Citizen Advocacy Center

The City of Elmhurst's current proposal to help the Elmhurst School District close its budget gap in exchange for a TIF extension is no win-win. On the surface, it looks like the School District receives the same funds regardless of a TIF extension, and at the same time, a TIF extension permits the City to complete projects.

Reading the numbers closely tells a different tale. The Elmhurst School District will absolutely receive their share of funds if the TIF is not extended. But if the TIF is extended, $15 ½ million dollars of School District funds is put at stake. The only way the deal comes out equal for the School District with a TIF extension, is if future city councils have $15 ½ million in potential surplus funds to allocate to the School District.

TIF extension clearly benefits the city in the short term and the long term, but for the school district, a TIF extension is a $15 ½ million gamble with no guarantees.

June 17, 2003: Ms. Terry Pastika, Executive Director/ Community Lawyer

The Reality Gap: Subarea H "Interim" Downtown Sector Plan Framework Policy

At the June 16th City Council meeting, the aldermen voted on "Subarea H Interim Downtown Sector Plan Framework Policy" (a comprehensive plan for Block 300). The question was raised as to what voting on the "Interim Plan" actually meant for city planning. A great discussion ensued, including concerns about the Glos Mansion, (which is not actually part of Subarea H) but an essential point was not articulated: voting on the Interim Plan, by default, alters the city's comprehensive plan. A comprehensive plan is a road map for city planners. Calling the proposed plan of Subarea H "a framework" or "an interim policy" is a semantics game.

The city comprehensive plan is being evaluated in subsections and the interim plan for each subsection is going to be shelved until all subareas are completed. When all interim plans are complete, there will be a public hearing to collectively present all interim plans to the public, with the intent of amending the comprehensive plan. In reality, if the city receives a proposal for a subarea, like Morningside with subarea H, they must decide weather to follow the existing comprehensive plan ordinances, or the "interim plan" which is supposed to be on the shelf until all subareas area evaluated. As indicated to the public when the Zoning and Planning Commission was evaluating subarea H, the city intends to use the interim plan to evaluate proposals, effectively amending the city's comprehensive plan by default, without a public hearing. Another dichotomy is that the Morningside Case and the subarea H interim plan are independent entities.

If true, the concepts evaluated for subarea H could have been more diverse, from primarily green space to low density development. In reality, the proposed Morningside development and the comprehensive plan for subarea H are strikingly similar.

: The verbatim record rule recently passed by the General Assembly is an essential citizen tool to ensure public body compliance with the Open Meetings Act. Frequently disregarded, this amendment to the Open Meetings Act would require a verbatim record of all closed meetings by either audio or video recording, which must be maintained by the public body for at least a year and a half. If signed by the governor, this will provide citizens with a mechanism to ensure public bodies do not inappropriately close meetings to talk about public matters or go beyond the scope of what is permitted to be discussed in closed session. For citizens who suspect a Open Meetings Act violation and file a complaint, a judge will have the authority to review the recording in private and determine if a violation took place. Major hurdles to Open Meetings Act enforcement may be nullified: citizens will no longer have to rely on public officials who were present when the violation occurred to divulge the act and public body attorneys who neglect to advise against the inappropriate discussions will have greater accountability.

The Public's Right to Know, May 10, 2003: Ms. Terry Pastika, Executive Director/ Community Lawyer

Implemented in 1984, Illinois was one of the last states to pass a Freedom of Information Act. This relatively recent law guarantees the public the right of access to all public information for inspection or copying, subject to limited exceptions. It is an important civic tool that ensures transparency in government, which is essential to a democracy. What should be a routine exercise in gathering public information often ends in frustration, leaving a gap between the rights of the public under the Freedom of Information Act and the actual public access to public documents. The gap was well documented in a state-wide study by AP member newspapers. Nearly 60 percent of the time the reporters had to show copies of the Freedom of Information Act and point to the specific section requiring disclosure of simple public documents. Public officials refusing to release the information or public officials not being aware of requirements under the Freedom of Information Act were cited problems.

Can the public obtain copies of county board meeting minutes, travel vouchers, city budgets, or vendor contracts? Can public bodies charge .25 cents, .50 cents, $1 or more per page copied? Can a public body charge for employee time to compile records? Does the pubic have to disclose why they are making the request for public information? These are common questions community lawyers at the Citizen Advocacy Center receive from frustrated citizens. Better education for public officials about how to comply with both the black letter and spirit of the Freedom of Information Act, in addition to reforms of the law itself are required to bridge the gap between the law as written versus the law as applied. A free guide to the Freedom of Information Act is available at the Citizen Advocacy Center or at www.citizenadvocacycenter.org.

Transparency and Informed Citizen Participation Is the Cornerstone of Democracy, May 10, 2003: Ms. Terry Pastika, Executive Director/ Community Lawyer

Editor Pamela Lannom's comments about the Open Meetings Act were excellent. Unfortunately, most people are not aware of this very important law that mandates public bodies must conduct public business in the public eye, subject to narrow exceptions. In order for citizens to participate effectively in the democratic process, it is essential for individuals and community groups to become adequately informed about issues considered by public bodies. The Open Meetings Act is an important tool to that end. On a regular basis the Center receives calls from concerned citizens and public officials throughout Chicagoland with Open Meetings Act questions.

Conversations beyond the scope of an exemption to close a meeting, closing meetings under the "litigation" exemption when in fact none is imminent or likely to occur, citizens denied the right to make a public comment, public body advisory committee meetings behind closed doors and items considered and voted on without public notice are common problems relayed to the Center. Some public officials may not be aware of the full extent of the Act, leading to violations. Some public officials are aware of the confines of the Open Meetings Act, but ignore it because penalties for violation do not wield a large enough hammer for deterrence. Every citizen and public official should have a primer on the Open Meetings Act, and educating the public about the Open Meetings Act is a mainstay at the Citizen Advocacy Center. Free copies and easy to understand guides are available at the Center and on our website. The Center also holds free Democracy Workshops explaining the Open Meetings Act and other important tools for democracy. The next workshop is May 7th and anyone interested can call the Center at 630.8334080 to attend.

Skepticism is worthy when municipality considers TIFs, December 12, 2002 Terry Pastika, Executive Director/Community Lawyer

Residents of Lisle should continue to question the validity of a TIF proposal. TIFs give municipalities extraordinary powers. If an area is truly blighted, and no development would occur but for the implementation of a TIF, all taxing districts stand to gain because the tax base will eventually increase, and it is growth that would not have occurred. However, if the tax base would rise naturally or the property would have been improved without a TIF, then the taxing bodies within the TIF area lose the equalized assessed valuations that would have otherwise been theirs for 23 years! If a TIF area is applied to land that could be developed without public intervention, the potential adverse effects could be: increasing the tax burden to taxpayers, hidden tax that evades any referendum requirements, developers given unnecessary subsidies and municipalities given increased power over the use of the tax increment. Early citizen participation is key. Get informed! The Citizen Advocacy Center distributes free TIF guides.

Democracy is alive and well in Elmhurst! December 12, 2002 Terry Pastika, Director/ Community Lawyer Citizen Advocacy Center

The community organizing efforts of Elmhurst citizens that resulted in the Zoning and Planning Commission's rejection of a proposed development by Morningside Equities Group of Chicago is a textbook example of what an engaged citizenry can accomplish. Citizens became proactive on a community issue that would directly affect their quality of life. Citizens spent countless hours gathering information about the proposed development, attending and giving public comments at public meetings, learning about procedural processes in local government, organizing a city-wide "orange ribbon" community awareness campaign, and working with and educating public officials about the citizens' long term vision for Elmhurst. Citizen engagement on this issue not only illustrated the power of citizen involvement, but also directly resulted in public officials revisiting the need for a historical preservation ordinance, a move that would systemically address many of the residents concerns. Democracy is alive and well in Elmhurst!

Personal Information is a Valuable Commodity! November 26, 2002 Terry Pastika, Executive Director/ Community Lawyer

The revelation of the ID theft ring highlights the importance of being vigilant in protecting personal information and with the holiday season approaching, consumers will be quick to draw their credit cards to get into the holiday spirit. Once personal information is disclosed to obtain a "savers card" from the grocery store, to purchase goods over the Internet or at a store, or even to enter a holiday raffle drawing, the consumer loses control of who receives their personal information. The dawning of the information age and explosion of marketing and credit card companies has made an individual's private information extremely valuable, and an individual's control over how that information is shared virtually nil. Personal information about individuals is bought, sold and traded or disclosed every five seconds! Taking precautions against theft, limiting disclosure of personal information, finding out what kind of personal information is being disclosed and learning how to correct mistakes on credit reports are all burdens placed on the consumer.

The Citizen Advocacy Center routinely facilitates free Privacy Rights Seminars and distributes a free series of educational brochures teaching people how to protect their privacy and protect themselves from identity theft. Call the Citizen Advocacy Center at 630-833-4080 for brochures or visit our website at www.citizenadvocacycenter.org to obtain free copies of "Protect Your Privacy" educational brochures.

Home Rule Sneak Attack, October 3, 2003, Community Lawyer, Sarah Klaper

Home Rule is quietly sneaking up on the residents of DuPage County. In order for the County to bypass voters and declare itself a Home Rule entity, the Board Chairman must have authority akin to a CEO. The County Board revised its rules in January to give Chairman Schillerstrom CEO-type authority, and now the Board's Government Efficiency Committee voted to recommend a restructuring of County government in line with an impending declaration of Home Rule status. While Home Rule status benefits county governments, several concerns arise regarding taxing and the County Board's ability to disregard both County and Illinois purchasing and competitive bidding laws. Likewise, the current County restructuring plan seems "efficient," but it places too much power in the hands of one individual, and eliminates the necessary checks and balances within local government.

This plan takes power from the people of DuPage County and their representatives, and places it in the hands of one man - Chairman Schillerstrom. Why would the County Board vote to limit its own powers and the power of its constituents? It didn't. The restructuring plan never went to the full Board; it went straight from the six-person committee to Chairman Schillerstrom for implementation. Will the residents of DuPage County have the chance to vote on the issue of Home Rule status? At the rate the Board is giving away authority, the answer appears to be a resounding "NO."

IS IT WORTH IT? August 29, 2003, Community Lawyer, Sarah Klaper

On June 27, 2002, the Illinois State Toll Highway Authority awarded a huge contract worth $37.9 million over three years to Transcore for a toll violation enforcement program. Transcore just happens to be not only the company that that is now in charge of toll enforcement, but it is also in charge of IPASS and tollbooth maintenance. Was the Toll Authority's decision prudent? At the August 28th Toll Authority Board meeting, Executive Director Jack Hartman stated that the Toll Authority has recouped $6.5 through August 1st in its toll enforcement effort. Looking at the bare numbers, it appears that the Toll Authority would have to recoup a minimum of $12.6 million each year just to break even by covering the cost of the Transcore contract alone, not to mention any of the lost toll money due to scofflaws.

The Toll Authority's enforcement program has been frought with procedural problems from going back two years to recoup fines that tollway users were not informed about until recently, to preventing individuals from properly by refusing to release toll booth maintenance and repair records. Besides the $37.9 million, what did this toll enforcement effort cost? Any remaining goodwill toward the Toll Authority or its new administration? Was it worth the trampling of Due Process at the hands of the Toll Authority with the complicity of the Illinois General Assembly? Finally, was it economically worth it to the tollway users and taxpayers of Illinois?

CELEBRATE DEMOCRACY EVERYDAY, July 17th, Community Lawyer, Sarah Klaper

I was dismayed to read the July 16, 2003 "Word on the Street" column in which a Citizen Advocacy Center press release about a Center event was included in a list of items "not fit to print." While July 4th is the day to celebrate US independence as referenced in the "Street" article, a vibrant democracy requires citizen participation EVERYDAY. It is unfortunate that Jim Pluta and Tim Bryers apparently think that one day of celebration is sufficient. As stated by Thomas Jefferson, "Patriotism is not a short and frenzied burst of emotion, but the long and steady dedication of a lifetime." In an effort to expand the public's civic knowledge and sustained community involvement, the Citizen Advocacy Center dedicates itself to educating individuals on civic rights, civic tools, and how to use those tools to effectively participate in local government.

To that end, the Center hosts 8 - 10 college and legal interns each year from across the country who intern at the center for free. This summer's group has performed phenomenal work on behalf of the Center and dozens of people throughout DuPage County by answering questions regarding condominium development, hate crimes, individual property rights in condemnation proceedings, and police misconduct. On July 23rd at 7p.m., the Center will celebrate the efforts of our interns at Democracy Day - Intern Presentation Night. The public is invited to join us while the interns present the projects on which they have worked in their tenure at the Center.

Topics to be discussed include tollway reform, election code reform, internet privacy rights, and the taxpayers' bill of rights. Of all the subjects covered by the Press, a free informational seminar designed to give the public knowledge of individual and civic issues affecting the community seems to be something most "fit to print."