Website Home   or   Forum Home

Riverside Info » About Riverside

1. spatny
   Member

   Before we start having special meetings at dawn, I want to make you smile (wryly)...

   How many zeros in a billion?

   The next time you hear a politician use the word 'billion' in a casual manner, think about how you want the 'politicians' spending YOUR tax money.

   A billion is a difficult number to comprehend, but one advertising agency did a good job of putting that figure into some perspective in one of its releases.

   A. A billion seconds ago it was 1959.

   B. A billion minutes ago Jesus was alive.

   C. A billion hours ago our ancestors were living in the Stone Age.

   D. A billion days ago no-one walked on the earth on two feet.

   E. A billion dollars ago was only 8 hours and 20 minutes, at the rate our government is spending it.

   While this thought is still fresh in our brain, let's take a look at New Orleans. We all want to help the people of that city but it's amazing what you can learn with some simple division Louisiana Senator, Mary Landrieu (D), is presently asking the Congress for $250 BILLION to rebuild New Orleans. Interesting number, what does it mean?

   A. Well, if you are one of 484,674 residents of New Orleans (every man, woman, child), you each get $516,528.

   B. Or, if you have one of the 188,251 homes in New Orleans, your home gets $1,329,787.

   C. Or, if you are a family of four, your family gets $2,066,012.
   HELLO!

   Local, County, State, Federal governments - Are all your calculators broken??

   We already have:

   Accounts Receivable Tax
   Building Permit Tax
   CDL License Tax
   Cigarette Tax
   Corporate Income Tax
   Dog License Tax
   Federal Income Tax
   Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA)
   Fishing License Tax
   Food License Tax
   Fuel Permit Tax
   Gasoline Tax
   Hunting License Tax
   Inheritance Tax
   Inventory Tax
   IRS Interest Charges (tax on top of tax),
   IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax),
   Liquor Tax,
   Luxury Tax,
   Marriage License Tax,
   Medicare Tax,
   Property Tax,
   Real Estate Tax,
   Service charge taxes,
   Social Security Tax,
   Road Usage Tax (Truckers),
   Sales Taxes,
   Recreational Vehicle Tax,
   School Tax,
   State Income Tax,
   State Unemployment Tax (SUTA),
   Telephone Federal Excise Tax,
   Telephone Federal Universal Service Fee Tax,
   Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Tax,
   Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge Tax,
   Telephone Recurring and Non-recurring Charges Tax,
   Telephone - State and Local Tax,
   Telephone Usage Charge Tax,
   Utility Tax,
   Vehicle License Registration Tax,
   Vehicle Sales Tax,
   Watercraft Registration Tax,
   Well Permit Tax,
   Workers Compensation Tax.

   STILL THINK THIS IS FUNNY?
   Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago, and our nation was the most prosperous in the world. We had absolutely no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world, and Mom stayed home to raise the kids. What happened? Can you spell 'politicians!'

   And after all this I go to put some dough in the bank, or make a call, and I have to "press 1' for English." I enlisted and served in my country's armed forces in war time - even if it wasn't called a war. I paid my taxes. Now I'm a stranger in my own land.

   What the heck happened?????

   You guys explain this, and I'll consider your tax referendum. "Press 2 for maybe."

   Posted Sunday Jul 6, 2008 13:22 #

2. civics101
   Member

   Mr. Spatny -

   Our country was the most prosperous country in the world. Yes we do have to 'press 1' for English now. I also do remember fighting a 'war' that began after the WWII armistice that continued on until the fall of the Berlin Wall;this war was predicated on capitalism. So all of Middle America can complain about how foreigners took away their jobs when it simply became cheaper to produce goods elsewhere. We FOUGHT a war on our capitalistic principles but yet when those same principles didn't work in our favor we complain and say its the immigrants or blame the politicians. Send your damn kids to college and stop telling them its ok to be a mechanic or some tradesman. India and China have surpassed us because they have higher education standards not because of unfair labor practices. The days of blue-collar America and just being average are over. We need to push our kids to stop wanting to be construction workers and instead be doctors and engineers.

   I do agree with you...things in Chicago do work in their own way. Things are corrupt there. I also think it is time for us to decide whether we are going to rely on property taxes or try to bring in business to make up the revenue gap. You are correct by stating that personnel costs are high --they are high everywhere. If you look at the ICMA website, you will see that the Village staff is paid at the level of other communities. You make the argument that Riverside is a special place, which is very true, then shouldn't we have capable people running our Village?

   Time and time again we hear about how the Recreation Department is a waste of money. It is just the same as people willing to pay for their children to have programs and part with their tax dollars, but the second their kids grow up and leave they do not feel they need that department or program. That is really shortsighted. My kids love the programs here and I know I will pay for other folks kids once mine are gone. It's just the way it works.

   Don, you are correct in stating that government is wasteful. Cook County and the City of Chicago is a mess. I have studied the budget and I don't see the waste. If you really feel that way then why don't you work with the people who work there and figure out where things are going wrong. Consultants are needed because usually they are experts. You cannot apply the private sector model to government. It just doesn't work.

   No one wants higher taxes. We do as a community need to figure out whether we are going to be reliant on property taxes or whether we should adapt and realize that Riverside must change. Olmsted was innovative...why shouldn't we be?

   Posted Monday Jul 7, 2008 01:03 #

3. spatny
   Member

   I wanted to stimulate discussion before some "Special Meeting" adopts some ill-conceived new policy that doesn't work. Thanks for responding. My view is this: Letting these people have the ability to increase taxes through Home Rule would be idiocy. They, and perhaps you, think that building condos and trying to create a "more vibrant" CBD will increase the village's available funds and lessen the burden on the residents. That. to me, is like thinking laying an extra lane of concrete on a freeway will ease traffic. We have all the taxes (and more) that I listed above, but they get eaten up (to a large extent) by inefficiencies and waste. If there were more revenues available I think there would be more wasted.

   We are always being talked to about the new demographic, and doing things for kids. That's just what I want to do, but not create more programs that shelter and coddle them, rather encourage them to get away from their computers and cell phones and go out and play a game. Compete with each other, but not with a bunch of blowhard dads screaming at them or explaining to them how the game must be played, etc. I rarely see kids show up at a field with a ball and bat or a football and choose sides and play a game. I always see a mob of SUVs pull up and the lawn chairs come out and organized screaming for an hour and then, like a bad dream, they all disappear.

   You mention the Rec department. Look at the salaries. Look at the requests for a bus, for software, for whatever they think up next. Look at the budget that carries things like a $5 mil community center as a reason for seeking more revenue. We need to support the schools and I do it at every election, always have, and never had kids. (See how suspect I am.) What I don't want to do is give the Board the power to do all the the crazy things they - no doubt with good intentions - think will work here and then waste the money on nonsense.

   We have people working for the Village that are very good - more than good. Mike Hullihan is probably the bargain of the century because he is able to do so much. Mike Collins is doing a great job and works his ass off with ever diminishing resources at his disposal. And there are others. But when we toss out hundreds of thousands of bucks for nonsense like some of these consultants and surveys and zoning codes that are immediately ignored then i say "enough." I don't see who the people will be that we will lure to Riverside to patronize these new businesses and fill our coffers? I think we are -praise be - a tiny island of tranquility in a vast sea of mediocrity and we should do everything we can to keep it that way for those who like it that way. If people want to cut trees so they won't have to deal with all those bothersome leaves then let them live elsewhere.

   I think grants are fine, but chasing grants we can't afford or which will have dubious consequences is foolish. TRying to lure marginal businesses into new construction with higher rents structures and low traffic counts is preposterous. I think we should explore making this place a gated community ala Pebble Beach, and charge admission for non-residents. I would like to see less traffic blowing through between 3 and 5 PM and I would like to see more - many more - residents participate and get vocal and yell and offer their suggestions. That's why i post this stuff. You know, "Question Authority."

   Posted Monday Jul 7, 2008 09:31 #

4. Catherine
   Member

   No American ever fought a war for capitalism, but for freedom from oppression. For a demonstration that these are not synonymous, see China. The war we recently commemorated was occasioned by oppressive taxation and same without representation, i.e. the voice of the people was not heeded. I think that is all we need say about what will happen to any request for more taxes for a while.

   Consultants are most often expert in one thing: consulting. They are rarely subject matter experts but rather are process experts. E.g., the consultant for the Long Term Finance Committee was expert only in persuading voters to vote Home Rule, not in finance.

   I do wonder at the formerly private property bought with tax dollars by the administration at 61 and 63 Burlington. Formerly well-maintained, they now usually look like two double-wides in an overgrown weed lot. Indeed the private sector just does some things better. If so, perhaps the Recreation Dept could be outsourced for cost-effectiveness.

   Posted Monday Jul 7, 2008 20:08 #

5. ChrisHajer
   Member

   From an email I received on the 4th of July:

   A consultant is someone who takes the watch off your wrist and tells you the time.

   A lawyer is a person who writes a 10,000 word document and calls it a "brief."

   Posted Tuesday Jul 8, 2008 15:51 #

6. spatny
   Member

   Tuesday's Special Board Meeting was a revelation, of sorts. It began with the Village President saying it would be nice if we elected our leaders and then let them do their jobs, or words to that effect. Then they said they didn't think the voters would give them Home Rule, so they would go for the referendum to raise taxes. The discussion then moved on to which form of the two available alternatives would present the lowest number as a rate of increase to the voters. The consensus seemed to favor the one that would not look as bad but raise about the same amount as the other, which to me smacks of legerdemain, at best.

   Then they began to discuss which of the "Strategies" prepared by the Village Manager and the finance guys they wanted to fund. It soon became apparent that none of the Trustees present were sure exactly what items from their previous discussions were included in which "strategy", and until Trustee Sells - to his credit - finally approached the issue by enumerating, item by item, what he believed was included in the one he favored - "Focus on Quality" - it was more a case of the blind leading those that cannot see. Of course, there was no vetting of the numbers presented for each program, and the final selection of what should and would be included is still somewhat vague, at least to the audience, and of course there is no assurance that each or any of them would be pursued as described. I found it especially interesting to discover that the trustees could not tell if line items for enhanced park maintenance, wilderness management, continued CBD planting, forestry equipment, etc.. were included, while items of more dubious need - like $30K plus for more software for the Rec department - etc. were firmly enshrined. At least so far.

   People understand that costs are increasing faster than incomes everywhere, but when faced with that situation they also understand that they must cut their spending on discretionary items even as they try to increase their incomes. We primarily have only "one job" - residential taxes - to provide income, and the residents that pay those taxes have other calls upon their cash flow. The fact is, this Village is being managed and the Board is being steered by a Village manager they hired and nobody voted for, and who does not live here. It is plain to see she has a philosophy that is oriented toward solutions that are not necessarily what others think are in the best interest of the Village as a whole. This financial "crisis" appears to many to be just another strategy for the Board to gather funds that are not required to be spent as originally specified.

   Why, if money is so tight, did we move $1 million of reserves out of the General Fund into the Capital Improvements account so shortly after the defeat of the TIF? Why is the Board allowing the Village manager to spend just under $10K for a survey of what people want after we had all kinds of input from village residents over the past year that clearly defined what was wanted and what was not? Why do we engage counsel costs for programs like collecting for vehicle stickers and then never hear any more about them? And why do we build over large structures through the granting of variances with inadequate parking which we then subsidize to the tune of roughly $500K when we buy buildings to tear down for parking which should have been the responsibility of the developer?

   We are hardly "The Village in the Forest" anymore. We have squandered hundreds of thousands of dollars on ill-conceived projects touted as "development tools" to the detriment of the protection and preservation of our natural environment. We are losing large trees quite rapidly now, and falling short in replacing them, but correcting this shortfall does not appear to be a high priority in the plans and programs proffered by the Village Manager. Indeed, I don't believe I can find it anywhere. If we are losing mature trees at the rate of upwards of 100 per year we should be planting twice as many young trees, and we are not. We are surrounded by Forest Preserves where we cannot control pests like the gypsy moth or emerald ash borer, which in itself could represent a million-dollar menace to our community. The Village Forester is absolutely correct in that we need to do what we can to increase species diversity within the village and be proactive with our wilderness areas so as to be less vulnerable to the pests and plagues that threaten our trees. Alas it seems that Trustee Sells is the only one that both understands this and wants to push the Board in the direction of prioritizing those efforts. Any new funding should, without question, include the financial resources to support this effort.

   Make no mistake, Riverside as it has been and as we know it, is in danger. Any Board that will not commit itself to prioritizing restorative programs and firmly allocating a portion of the "dollar a day per household" that they are going to ask for for these purposes would be folly. The Village Manager acknowledged that the numbers for the items presented last night might be padded so as to have funds available for initiatives that may arise during the course of the year - but presumably that means items like the recent survey rather than help for our forestry efforts. I feel many residents would be prepared to support a modest increase in taxes if they knew what it would really be used for, and it it was aimed at preserving what we have and not frittered away in attempts to turn Riverside into something it will never be - a magnet for outsiders. Until the voters have the confidence that it is their elected trustees that are directing this show in that direction I can't see this referendum passing.

   Posted Wednesday Jul 9, 2008 12:20 #

7. Catherine
   Member

   I don't see any voluntary increase in taxes winning a majority in this general and particular environment. The contrary I would regard as little short of miraculous. So I found much of the discussion rather surreal. Of course, that's all just my perception.

   By the way, I heard nothing about the planting of trees. I agree our present loss/replacement ratio is very alarming, as is the imminent onslaught of the gypsy moth. I presume the cost of the trees will have to be assumed by NGOs and individuals. I see your trees are doing very well in Swan Pond.

   Posted Wednesday Jul 9, 2008 13:20 #

8. spatny
   Member

   If you want to see what the gypsy moth is doing look at the Forest Preserve at 31st and LaGrange Road - SW corner. Those huge trees are almost bare. And the Emerald Ash Borer is drawing ever nearer. We need to get new species in and keep doing more than we think we will need, and that means more help - financial and manpower - for the Forester and DPW. These people don't see the need at the moment.

   The swamp oaks are doing really well, and the birches. The hackberry trees are still looking iffy - at least one - but we can hope. Last year that was 19, we need to double that or more this year, but not much response so far.

   Posted Wednesday Jul 9, 2008 14:00 #

9. spatny
   Member

   Another "Special Meeting" Monday, July 14, 7:00 PM at the Town Hall. Presumably this will be where the Board decides how much money they will seek to raise in a referendum this November, and outline what it is for.

   Posted Friday Jul 11, 2008 07:25 #

10. spatny
    Member

    Last night at the "Special Meeting" we were treated to a spirited discussion of items relating to the tax referendum that this Board feels it needs to put before the voters. The trustees discussed mainly and at great length what items of present taxation they can drop if the referendum passes, and what form the question will take on the ballot. Despite the fact that not long ago they were patting themselves on the back for "making the tough decision" to have a 1% tax on eating establishments (which nets the village about $30K annually but could increase substantially if/when any new restaurants open in town) and raising the vehicle sticker (which brought in approx. another $120,000) they debated ad nauseum how fast they could cancel the first and reduce the second should the referendum pass. To me it looked like a mad thrashing to figure out some bones to throw to the citizens in order to get them to vote for the referendum and also any/all of them that will be running for reelection. For the record, the eating establishment tax is one of the few we have that allows us to collect something from people who visit Riverside (including, of course, those who buy food and drink at the Zoo. I don't know what they are thinking about when they say it is costing too much to collect and/or detering people from dining here. Ten cents on a $10 tab - $1. on a hundred dollars? Are they kidding?
    As for the vehicle sticker, it seems some of the village seniors must have registered their ire at the $65 rate, so the trustees are now falling all over themselves to knock it back and even give reduced rates to seniors. Of course, what isn't collected there will have to be collected on real estate taxes, but that part of the equation was not enough to sway them from making a promise to "roll back" our "wheel tax." I'd say it was a blatant ploy to make themselves look like they are anti-tax while they stick it to John Q. Resident/home owner.

    Worse, in my opinion, was the highly orchestrated endeavor to not mention what the rate of increase will be if they choose to use the Extension Limitation proposition. I promised not to hazard a guess since this is purportedly still be worked on, and they will probably go for the Limiting Rate proposition as that shows a tiny fractional number. Either way, without benefit of calculator, high priced legal consultants or our vaunted finance department, I predict that when all the fog and smoke has blown away, they will need and ask for an increase that will cost our "average" homeowner with a house valued at $450,000 about a dollar a day more for each and every day of the next four years. This number, we are told, will put the village on a solid footing and allow our village departments to deliver top quality services. That's what they claim.

    Everyone will have to decide what they think about that. I, as a senior on a more or less fixed income and someone who experienced a tax-related rental increase of $720 this year - about twice what they will be asking - am frankly disinclined to support this measure because I feel there are numerous areas where we overpay and indeed squander funds. I mean on consultants, Rec department salaries, surveys, etc. I see neither cost cutting or restraint in these areas, and so I don't think I can support this initiative. I also believe that the "urgency" of this situation is bogus, in that money that was available in the general fund has been moved to capital projects, over half a million was spent on buying property, and for other reasons. I will withhold my final opinion until they produce the definitive numbers and text for the ballot, but if I were to wager now, I'd say this looks like the Titanic to me, sinking of its own weight.

    BTW, are we short one Trustee? Someone seems to have been missing at all these last meetings. I hope he is not under the weather. I miss him.

    Posted Tuesday Jul 15, 2008 16:20 #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.