Niles Village Board of Trustees candidates answered questions and argued about village issues during the Niles Candidates Town Hall.
More Top Picks Best Pencil Grips For Kids
The event took place on March 26 at Golf Mill Mall’s Center Court and Maine Township Supervisor Carol Teschky moderated the debate.
There are a total of six candidates running for three Village Board seats. Incumbent Trustee Joe LoVerde is running with former Niles Police Chief Dean Strzelecki and Niles Ethics Board member Denise McCreery as the Niles Forward Party slate. Incumbent trustees Chris Hanusiak and Rosemary Palicki are running as independents, as is the new candidate David Carrabotta.
In their opening statements, the candidates touched on themes they expressed in the earlier statements and events. LoVerde touted his experience in the Niles government, particularly his work on stormwater relief, and emphasized the importance of retaining businesses and attracting new ones. Strzelecki touted his experience on the police force and the steps he took to improve communications between officers and residents. McCreery touched upon her experience as a president of the Niles Chamber of Commerce and Industry and promised that she would listen to the voters if elected.
“No matter what my opinion is, it would be my job to listen to the majority,” she said. “And I’d do that. I will listen to the voters.”
Carrabotta said that he would work to improve village finances and stop using TIFs and other tax incentives. Palicki said that she would continue to listen to residents, work to increase transparency and carefully consider the issues. Hanusiak said that his record on the board speaks for itself, and explained that he would continue to oppose video gambling should there be any attempt to revoke the existing ban.
After the opening statements, Teschky asked questions submitted by the public and the press. First, the candidates were asked how they would help a commercial building owner who hasn’t been able to attract tenants for several months.
McCreery said that she would work with the Niles Chamber of Commerce and Industry to help businesses. Carrabotta said he would treat each business individually, helping them if necessary, or simply sitting back and trying to remove regulations and other obstacles that may be getting in their way.
“[I would] bring them in, have them talk to us and listen,” he said. “Each business is different.”
Palicki said that beautification could help attract businesses to vacant storefronts. She also said that she would try to make sure the board is more careful about granting tax incentives.
“We need to make sure we’re not imposing on smaller business and giving our support [only] to bigger businesses,” she said.
Strzelecki said that the village’s Economic Development Coordinator should help commercial property owners attract tenants. Hanusiak argued that taxes should be lowered to attract more businesses, and echoed Palicki’s concerns about the impact of tax incentives.
LoVerde said that the village’s existing facade program and tax incentives can help attract businesses, emphasizing that he and other Niles Forward Party candidates would be “pro-business” if elected. In response to Hanusiak’s comments, he argued that tax incentives were investments in Niles’ future, and that they would help attract jobs.
When asked what Niles could do to improve transparency and accountability, Carrabotta proposed choosing Niles Ethics Board members by lottery from a pool of volunteer candidates in order to avoid political appointments. Palicki expressed concern that the Ethics Board isn’t as effective as it used to be, noting that, in the last two years, it has met less and pursued fewer complaints. In September, she asked the Ethics Board to give quarterly updates on how it has been doing, and she expressed concern that the board hasn’t received anything since.
“We need to get updates, even if nothing happens,” said Palicki. “We have the means for establishing good ethics – we just aren’t using them correctly.”
Hanusiak questioned the objectivity of Ethics Board chair Tony Gaudio, noting that he expressed support for Mayor Andrew Przybylo and the Niles Forward Party.
“We need to revamp the Ethics Board to so that people can make complaints and not worry about it [reaching the board],” said Hanusiak.
Strzelecki said that the village Inspector General position – which was established in 2013 – was a strong mechanism for rooting out corruption. McCreery argued that the current system was already working well.
“I think that the fact that complaints have diminished doesn’t mean [the Ethics Board] has devolved,” she said. “It means we are doing something right.”
Palicki said she wasn’t convinced.
“How do we know if complaints have diminished if we didn’t get a report,” she said. “The Inspector General should support the Ethics Board, not drive it. He now makes the decision, along with [Village Manager and Ethics Board chair] who get to decide what the board sees.”
Next, the candidates were asked to give their take on the “biased flier” that was sent out before the November election. The flier in question concerned the referendum to take away Niles mayors’ power to fill trustee vacancies. At the time, Palicki and Hanusiak both expressed concerns that the flier was slanted to focus on the negative consequences of the referendum – something they reiterated during the debate.
Strzelecki said that he had no issue with the flier.
“It’s important to inform the people about the consequences of what they decide on,” he said.
LoVerde said that the village simply followed their attorneys’ advice. McCreery said she didn’t necessarily have a problem with village sending out information about referenda – so long as it’s done right.
“Decoding those referendums may be difficult sometimes,” she said. “We should continue to do this, but representing both sides.”
Carrabotta strongly denounced the fliers, calling them “propaganda” and arguing that residents could have gotten information about the issue through media or by researching it on their own.
“It’s government out of control,” he said.
More Top Picks Best Graphics Tablets For Photoshop
Next, the candidates were asked to give their take on another controversial issue – granting Special Use permit to the Sportman’s Club gun shop and training center. Palicki and LoVerde opposed granting the permit, arguing that the gun shop didn’t meet all the requirements. Both trustees said on multiple occasions that they didn’t oppose gun shops per se – which they reiterated during the debate.
Strzelecki said that he was confident that, so long as all the safety procedures are followed, the gun shop wouldn’t make the village any less safe.
“You can’t handle a gun in the shop unless you have a [Firearms Owner Identification (FOID)] card,” he said. “They are not going to be able to buy ammunition without a FOID card. [The shop] is going to have the highest-end burglary alarms.”
Hanusiak and Carrabotta expressed similar sentiments. McCreery said that while safety was an important concern, she didn’t feel the gun shop would affect it.
“That’s what we should be concerned about at all times, not when some business opens its doors,” she said.
Finally, the candidates were asked about whether they support term limits. During the 2012 municipal elections, Niles voters approved two referenda– one placed on the ballot by the Village Board and one placed by activist Joe Makula. While all candidates said they supported the term limits, Palicki reiterated her opinion that a judge should decide which referendum would actually become law.
In the closing statements, candidates reiterated their positions and took some swipes at their opponents. LoVerde and McCreery both accused Palicki of voting against resolutions that would promote business growth to Niles. LoVerde also questioned Hanusiak’s motivations behind his votes.
“Chris – are you really independent, or are you against everything because you couldn’t support two mayors who ran against you?” he said.
Strzelecki also criticized Palicki and Hanusiak.
“Voting ‘no’ against the mayor isn’t being independent – it’s being obstructive,” he said.
Responding to McCreery’s criticism, Palicki said that she voted the way she did either out of safety concerns or because she felt the measures would benefit some businesses at the expense of others.
“To me, it’s unrealistic to offer a program if we can’t offer it to all businesses,” she said.
Hanusiak also used his closing statement to push back against NFP candidates’ criticism.
“I vote for things that make sense for the taxpayers,” he said. “When things make sense, you vote for them. When they don’t, you vote ‘no.'”
Igor Studenkov is a freelance reporter for Pioneer Press.