County Board

I still wonder if these proposals will ever be allowed to come to a vote:

The two issues related to the county board are part of a package of various reforms, including whether to eliminate the office of county auditor and whether to establish an independent county board redistricting commission.

Tuesday's public meeting will begin at 7 p.m. at the Brookens Administrative Center, 1776 E. Washington St., U. It will be held within the county board's regular committee of the whole meeting, scheduled to begin at 6 p.m.

Discuss.

If you were one of the people who believed Steve Beckett when he claimed that the County did nothing wrong and had no culpability regarding mold at the nursing home, you'll be shocked at the settlement of the case.  Anyone who looked at this case objectively won't be.

The County won an award from Otto Baum in the amount of $400,000, which amounts to $150,000 when their retainer is taken into account.  The actual costs for the mold remediation were $1.5 million.  The legal costs for the mold remediation I believe will amount to more than $500,000.  With the PKD settlement, we have recovered no more than our legal costs, and I'm guessing even less.  Of course, the opportunity costs for the money aren't calculated in any of those figures.

The arbitration judgement points out numerous problems with the actions of the county and PKD.  A still unresolved mystery is how PKD was able to settle their side of this debacle so easily and quickly in January 2007.

The judgement is attached below.  I'll do a more full blown examination at a later time.  But it exposes a number of misstatements, myths, and fabrications. 

This settlement has been five years in coming.  It could have happened much sooner and at less cost.  Unfortunately, for the County, it was worth dropping a  half million dollars in legal fees to perpetuate the lie that they did nothing wrong.  The County screwed up.  Badly.  And taxpayers are paying the bill.

I don't know how seriously to take the County Board redistricting proposals, because I don't know if the County Board Democrats will allow any proposal to come to a vote.  But it keeps coming back up:

The goal of an independent commission, supporters said, is to open up the mapmaking process and encourage competitive elections.

"We're not getting people to come out and run for election. They won't run because they think it's all planted and the districts are all fixed and the incumbents are all in," said Urbana Democrat Steve Beckett, who authored the redistricting commission resolution before the county board.

Beckett said he was "embarrassed" by his vote for the last redistricting map.

"Two people in a backroom drew a map. A major component of that was incumbency, could they eliminate people they wanted eliminated from office. And they succeeded," he said.

The Republican-drawn map 10 years earlier also was "ridiculous," he said. "That wasn't representative of this county."

Champaign Republican Alan Nudo said competitive districts would lead to better candidates for the board.

"Good candidates will come to the fore if they think they have a competitive election," he said.

Discuss.

We are now down to two GOP candidates for Country Board District 1.  Per the NG, Gary Maxwell has withdrawn, and endorsed Stephanie Holderfield.  She will face Chris Doenitz, the GOP incumbent.

This will be an interesting race, and could come down to door-to-door, get out the vote, politics.

I'm looking forward to listening in on Jim Turpin tomorrow at 10am.   Brenden McGinty and Alan Nudo will be discussing possible reform on the Champaign County Board. 

I can't imagine how removing power from the voters is good, even though the past two Auditors have marginalized the office of Champaign County Auditor.   These guys have proven that you can run a full-time senate campaign and/or your political party while being an "independent watchdog".  

Some topics will include:

• County Auditor – the county board voted to place the question of removing the auditor as an elected position before the public on the November, 2010 ballot.
• County Board committee reduction – changing the current six standing committee structure to two “committee of the whole” meetings per month.
• County-wide elected chair – this proposal is designed to allow the voting public to determine who should be chair of the county board, rather than the county board members.
• Reduction of size of the county board from 27 to ? – will this create better representation and accountability of county government to the voters? Issues like single member districts, rural vs. urban representation, knowledge of who is your county board representative, and most importantly, how can we insure rural issues are fairly represented by rural county board members?
• The question of allowing 2012 re-districting process to be done on a non partisan basis – probably the most controversial political issue to be discussed.

This should be an interesting show!

Today's News-Gazette:

Under a tentative plan, every one of the 27 county board members would be expected to attend the three meetings – committee-of-the-whole sessions on the first and second Tuesdays of the month and a full board meeting on the third Thursday.

One reason for the switch is to streamline the board process and reduce the number of meetings that County Administrator Deb Busey has to attend, said board member Steve Beckett, who suggested the change. Another reason, said board Chairman C. Pius Weibel, is to give all board members equal access to information and debate.

Action on a second, more controversial item – reducing the size of the county board – was put off for at least six months. The policy committee is suggesting that at least two public hearings be scheduled in February to discuss the idea.

Committee Chairman Tom Betz had suggested in a memo that the board move from having nine three-member districts to 13, 15 or 17 single-member districts.

Discuss.

Urbana Democrat Tom Betz reverses course and now seems open to supporting the concept of reducing the size of the County Board.

[I]n a memo to members of the county board's policy committee – which will discuss the proposal at 7 p.m. Wednesday at the Brookens Administrative Center – Betz now suggests there should be 13, 15 or 17 county board districts, each with a single representative. There are now 27 board members, with three each from nine districts.

"My recommendation is that we approve this structure as a county board in the near future so that we have publicly communicated our intent well in advance of the reapportionment activities that will occur in 2011, and which will dictate the election of board members in 2012," he wrote.

Discuss.

Eric Thorsland is running as a Democrat for County Board District 1.

I am writing to let voters who live in District 1 of the Champaign County Board know that I will be running for the board in the 2010 election as a Democrat.

I will be on the primary ballot in February and am currently visiting district neighborhoods to collect petition signatures and meet residents. I have been informed that there are at least three Republican candidates considering running, and with that un-unified opposition I am delighted to say I have the united support of countless citizens in the district behind me in my effort to best represent the area's interests at the county level.

The incumbent is Chris Doenitz, and at least two other Republicans - Stephanie Holderfield and Gary Maxwell - are circulating petitions as well.

Steve Beckett and Barb Wysocki, two Democratic County Board members from District 9 (primarily southeast Urbana), have announced they will not be running for re-election in 2010.

The announcement by Wysocki and Beckett opens up the race in county board District 9, probably the most politically competitive district in the county. If Republicans were able to win the two seats, the current 15-12 Democratic majority would be overturned. The filing period for the Feb. 2, 2010, primary election is from Oct. 26 to Nov. 2.

Wysocki and Beckett said they had not notified Democratic leaders of their intention, nor have they tried to recruit successors.

"We talked about that, but we decided that the minute we recruited somebody, they would be marked already," Wysocki said.

The two independent-minded Democrats were frequently at odds with their own party, including a maneuver in 2004 when Wysocki, Beckett and their District 9 colleague Brendan McGinty, working with Republicans, helped unseat board Chairwoman Patricia Avery and installed Wysocki as head of the board.

Voters will get a chance to decide whether the auditor is elected or appointed.

Unsurprising:

But he appeared to be the only sure vote for the referendum among the 10 Democrats at the party caucus Tuesday. Five other Democrats missed the meeting, and at least one of them, Brendan McGinty, who also supports the referendum, will miss Thursday's vote.

A board committee voted 5-4 earlier this month in favor of calling for the referendum.

It's unclear how the board's 12 Republicans will vote. They aren't scheduled to caucus until shortly before the meeting Thursday.

Meanwhile, most of the Democrats at their caucus indicated they will resurrect the idea of combining the offices of county recorder and county clerk as well as county sheriff and county coroner.

"If it results in two less offices, I think it's worth discussing; I really do," said board member Barbara Wysocki of Urbana.

"The original idea," said board member Alan Kurtz of Champaign, "was to bring in all the elected officials and have them defend themselves, and let's see if we can find some efficiencies and money-saving. That was what the objective was in the beginning. The true story, though, was (County Auditor Tony) Fabri and his party, the Democratic Party.

"When we could have done more investigating about the recorder and clerk, and the coroner into the sheriff's office, those questions never arose."

Kurtz called the plan "political."

That may be true, but the opposition to a referendum on the Auditor is clearly political, too.

The NG:

A Champaign County Board member has been ordered to complete anger management counseling after admitting that he slapped another man at a grain elevator last fall.

Christian Doenitz, 48, a Republican from District 1 in rural Mahomet, pleaded guilty Wednesday before Champaign County Judge John Kennedy to disorderly conduct, a Class C misdemeanor.

He admitted that he "alarmed and disturbed" Brian Anderson when he slapped Anderson in the face during a confrontation on Oct. 22 at the Anderson's grain elevator, 3515 N. Staley Road, C.

I don't know if Doenitz is running for re-election.  Anybody?

When the Democrats took over the County Board in 2000, one of the main tenets of their platform was the need for long range planning.  Unfortunately, the Democrats have done as little as Republicans in the way of planning.  But even worse, we've gotten big bills for nothing.   For example, a couple years ago I wrote about the Energy Audit the County did and then ignored. 

But while the County Board ignored the energy audit, at least they got the document they paid for.  Not so for the East Campus Master Plan study.  In discussions regarding the allocation of space at Brookens recently, I was surprised to learn that the plan which we paid over $130,000 for resulted in not a single piece of finished work.

Like everyone at Brookens, I participated in the initial information gathering stage of the plan in 2002 or 2003 I believe.  One of the goals of the plan was to determine space needs at Brookens.  This list, from the East Campus Master Plan Scope of Work document gives some idea of what we thought we were buying.

The A-E Team will develop alternative concepts for the future development of the campus incorporating the programmatic information developed in Phase 1. concepts will address but not be limited to the following:
• campus Gateways
• Vehicular Access and Parking
• security and Safety
• Pedestrian circulation
• Existing and Proposed Buildings
• Open/Recreational Areas
• service and Maintenance
• storm water and Drainage
• Landscape and Environmental Issues
• Utility Infrastructure

At the October 2004 County Board meeting the County Board approved the final payment to Isaksen Glerum of 42,767.16.  At the time, Steve Beckett said that we would finally be getting the plan. 

But in response to my FOIA request, Denny Inman was not able to provide me with any work product except a draft plan which is basically devoid of anything and looks more like a template where data might be inserted. There is no date on the draft plan, and it appears that it was done far before most of the research for the study was prepared. Most disappointing is that Inman was not able to provide a single request to Isaksen Glerum after the October 2004 meeting requesting the final work product.  No e-mails or written letters demanding something for the $130,000 that the firm received from us.

Of course, a request to IGW might have been oral.  In addition, IGW may have had oral communications with Inman requesting information to complete the plan that Inman never provided.  But it seems like $130,000 justifies more than a phone call. 

And of course, the long range planning is still nonexistent.

Tom Kacich's blog:

In fact, when the board approved an early (by two months) retirement for co-administrator Denny Inman, there was not a peep of debate. Not even a roll call vote. The public work was done in less than a minute.

Everything had been worked out privately and secretly and, apparently, legally.

The other three items discussed in executive session dealt with a worker's compensation case, some land acquisition and contract negotiations, we were told. I hope that's all that was discussed. But I have to wonder.

Tom's not happy about the secrecy, either.

UPDATE:  The full NG story is here.

Inman, who has been a county employee since September 1985, now will retire as co-administrator on Sept. 30, 60 days earlier than originally scheduled. County board Chairman C. Pius Weibel said the deal had been requested by Inman. Weibel said the agreement is "revenue neutral" for the county. He said the county will be required to make military pension and Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund payments of about $12,000, but will save as much as $17,000 in wage and benefit costs.

The agreement also opens the door for the board to hire Inman's colleague, Deb Busey, as the county's lone administrator.

The County Board agenda for tonight includes an item that is disconcerting.

B. Adoption of Resolution No. 6969 Authorizing the County
Board Chair to sign an Amended Agreement for County Administrator
Of Facilities & Procurement

Right now, as it stands, the County Board can walk away from Denny Inman on November 30 of this year.  Why there should be any need to modify the agreement now is beyond me.  And because we can't see the proposed modification, we don't know.  What this looks like is another last minute contract proposal that Board members are going to vote on without due diligence.  At the very least this should be reviewed and available for the public at least 24 hours ahead of time. 

Inman's incompetence has cost the County literally millions of dollars.  But his silence on a number of items has been invaluable to people like Weibel and Beckett.  Allowing Weibel to execute a contract with him without full Board review is irresponsible.

The County Board will be holding an extra meeting tomorrow prior to the full board meeting.  The meeting is to discuss litigation, and I believe it might be regarding the Otto Baum arbitration hearing that Julia Rietz told me is to happen this month.  While it’s possible the meeting will be to receive the arbitrator’s decision, it’s probably more likely that the Board will be meeting to consider one final settlement offer.  Regardless, here are some points for everyone to consider as this issue heads to a conclusion.

Otto Baum was the general trades contractor for the nursing home (not the general contractor).  PKD, who has already settled with the County for $113,000 for their part in both the mold and the HVAC problems, was the project manager.  The costs associated with the mold problem are about $2 million, with additional on going expenses for testing as well as delays in the opening of the facility.  Early on in this fiasco, it was believed that Otto Baum would have written us a check for at least $800,000 and possibly $1.3 million just to be rid of the situation.  Now with our legal fees since that time, anything less than a million dollar settlement means that the County lost out by hiring the outside attorneys.

The case against Otto Baum rests primarily on the fact that they ordered the trusses from Bear Creek and that at least some number of those trusses showed up with mold on them.  Those trusses were then installed in the building.  The County also believes that Otto Baum didn’t take proper care in the storage of the trusses on site and I believe that the County feels that Otto Baum had responsibility for wrapping the building.

Otto Baum’s case against PKD (not part of this arbitration) is that they had responsibility for the site conditions, that they made the decision to put heaters in the building, and that they contributed to the problems by creating a greenhouse effect by wrapping a building that had snow in it and turning on those heaters.  In looking at the contracts, it is unclear to me who had responsibility for these issues.  Of course, since we’ve already settled with PKD, any responsibility that the arbitrator might assign to them will not accrue to the benefit of the county.

Otto Baum’s case against the County is unfortunately pretty damning.  First, although originally denied by Inman, Beckett and Weibel, there is a memo that says that the County agreed to put up the moldy wood in the nursing home.  This was done without any written agreement as to how the problem would be resolved financially.  It’s presumed that this was done in an attempt to keep the project on track.  Otto Baum had no contractual obligation to finish the project in a certain time frame.  For them, the cheapest and easiest solution would have been to reject the moldy wood and wait for better product.  They will argue that the County chose a more expensive way of dealing with it and that they shouldn’t have to pay for that.

Otto Baum also can point to the original environmental engineer brought into this case who said that no wood should be installed in the facility until it was tested for moisture content and fell below 15%, the industry standard.  No tests for moisture content were ever done and Inman has not been able to provide any documentation of passing on that recommendation to Otto Baum.  The minutes of the weekly progress meetings have no mention of this.

I’m guessing that we’ll see the County settle for a disappointing amount.  The reason is simple.  Our case is not strong, and the powers that be have never really wanted to let anyone in on the truth.  A settlement would allow both parties to merely put a number on a piece of paper, and the people responsible can continue to claim they did nothing wrong.  If it goes to an arbitrator, his decision, including anything embarrassing within it for the County, will become part of the public record.

Any proceeds from the settlement will be used to pay off the bonds that were sold to pay for the various problems that led to the $4 million cost overrun.  The only benefit to the general corp fund balance is about $150,000 from a previous fiscal year bond payment as well as a few years reprieve for bond payments.

Ok I have to admit that this is a pet P of mine.  How long are we going to sit by while the county spends massive amounts of money to run a private business? 

I want grandma taken care of as much as the next guy but what is the county nursing home providing that is not provided by other nursing homes in the area?

If I cannot afford to be taken care of and do not qualify for Medicare/ Medicaid will they take me in?

Do they give preference to the poor or those on Medicare?

What exactly am I and other taxpayers getting for all the money that is being spent at the County nursing home?

March is a loss of 50k not including the pension subsidy and free building.  This for a government business that is run like a business not as a charity.

What liabilities are taxpayers taking upon themselves?

How long are citizens of Champaign going to sit by while money intended for the poor and elderly is squandered on an unsustainable plan?

What if we took the 50k, plus what we are spending on the building, plus the pension payments, and just hand it out to the 200 elderly at the nursing home?  At least then maybe they wouldn’t have to risk being punched in the face or dieing of a broken leg caused by incompetence.

How many people could be helped with that money if we weren’t too prideful to admit that we suck at running a nursing home?

Today's News-Gazette:

While different members of the policy, personnel and appointments committee expressed various concerns and had questions about the process to be taken, there was a consensus on the committee Wednesday to recommend that the full county board go forward with a review.

Al Nudo, a Republican county board member from Champaign, gave committee members a suggested timetable that calls for looking at reforms, including a review of elected offices and whether those should continue to be elected by the citizens, appointed by the board our hired as professionals.

Other issues include a review of the county board chairman's post and whether that should be elected by the citizens or the county board, whether the county should adopt a home-rule form of government and whether the county board, currently consisting of three members from each of nine districts, be changed.

Discuss.

Today's News-Gazette:

Champaign County Board members will look at options for changing the county auditor's job.

Al Nudo, a Champaign Republican, introduced a resolution at the board meeting Thursday in Urbana to let voters decide whether to eliminate the office of auditor.

John Farney, a deputy county clerk and vice president of the county workers union, delivered a letter to county board members calling for the resignation of Tony Fabri as auditor. If Fabri did not resign, the county board should work to eliminate the post, he said.

Discuss.

Today's News-Gazette:

Alan Kurtz of Champaign said of Fabri, "He doesn't answer phone calls," even to county precinct officials. "He is, literally, discourteous to people," Kurtz said.

Ralph Langenheim of Urbana added, "We have known about Tony for a long time. We know he shows up late and he's a remarkably relaxed person."

As for Fabri's leadership of the Democratic Party, Langenheim said the problem is finding someone willing to take on the job and all the work it entails.

"If we could find somebody to do the job, it would be to our advantage, because he's inefficient," Langenheim said.

Tom Betz of Urbana acknowledged the auditor's office is not a constitutional office in Illinois, but a statutory one. That means the county board has the power to abolish the post or combine it with other county offices, he said.

I haven't commented much upon this, partly out of chagrin that I didn't think to FOIA the phone records prior to November's election.  If the County Board has the power to consolidate the office, they should do it.  Clearly, Fabri's not providing any value to the County taxpayers in exchange for his $80,000-plus salary.