City of Champaign Township Supervisor Linda Abernathy, who is asking voters for a property tax increase this fall because she feels she doesn't have enough money to provide general assistance to township residents, somehow submitted a budget which inlcuded several thousand dollars in legal fees despite the City of Champaign providing free legal service for the Township.
Tension was higher than normal as the town of the city of Champaign Township debated their budget for Fiscal Year 2008-09 Tuesday night.
Though the township board eventually passed the budget, debate ensued about a $9,000 line item, of which a large portion was called "a supreme waste of money." An amendment was eventually added re-appropriating the $9,000 of the $688,668 budget. Originally, $3,000 of that money was allotted for professional fees such as membership to the Township Officials of Illinois, while the other $6,000 was appropriated for legal fees, which a number of the Board members had a problem with.
The legal fees were said to be used for outside legal counsel, despite the fact that the city of Champaign currently allows the township to use their attorneys.
"It sounds like there could be a fight on the horizon," said Board member Tom Bruno. "I don't want to suggest we get separate legal counsel if that's not the case. It seems like a supreme waste of money."
Township Supervisor Linda Abernathy said the counsel was not going to be used for any legal action brought up against the city of Champaign but rather to get advice about how to properly run the township and utilize its resources.
"This is not about a lawsuit," she said. "What (the board members) are doing is polarizing the issue."
Sheesh.
"What (the board members) are doing is polarizing the issue."
Hey, this stuff works great for Barack Obama. Every politician ought to try it.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I understood that she wanted to use the money to hire Bob Kirchner. It seems to me that if she's in dire straits financially, she should just save the money, accept the City Attorney's services, and use the money to serve the poor. Surely the City Attorney can give her advice about how to properly run the township and use its resources, or for that matter, she doesn't need an attorney to do that.
It is all very complicated.
Nothing is transparent in Champaign, city or township, Vic McIntosh'statement not withstanding.
Pattsi Petrie
What does that mean, that the board members are polarizing the issue? The Supervisor is the person who talks about how the township is broke. I would think she would welcome the opportunity to save money. And while she's at it, I'm still waiting on the explanation about how money was missing from the office; and how she found funds to buy her staff t-shirts when she was asking everyone else for money. It turns out that Linda Abernathy is just another politician, asking everyone else to adhere to one standard, and applying another standard to herself. If she won't even give up $9000 to help the poor, why should we?
Does anyone know when is Ms. Abernathy up for election again? Is it next Spring?
Did she provide any specific examples of where her current counsel is lacking? She must not feel she's getting decent legal counsel from the city. Township and municipal government laws are different, although i would expect a city attorney would be able to figure it out pretty easily. It could be the city's attorneys aren't prioritizing township matters as she'd like. I would think the assessor's side of the township has more need for legal services than the supervisor's side (due to property tax disputes, etc.). Does the assessor have his own budget?
I think the supervisor's budget has to be approved by the city council sitting as the town board, and I think, but could be wrong, that her budget includes funding for all offices under the supervisor, including the assessor. Since the supervisor will not discuss the matter, apparently believing there is some kind of conspiracy or evil cabal, I guess we'll never know what all of this polarizing is about. I've never heard her express any concerns about the City Attorney, and I suspect that she wants her own counsel so that she can get the advice that she wants: give me the money that I want, or I have to sue the City because I'm mandated by law to hand out cash to people. If I'm wrong, perhaps the supervisor would like to correct this or tell us about these unseen forces that are polarizing the fair township of Champaign.
The Township supervisor is run on a partisan basis, but on the same timetable as municipal elections. Petitions will be circulated from September to December, filing in December, Kirchner and Wyman challenging the nominating petitions in late December, then a primary election in February if necessary and a general election in April, 2009. 4 year term. Pay is currently at $59,000 per year. No heavy lifting.
Will someone, anyone, please field a candidate against her--one who will answer questions, discuss the business fully, and has no other agenda?
Last I heard there was like 7 people who expressed interest in running against her, some of which I imagine are even in her own party.
--
j
Part-Time Pundit
I watched this presentation last night, and I was appalled at Ms. Abernathy's attitude--she apparently believes that her salary is sacred, and that no one should ask her how she calculated her raise, or anything else, for that matter. It was pathetic to listen to her try to explain why the line item for professional services included money for due for the Township association, and even then, she really didn't know what the amount was, or even what they get for the money. We have reached a point where elected officials are now insulted when asked about how they are spending PUBLIC money. And as for Ken Pirok, the only council person who supported her request, he apparently believes that as long as she asks for it, she should get it. I wonder if he advises his clients to treat their money so cavalierly.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I understood that she wanted to use the money to hire Bob Kirchner.
I'm just watching a replay of this discussion and this is not what she said. When Bruno asked if she had someone in mind the only person she mentioned with any specificity is the same attorney that Cunningham Township uses.
She is a really poor presenter and comes off as trying to hide things when she can't directly answer all the questions with good examples. Watching her I'm not so sure she is trying to hide anything, but instead is just really poor at making herself understandable.
As for the legal fees issue, I can certainly understand a desire to have access to legal counsel with specific expertise in township government. It would be more efficient because municipal attorneys generally deal with different issues. Abernathy said that she's already getting advice from outside attorneys but that they've been doing the work pro bono. It may be these people aren't willing to do that forever.
Honestly, I think another supervisor could have easily gotten this line item passed with a good solid presentation that included a few specific examples. But this supervisor comes off as suspicious when she gives a poor presentation and doesn't have great examples. I'm not sure Bruno and Schweighart really believe this request was for counsel to help her sue the city, but offering up such a suggestion makes it easy for them (and others) to vote against the legal budget item. And Abernathy was unable to counter the allegation.
Having watched this, curious posted the cause of this problem, Abernathy's lack of presentation abilities. To make things worse, she covers with attitude. I think $59k/year and party loyality should have given the taxpayers a better steward of their dollars. Is the salary too low or the political pool too shallow----or both?
The backdrop for all of this is that her current legal advice is coming from City of Champaign's legal department, specifically Fred Stavins and Trish Crowley.
They have been advising the Township for literally decades, and Trish Crowley is a recognized statewide expert on Township issues. So for Linda to suggest that she needed the expertise of Fred Grosser was laughable.
Fred Grosser is a capable sole practitioner and he does do legal work for Cunningham Township, but Crowley has a statewide reputation for her expertise and Crowley and Stavins also have an intimate knowledge of City municipal legal issues so they are uniquely situated to advise each entity, and assuming the co-terminus Township is not in conflict with its alter-ego the City, it makes sense to use one team of lawyers.
Accepting all that City Girl posted, could there not be a potential conflict of interest, especially that Crowley and Stavins are paid and employed by the city of Champaign, not a matter of legal expertise?
Pattsi Petrie
There isn't any conflict of interest--the Board and the City Council are one in the same. The only time there would be a legal conflict would be if the Supervisor sued the City (which I wouldn't rule out--can't you just see the suit demanding more money so that she can comply with her mandate), or if the City Council sues her. If either of those things happened, then each party would have to have their own attorney. I think that we should simply lobby the legislature to get rid of townships where they are coterminous with municipalties--they really serve no purpose, and just cost more money. It is laughable to think that we are getting $59,000 worth of anything out of this Supervisor--she can't even explain how she arrived at $59,000 as her salary. Last year it was $56,000, and she claimed to get a 3% raise. If so, her salary should then be $57,680--if not, then she either got about a 6% raise, or the numbers are inaccurate.