Despite a statewide crusade to convince mayors to support his “Turnaround Agenda” for Illinois, Gov. Bruce Rauner is discovering that even fellow Republicans are reluctant to embrace his plan.
Crete Mayor Michael Einhorn was one of the few Southland GOP mayors who told me he had scheduled a resolution supporting the governor’s for a vote at a village board meeting Monday.
“I kind of modified the language a little bit,” Einhorn said, referring to language in a resolution that the governor’s office has proposed and distributed to municipal leaders throughout the state. “I’ve added a few things.”
When asked what he object to in the Turnaround Agenda language, or what specific programs he may have added, Einhorn said, “Just some minor language things. Not changes to the substance of what he is proposing.”
Einhorn said that he has complained for years about many of the problems Rauner’s agenda seeks to address.
“The prevailing wage makes it impossible to remain competitive,” Einhorn said. “It causes us to lose business to other states. State mandates imposed on municipalities are completely out of control. There’s a bill in the Senate now that would increase fire pensions. The Legislature keeps passing those increases and we (the local governments) are the ones that have to pay for them. You don’t have to be an actuary to see that we’re all going to run out of money, but legislators keep proposing this stuff and approving it because of the unions. They get a check from the unions and they are expected to keep passing increases in police and fire pensions.”
More Top Picks Best Harmonicas For Beginners
Rauner’s turnaround agenda proposes that local voters decide what issues can be collectively bargained in their county or municipality.
It states that local voters should decide pension and health benefits for their local governments.
“Conflicts of interest have spread throughout Illinois government,” the Rauner agenda states. “Special interest groups have come to control Springfield, running it for their own benefit and pushing many local governments to near bankruptcy.”
The agenda specifically states that Illinois shouldn’t impose costly mandates on local governments that drive up their costs.
“Prevailing wage requirements and project labor agreements block true competitive bidding in government construction projects and drive up taxpayer costs 20 percent or more,” the agenda states.
The wording of the turnaround resolution itself states, among other things, “Voters in our community should be allowed to decide by referendum whether or not employees should be forced to join a union or pay dues as a condition of employment.”
It’s that wording in particular that many Southland mayors, even those who are members of Rauner’s Republican Party, said they found objectionable.
“I’m not even going to bring this before my (village) board,” said Frankfort Jim Holland, who is a Republican precinct captain and campaigned for Rauner during last year’s gubernatorial election. “I don’t even see the need to discuss it.”
“So many of the issues it (the turnaround agenda) addresses come under the jurisdiction of state and federal laws, or court rulings, and the village has nothing at all to do with that.
“I am a conservative Republican and I support what he’s trying to do to change the way government functions in Springfield. But what the state ought to be doing is what we have been doing at the local level for years. Pay your bills on time. Don’t spend more money than you have coming in. If you agree to do something, if you sign a contract, than fulfill your obligation and make the payments you are supposed to make.
“The goal of government shouldn’t be to see how much money you can spend, but see what the voters want, spend the money on that, and make sure you always stay within your budget.”
Like all of the mayors I have spoken with, Holland is under the impression that the governor’s turnaround agenda is a “take it or leave it” proposition.
“My understanding is that the language is non-negotiable,” he said. “The governor didn’t use those exact words, but that’s definitely the impression we’ve all gotten.”
Einhorn has not met personally with the governor, but he said the executive committee of the South Suburban Mayors and Managers Association, which did meet with Rauner, also communicated to him that the governor’s turnaround resolution was to be adopted as written by his office staff.
“That’s simply not realistic and I doubt the governor meant it that way,” Einhorn said. “You can’t dictate to other government entities. No one does that. Everything is negotiable. And I would think that if the governor wants our support, if he wants a letter he can take to legislators to Springfield that says we support his goals, he would be happy to accept whatever we pass that demonstrates that sort of support.”
The purpose of the governor’s appeal to the mayors is to get their village boards to pass resolutions that state “Be it resolved, (name of municipality) endorses the major reforms in state government that will encourage local control, reduce costs on local government, empower local voters and increase competitiveness in our community.”
In theory, with enough of those resolutions in hand, Rauner could put pressure on his fellow Republican legislators, but particularly Democrats who control the Senate and House, to support at least some of his reforms.
Rauner has also been visiting newspaper editorial boards and doing interviews with radio stations to rally grass roots support for his reforms. Recently, he’s been calling for referendums to change the Illinois Constitution’s provision that seems to guarantee union benefits.
In an earlier column on Rauner’s turnaround agenda I suggested the governor should have done that before going to the mayors, giving the public a chance to pressure their local leaders to call the governor’s resolution for a vote.
New Lenox Mayor Tim Baldermann, another Republican, said that while “he appreciates the governor’s vision” the language regarding unions and bargaining rights doesn’t make sense to him.
“You can’t have every municipality in the state deciding for itself what can be collectively bargained and what cannot,” Baldermann said. “That should be statewide legislation or federal so that we’re all not competing with each other and you don’t have different work rules going from one suburb to another.
“Whenever our state’s elected leaders don’t have the courage to make a difficult vote, they kick the can back to the local governments. It’s the same thing they did with video gambling, saying each of us has to decide if we want it.”
Baldermann, like most of the other mayors I’ve spoken to, also said he objected to the governor’s threats to take 50 percent of the income tax money the state normally shares with local governments to pay the state’s bills.
“I appreciate the idea that everyone has to have some skin in the game, that we all have to share in the sacrifice to solve this state’s financial problems,” Baldermann said. “But that’s just too much of a sacrifice for local governments to make.”
More Top Picks Go Kart
Baldermann, who met with the governor along with other Will County mayors, said he also was under the impression that the items in the turnaround agenda were non-negotiable.
“We have no plan to vote on this right now,” Baldermann said.
Regarding the governor’s various proposals to give the public the right to vote on collective bargaining and government employee benefits, Baldermann said, “In theory, that’s a nice idea. But we just had a municipal election and had 15 percent voter turnout. I’m not sure you want 15 percent of the people deciding the rights of workers. Voters are just too apathetic.”