Schillerstrom to DG: it is good to be king

After a half year of asking and being ignored, the Downers Grove Chamber of Commerce and Industry (DGACOCAI) Legislative Council met Monday with DuPage County Board Chairman Bob Schillerstrom, looking to get a commitment that part of the $20 million in newly minted sales tax revenues ($40 million next year) could help move the Belmont Avenue underpass forward.

As reported by Mayor Sandack and Commissioner Waldack, and verified by several others: it’s good to be King (Bob)…

Waldack painted a fairly grim assesment of DG’s prospects of getting any of those millions earmarked for transportation. Sandack put a game face on and vowed to keep pushing forward looking for money solutions, and DG business leaders and elected officials hung it out there trying to get an $8.5 million shortfall covered so the funding can be locked in for good and the project can finally, after 10 years, finally begin.

Schillerstrom pretty much said “I’m all for it, I’m all ears, cooperation is important.” But offered no concrete commitments for even Dollar One of the $40 million (each year) sales tax bonanza rigged up by Gov. Blag to bail out public transportation.

Why? Because DuPage County Board Chairman Bob Schillerstrom got three little words put into the transportation bill, “and public safety“, and that means he doesn’t have to use the tens of millions of dollars, earmarked for transportation projects, on actual transportation projects-like the Belmont underpass.

Now, he can spend it on his favorite pastime, making county government bigger.

Faced with an out of control budget due to so many facets of poor public policy and disgraceful public management that minds numb merely contemplating the scope, DuPage County Board Chairman Bob Schillerstrom did what any self respecting king would do: he changed the rules and looted the treasury for his own needs . The County Sheriff and the county Prosecutors office will be able to keep themselves fully staffed. No job cuts or budgets trimmed now that there’s all this money-supposedly for transportation-that they can now use to make government bigger and fatter.

This year, a $20 million windfall; next year $40 million. That is a lot of taxpayer cash to cover up some pretty big problems at County. But not a dollar, not a dime for a transportation project that is crying out for funding. So the Blemont Avenue underpass, after 10 years, in view of the finish line to get it locked in and get it going, is stopped short and is gasping for wind.

And DuPage County Board Chairman Bob Schillerstrom, as he drove by, said he was all about cooperation, but hasn’t offered any real help to get it done.

But he waved as he drove by…

Relative Measures Per Resident Part Two

I rarely get many comments, but DGDood scraped a nerve here, saying in comments:

You should post this over at DGreport. More people need to see how we overpay. One reason local government wants to get this big stormwater public works project going is so they become indispensable cogs in that gravy train.

and three days later:

You still haven't put this over at DGreport. Chicken? Don;t want to upset anyone? I'll do it if you won't. Where did you get the info?

This is where reports are put on-line at Daniel Hynes Office of the Comptroller. Municipalities are required to file annual standardized reports. It piqued my interest because DG has yet to file their 2007 report.

My original intent was to examine how very high debt like Hoffman Estates can effect budgeting due to TIC's (Total Interest Cost)of carrying debt. I found the tangential staff comparisons interesting because some municipalities like Wheaton seem to get by with less.

2006	Wheaton	Downers Grove
Population*	55,416	48,274
Total Appropriation	83,669,691	78,362,884
Total Debt	52,455,000	50,526,332
Interest Payments	2,032,558	1,807,619
Principle Payments	2,345,000	650,000
Employees FT	274	360
Employees PT	106	75
Employee Cost	18,020,489	31,617,304
EAV	1,807,481,291	2,057,634,957
Miles of Streets	165	165
Land Area Sq. Miles	11.52	14.4
Acres of Parks	800	600

There could be further breakdown to find where the differences are by department, but I do not have a driving interest in stirring that pot.

Be my guest DGDood. Do your own research and blog it wherever you like.

Relative Measures Per Resident

I got the idea for this from Evanston Now, who ran a significantly more in depth analysis among Evanston and two nearby communities.

This is the populations as per the official 2000 census. The populations for all 5 communities, according to the individual websites, have remained relatively constant, and roughly similar.

This graph shows the 2007 total appropriations for each community. Note that Hoffman Estates has a large appropriation to service huge debt. DG is pretty middle of the road here.

The above shows the appropriation expressed on a per resident basis. Given most of these communities have a similar package of services, except for the shuttle, it is a reasonable measuring yardstick to see how we stack up. This does not include any of the $75 million initial stormwater borrowings that could occur this year.

Again, here we are in the pack. Note that Hoffman Estates has almost a quarter BILLION dollars in debt. That will also be us in a couple years if we go 'all in' on the stormwater plan.
Expressed on a per resident basis.
This graph shows the Total Staff Payroll for the communities.
Not only does Downers Grove pay more for similar sized staffs,
once the per resident costs are factored in, our village government staff costs are by far the highest of any similarly sized community.

Tree Update

Interim Director of Public Works Robin Weaver broke the sobering news to council tonight: the Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) is on the way, it's closer than anyone thinks, and nothing anyone has done stops the 100% lethality of this pest. Evanston is getting hammered right now; hundreds of trees need removal, and their Public Works crews are swamped.

It's all very sad. Ash trees had their foibles, but some, especially purple Ash, really are beautiful shade trees. Hardy, tolerant, robust, and completely vulnerable to a small bug from China. Probably the best way to know the EAB has arrived will be the tiny sideways 'D' holes in the tree, and the woodpeckers pecking away eating everyone they can find. Sorry, the woodpeckers don't stop them either.

Public Works will be taking out 400-450 trees this year, trying to get ahead of the problem like everyone else did not. Replacing all those trees is going to cost money, and it is my intention to see what we residents might do to help lower the cost to the village. I'll report in on this if/as things happen.

The good news is it is now policy to route sidewalks around non-ash, non-invasive mature trees whenever possible. The three block long project on Carpenter between 59th and 62nd originally called for the removal of 20 trees on the east side of the street. That is now down to two trees, and when the project is up for resident input I hope to save at least one more if possible.

This is a new attitude at Public Works. Before, residents had to know, had to go, had to protest removal of trees. Then, it was residents had to push our way into the process to save the tree(s) on our property, and then it was no sure thing. Miss the meeting due to work: bad things happen.

Now, I have been told, the project designers do that part automatically. Save the trees is the mantra; they count more than ruler straight sidewalks one foot off the property line. Mission accomplished.

The 18 trees saved on Carpenter translates into a street canopy that remains intact, and a $$ savings to the village of just over $7,500. For three blocks. Imagine if we had this policy in place when we started the sidewalk program.

We will still save ourselves tens of thousands of dollars moving forward, not to mention 40 years regrowing needlessly destroyed street canopies.

PACE Bus Circulator Study

There are not direct links to this, but here's the PACE BUS Circulator Study. Click on Project Reports, then scroll down to Service Specification Reports. Downers Grove has the full report. Chapter Three has the estimated costs, and estimated sources of revenue, such as they are.

"The planned service is designed to be integrated into the current shuttle service creating a more effective and comprehensive system. The planned service is also intended to complement existing Pace service."

This quote from the Executive Summary indicates this is not a changeover from the shuttle; this something different and additional to the shuttle, not made entirely clear at the council presentation by the study presenter.

This does not look like it has any impact on the shuttle, and would be an additional cost to the DG budget at some level, from a couple hundred thousand up to 1.5 million each year.

I'm still leery, and if it's outside the shuttle, I'm more leery/less enthusiastic. Of the four trial run communities, we have the most ambitious plan. Addison has no bus service to speak of, so one line running through the middle of town works for them. Wheaton; the study is just adding a route connecting the train station to the County Complex on the west side. Lombard is kind of a smaller scale DG plan.

At this point, I'd say show me where the money comes from, then let council deliberate the particulars.

2008 CIP - Scope and Design Open House

The Village has more projects than stormwater projects this year. On a Tuesday when the council did not meet, members of Public Works showed residents what else is coming for the 2008 construction season.

The weather turned pretty lousy by 7pm, but there was pretty good attendance anyway.

I hoped DG's newest news man RonBurgandy would be there, or even say, a columnist from the Sun, but there was no press at all. I took these pictures on my phone, so the light is suspect and makes everyone look shiny.

I didn't think to take down names, so this amiable guy in the dark shirt is Bike Path Guy. He talked about the first two phases of signage and stripage for designated bikeways, so he's also Sign Guy.
It's tough adding in bikeways in DG because our streets typically don't have the width in the older parts of town, and there isn't much off-street path opportunity. Signage is important to alert drivers that bikers are around. Most pathways will be marked with signs every 220 feet or so. The two guys in the sign department will be very busy this year.

As usual, there were several staffers on hand to answer any questions. Deputy Village Manager Dave Fieldman was in good spirits. Usually he's the guy who answers a lot of questions at council meetings (although Tom Dabareiner, Director of Community Development, is giving him a run for his money lately).

There were several PW guys there handling questions, so he had a light load for a change.

Like I said, my phone cam makes everyone look shiney, although the focus is always perfect. Yeah, Dave looked a little, I don't know, blurry.

I talked briefly with Ms. Weaver to continue lobbying for saving our mature, non-ash, non-invasive parkway trees from straight line sidewalks (seeTrees Winning New Friends at Public Works ), and the Sidewalk Guys have the message to save every tree possible from now moving forward. Just in a three block run we saved 18 trees. Have to say, if she keeps to her plan we'll save several hundred trees before we finish sidewalks in DG and get back up to speed on infrastructure. That matters.

L-to-R Village Manager Cara Pavlicek, Plan Commissioner Greg Beggs, and Public Works Director Robin Weaver.

Like I said, I didn't think to write down names of people, so I only know the well-known names, so I don't know who this guy is . Said his name was Ron something...

I'm kidding. Mayor Sandack was all smiles too, and took time to talk with residents and thank them for coming out in such bad weather.

Silver Lining to Economic Trouble

Interest rates are ratcheting down as the Fed tries to avoid a total economy meltdown.

That's good news for us here in DG as staff and council wind their way along the stormwater issue. Bids will go out for a financial consultant to shepherd bringing $25 million in bond debt onto the books for stormwater projects.

Interest rates, and bond rates, are at significant lows. Serendipity works, and the luck of timing will save the village millions in interest payments. This is also a great time to take a look at any other bond issues we have out there, with an eye towards lowering the rate and the amount of interest paid.

Good news for DG in the midst of bad news on the economy.

Hit’s, Misses, and a Great Idea

Hits

Applying for FEMA grant money.

On two 2008 storm water related projects the village is an applicant for FEMA grant money, to the tune of a couple million bucks. There’s also the opportunity to be a sub-applicant to the state for more of the same FEMA money. FEMA has nation-wide funds of about $25 million annually for precisely this type of work, and the state gets a minimum $500,000 extra to dole out as it sees fit. Starting during Mayor Krajewski’s term, our village government got pretty good at writing for grant requests and filling applications (way, WAY harder than it sounds).

Last year all of the federal money was granted, but like I said, our village staff is pretty good at putting together a grant request, plus we have the detailed engineering study and can produce proper plans documenting what’s to be done. FEMA likes that.

In 2007, the state awarded only a bit over $100K of the $500K available. That left almost $400K unused. We could use that each year easy. I emailed VM Pavlicek and asked if we are applying both as an applicant (for federal money) and as a sub-applicant (for state funds), and Megan is supposed to get back to me.

Home Rule Sales Tax (HRST) Hike

Tuesday council approved raising our HRST based take from ½ cent to ¾ cent. Technically, they’re raising it 50%. It does have a sunset clause and “become null and void at the end of the debt service issued for stormwater related improvements.”

Each ¼ cent of Home Rules Sales Tax currently generates $2,300,000.

Misses

Non specific Tele-Tax hike.

They also approved a 1% hike in the telecommunications tax, from 5% to 6%, a 20% raise in the rate.

The proposed increase will take effect on July 1, 2008. Revenue generated by this increase in FY08 is estimated to be $410,000, which will be used to fund expenditures in the Capital Projects Fund. The full year revenue generated by this tax increase for FY09 is estimated to be $820,000.

There is no sunset clause for this tax hike, because it fuels the Capital Projects Fund. The money can be spent on whatever the village says, whether it be sewers or streets...or a new Fleet Services building, a new Police Station, or a new Civic Center.

A Great Idea

Linda Kunze reads minds.

Staff has been working on this one off-radar, but it’s a great idea and deserves to see the light of day.

I’ve been talking about a single downtown waste hauler since the last election; then we can do recycling downtown, cut down on garbage truck traffic, and we could make our alleys and business rear areas look a lot better. The village could also place recycling cans around downtown; permanent ones instead of the temporary ones we see at downtown events.

Talk about a topic no one wanted to hear.

Linda Kunze, Downtown Manager of the Downers Grove Downtown Management Corporation, thinks it’s a great idea, is in a position to do something about it, and is pushing forward. The village has committed to build a total of three common dumpster areas around downtown, to centralize and clean up collection areas, making it very easy for downtown commercial businesses to recycle just like we do at our curbs every week.

This means tons of paper, cans glass, all going to recycling instead of to landfills, and we get cleaner looking alleyways. That opens the possibility for further development. Check Naperville’s downtown: there are a couple areas where there are backyard restaurant patios, and rear-facing clusters of shops on former alleys. I’m not saying that’s what will happen, I’m saying those types of things become possible.

The first centralized collection area goes in this spring, the two additional units the following year. Downtown Downers Grove will get the businesses invested in the concept and use. Council can help move things along by making it clear they support this, and expect businesses to get on board.

This is just one example of recycling bins. Here's another where local artists design and build recycling receptacles out of recycled materials. The possibilities are many.

Bravo, Ms. Kunze.

So when do we say "That’s enough"?

Like most guys, I subscribe to the hypothesis that when a project is 80% done, it’s done. From then on, it’s just clean up. Employing the rule of 80/20 to the stormwater issue, we should be able to get to that 80% finished plateau for about $68 million. The last 20%, the clean up, will cost the remaining $272 million.

So I guess my question is this:

Do we really want it all done? Do we really want every possible problem, no matter how small or how expensive it may be, to be completely addressed? Maybe there is just some areas of town, like 40^th and Glendenning, that need to be open unbuildable land forever, regardless of how much developers want to build. Maybe these are areas where public condemnation needs to occur for the better good. I can think of a couple homes that should be bought by the village and torn down, and the lots left empty.

I know: Mark, getting cold feet? No stomach for the tough decisions?

There’s plenty of cheap shots to be taken on this one, but I won’t be taking them on anyone thinking maybe $340 million is a little pricey. Maybe, like our other taxing bodies have found along the way, there’s a plan B that needs to be examined before we jump headlong into a 30 year commitment that may end up with at least $300 million in additional interest costs.

I'm in for the 80% done at 20% cost. If only that worked in real life, eh?

Finance it!

This week council heard a Northern Trust presentation titled “Stormwater Financing Analysis”. What Northern Trust floated was the idea of not dedicating $6 million or more each year for Stormwater projects, but instead financing it with:

• $6 million a year in loan (via bond) payments each year for 30 years for floating $180 million in bonds that would give us $108 million in funds for projects.
• $4 million a year in loan (via bond) payments each year for 30 years for floating $120 million in bonds that would give us $72 million in funds for projects.

They also floated the concept of Non-Self Supporting Debt Outstanding as the correct debt figured against the Village EAV. There is ‘only’ $5 million in that kind of debt, because the other $36+ million in debt is paid for by the Parking Fund (for Series 1999), the TIF district (for Series 2000, 2001, 2003A), and property taxes (series 2002, 2005).

This is the first time I’ve ever heard about recategorizing debt into Self-Supporting and Non-Self Supporting types for debt ratio purposes here in Downers Grove, probably because our local government has slid funds around as needed to cover abatements and debt reduction in the past, making 'self-supporting' and 'non self-supporting' pretty much a moot point.

Note: The concept of “self-supporting” debt is that borrowed bond debt will fund projects that generate enough revenue to pay the debt service obligations. Examples of this type of debt include Tax Increment Financing (our downtown), Special Service Assessments (brick streets) and the Water Fund. GO self-supporting debt payments are a general Village obligation and must be paid from the property tax levy if revenues don't meet debt service. Here in Downers, we’ve had to rely on property taxes to make up shortfalls in several “self-supporting debt funds”, so it doesn’t always work out in real life like it’s supposedly does on paper.

The net result is hey! We can borrow a bunch more money than we thought and not wreck our credit rating.

They also went over spreads, rate lock-ins, and interest only payments to start (yeah, I know that sounds like sub-prime and Alt-A lending come-ons), and pitched council on refi’ing Series 1999, 2000, 2001, and 2003A bonds at a lower rate, claiming that would save $173,134.00 -which is a good deal if true.

I was surprised at the 30 year bond terms. Usually muni bonds are for 20 years or 10 years, but the spokesman said the rates were not much different, although he did not quote any TIC (Total Interest Costs) on comparable 20 and 30 year loans.

Bonding for what?

At the 11/6 council meeting, it seemed like every possible fee and tax was being raised so flooding and streets could be addressed. But the net result is $6 million for 2008 funding. To paraphrase Mayor Sandack and Commissioner Durkin: "That doesn't get it done, we need to do more faster now, when the money is cheaper, and we need to borrow." Ding! They get it, but it's at the expense of the municipal center. Muni complex? New Police, Fleet Services, and Village Hall buildings?

So what staff wasn't talking about on the green sheets, is borrowing. Thing is, it's the textbook example of when it is correct, even best to borrow. "Streets and Stormwater" if you will (flooding is the symptom) have to get done as quickly as possible. Everyone on staff and council takes turns bashing the inattentiveness and sloth of the past 25 years of local government; they hid their heads in the sand and ignored two huge growing problems. So now it's time to change that. These improvements are permanent and have every reason to be have payment spread out over 20 years or more. By borrowing, we can fix the problem fairly quickly. This is health safety and welfare at it's most basic.

Replacements for existing structures, even badly needed ones, are next in line, not first in line for available funding.

Commissioner Tully and Schnell expressed concerns that delaying a new village hall creates the same type of problems delaying streets and sewers did; makes it much more expensive to 'fix' later. It's a harsh fact, even with all the new taxes, fees, you name it, our local government will have to make do for a bit, just like residents have done for so many years. waiting for decent streets and decent stormwater measures. Interest costs are at record lows right now. Money won't get cheaper so the time to do it is now.

Problem: we can only borrow so much. The debt ceiling put into place is 3% of the Village EAV. Right now we're at about 2%. The means we could borrow up to $69 million dollars, but we already have $41 million in debt now.

On Tuesday, November 20th, council will hear from bonding providers. This may get interesting...

2008 Budget Workshop

A couple observations for now:

Hybrid Infrastructure Funding

I was saved all of my major talking points. Didn’t have to bring them up at all. Here’s why: Sandack and Durkin have correctly zeroed in on the need for a hybrid of funding sources that includes borrowing in addition to a full plate of tax and fee hikes. Some residents may speak about the fairness of this tax and that fee, and they may have legitimate points, but we don’t have the luxury of time to lock in funding, and the village has to get going on this now. Several projects that should have been done this year were sidelined for 2008. Project deferral cannot continue to happen. As residents, we didn’t pay for what needed to be done for the last 20 years, so now we have to pay for that and what needs to be done once back to square one.

Sandack pushed staff on how much could be done each year; what was the upper limit of staff’s capabilities to finish projects and check them off the ‘To Do’ list. Durkin was right there too. Durkin even commented on how quiet I was all day. They both did a credible job voicing a willingness and a need to focus on job #1.

Ron and Sean, on this very important multi-year budget item, and for this critical resident need, get it. Flooding and infrastructure come first for CIP priority. Period. Everything else: get in line.

Government Center

Staff wants $850,000 budgeted for the first phase of preliminary design (site and layout mainly I think) for the new police station and Civic Center. That’s $850,000 that could be spent on flooding. Tully spoke to not letting another need go unaddressed too long. Speaking as a resident, the past unaddressed needs of residents, that directly and negatively impacts our health, safety, and welfare, is far more important than a new Government Center. Does the Police Department need a new facility? I believe them when they say they do; I don’t have the specialized information as to what the needs and shortfalls of the current facility are.

New Village Hall? I won’t argue the need here, but I will say this: the current facilities are being maintained, and needs are being budgeted for on an ongoing basis. My one car may be 10 years old, but until the maintenance costs more than the payment and maintenance on a new one, I think the old one is a keeper. I’d like a shiny new one with all the go-fasters, but I have college educations that are front and center that are more important.

So it is with the new Government Center. Sandack and Durkin heard what residents said last election loud and clear, and it was not 'build a new muni center', it was 'FIX OUR STREETS AND FLOODING!!!!' We won’t have the cash to do both, we will need to borrow to get ‘bundles’ of infrastructure projects funded and finished as fast as possible, and we should not drain off needed funding for projects that can wait.

I suggested at the budget workshop that the Government Center be a topic for the 2008 Total Community Discussion (TCD 3 or whatever it’s called), so residents can weigh in and be heard. The ECC should also weigh in with ideas that can contribute to reducing the costs of heating and cooling such a large facility, with ideas like passive solar, thermal pumps, green roofing, even small wind or active solar should be on the table as discussion points for design elements. The ADRC should weigh in with suggestions for a design theme fitting for our downtown, and provide some early input. And I think we our village should reach out to some of our many expert architects for ideas and input. This is an item that we do have the luxury of time for. The current facilities may be outdated and in need of replacing, but it needs to be done in a manner that is cost efficient, needs efficient, and energy efficient.

Next up is figuring out how much all of this is going to really cost us. Now, most of what you read about the budgeting process best practices say it starts with the strategic plan (which our local government didn't get around to updating this year) while at the same time getting a rough ball park on what would be in the revenue pipeline; THEN figure out what gets what. Instead, we're relying on last years strategic report (maybe not a bad thing), with the process looking like figuring out what local government wants to do, then figuring out how much we have to pay for it all.

Not many of us have the option of simply letting our boss know how much extra they'll be paying us this year so we can deal with state, county, and local tax and fee increases, so I hope council keeps this in mind when they get down to brass tacks.