need to get out of office !!

      Delete
  5. At the meeting on July 18, discussion took place to purchase vehicles for the Fire Department at an amount of approximately $2M for a tower and an engine, with the securing of loan/bond financing to take place no later than October just before the results of the home rule election results. Methinks that the City will go on a spending spree before the referendum results are in, since if home rule is lost then major purchases will have to be voted via referendum.

    ReplyDelete