The Carbondale Observer

As everyone knows, today is election day in Carbondale. There are eleven candidates for three seats on the city council, and four candidates for mayor. Polls are open from 6:00 am to 7:00 pm. You can find your polling place here.

I wrote a post after the primary explaining my votes for Jane Adams, Lee Fronabarger, and John Holt for city council and another post explaining my vote for Sam Goldman for mayor. I’m going to follow up here explaining who I’m voting for in today’s election, starting with city council.

It’s no secret that I’ve been planning to vote for Jane Adams and Don Monty since the primary in February. That hasn’t changed. I voted for Don Monty because I think his decades of experience at city hall place him in a unique position to guide Carbondale through tough fiscal times. Here is what I wrote about Jane Adams back in February:

I mentioned above that there is usually one council candidate in each election who stands out as deserving my vote. In this election, that candidate was Jane Adams. I admire her work in establishing the Arbor District. Adams owns some rental property in Carbondale and, unlike many landlords, she has improved the community by maintaining and improving her properties. She has a professional looking website with  a detailed platform and a blog. I agree with the positions Adams has taken, especially her emphasis on downtown development and neighborhood revitalization. I have seen Adams speak at city council meetings during citizen comments and I have read her letters to the editor. I have always been impressed, and have often wished she would run for council. Now she is, and she got my vote.

All of that still applies today. Simply put, Adams has the vision we need on city council.

That leaves one council seat, and several good candidates. I voted for Lee Fronabarger and John Holt in the primary, and I still think both would be good on the council. I thought Jackson did very well in the League of Women voters forum, and I thought Bradshaw showed some improvement as well. Any of these four would be acceptable choices for council.

But I still see the council election as a choice between Tom Grant and Lance Jack.  I think Grant would be a fine council member. His experience in city government is valuable, and his current work as the owner of a sustainable farm brings insight into an increasingly important industry. Grant might win today and Carbondale will benefit if he does, but I am voting for Lance Jack.

It was Jack’s performance in the League of Women Voters forum that earned him my vote. Jack faced indirect criticism from other candidates for his vote in favor of the Saluki Way tax. Jack not only defended his vote for the Saluki Way tax, he defended representative democracy from demands for direct democracy.

Jack isn’t without his flaws. In the LWV forum, he suggested that the city take the lead in building a multi-story, mixed-use development at the intersection of E. Walnut and S. Washington. I think that’s a step too far. The city would have to be a partner in any development of that kind, but it should be a junior partner. But Jack’s focus on downtown and his willingness to consider unconventional solutions are valuable.

Because of the large number of candidates, this election is unpredictable. It’s possible that neither Jack nor Grant will be elected. If they aren’t, the candidates most likely to win are probably Jackson and Bradshaw, in that order, with either Holt or Fronabarger having the potential to pull off a dark horse victory.  Any of these would be acceptable council members.

The mayor’s election was tougher for me. I voted for Sam Goldman in the primary, and I still like his platform. Steven Haynes has good experience in city government. But the election is between Joel Fritzler and George Maroney, and that’s a tough choice. It might seem odd, since the candidates are so different. I’ll explain as well as I can.

My personal politics are probably closer to Fritzler’s than to Maroney’s. But I’m not sure Fritzler can get things done, and he’d certainly be a part time mayor. On the other hand, I have little doubt that Maroney will be able to get things done, and I think he’d be a more active mayor than Fritzler. But I’m not sure I agree with Maroney on some important issues.

I had made up my mind to vote for Maroney because, as I’ve mentioned, I think Carbondale needs an active mayor. I had decided that strong and wrong is better than weak and right. But I never felt great about the decision. My feeling is that Maroney doesn’t understand the value of a traditional downtown, and that he doesn’t understand the built environment. I’m not sure he is diplomatic enough to play the political role of mayor in a town with as many competing interests as Carbondale.

Over the weekend, I decided I had to vote for Fritzler. He isn’t the active mayor I want. I’m not sure he has much of a positive agenda. But I also don’t think he’ll block the positive agenda others bring to the council. Fritzler also got an extra point for having a more active campaign. I’ve seen him walking neighborhoods, and he had a last minute TV commercial Monday evening.

Like the council election, the outcome of this race is unpredictable. Any of the four candidates could become mayor and, fortunately, each is qualified. I’m going with Fritzler, but I’d be satisfied with any of the others.

Comments are welcome.

(Incidentally, anonymous comments are allowed. The comment form asks for name and email by default, but feel free to use a pseudonym if you want to anonymously say who you’re voting for and why.)

The League of Women Voters held its second city council candidate’s forum Wednesday night featuring the six council candidates who were not invited to Monday’s event. Wednesday’s forum included candidates Lance Jack, Rick Jackson, Don Monty, Mike Riley, Candle Wester-Mittan, and Hugh Williams. The five remaining candidates participated in Monday’s forum.

Asked about steps to necessary to balance the budget, Williams pledged to oppose all tax increases. Jack pointed out that rising pension costs are responsible for recent tax increases and urged using “all the tools in the toolbox.” Jackson oppdosed cuts to city employees and increases to the property tax, adding that any plan should be equitable. Monty said that different methods are used to balance different city fund and said tax increases should be a last resort. Riley would keep property and sales taxes static and look for pension savings. Wester-Mittan said Carbondale should reassess its priorities and, as part of that, proposed a forum where representatives from all taxing bodies would be present.

The candidates were asked to name their top two priorities if elected. Jackson said he would prioritize requiring a referendum for any tax increase and the use of celebrations and festivals to develop community spirit. Monty pointed to protecting public health and safety along with protecting Carbondale’s future financial situation. Riley would focus on economic development (including both new and existing businesses) and improving Carbondale’s housing. Wester-Mittan would prioritize economic growth and crime prevention. Williams wants to give subpoena power to the Human Relations Commission and get rid of what he called the “anti-business attitude” in Carbondale, citing parking meters as an example.

The forum seemed almost like a debate when the candidates were asked about whether more citizen involvement is needed on big issues like the city’s controversial twenty year, $20 million commitment to Saluki Way. Jackson, Williams, and Riley expressed support for referendums, and Wester-Mittan for forums. Lance Jack defended his vote for Saluki Way funding and defended representative democracy itself. Monty also defended representative democracy, saying that elected representatives must sometimes make unpopular choices. I agree with Jack and Monty.

The candidates were also asked for their ideas on improving Carbondale’s housing. Monty said Carbondale needs a non-profit housing corporation, attractive neighborhoods, and improvements to infrastructure. Wester-Mittan said the city should work with local banks to develop an incentive program for SIUC and SIH employees to buy houses in Carbondale. Jackson said Carbondale needs higher incomes if it wants to increase the proportion of owner occupied housing. Jack supports keeping or expanding existing programs like the rental conversion incentives.

I thought Monty, Jack, and Jackson were clearly the strongest candidates. I defended Jack in a series of posts when he was driven off the city council last year (see here, here, and here), but last month I expressed some reservations about voting for him. Jack was at his best Wednesday night and he’s certainly back in the running for my vote. I expected Monty to do well and I was already planning to vote for him.

I hadn’t heard of Jackson before this election and I was dismissive of his candidacy in my post on last month’s primary, mostly because he didn’t send a candidate essay to the Carbondale Times and didn’t return the Shawnee Green Party questionnaire. After seeing him in tonight’s forum, I have to say I was wrong. Jackson is a serious candidate and if he doesn’t win this year I hope he’ll run again in 2013.

As I mentioned earlier this week, I’ve made up my mind on two council candidates – Monty and Adams. Judging by the results in the primary, I’m not the only one who feels that way. I need a third candidate, and I think the election is between Lance Jack and Tom Grant. Each would bring strengths to the council. I’ve nearly made up my mind which I’m supporting.

If you want to listen to either city council forum or the mayoral forum from earlier this month, they’re available on WSIU’s website.

Comments are welcome.

The League of Women Voters sponsored a forum Monday featuring five of the eleven remaining city council candidates. Monday’s forum included candidates Jane Adams, Jessica Bradshaw, Lee Fronabarger, Tom Grant, and John Holt. The six remaining candidates are scheduled to participate in a separate forum on Wednesday. I watched from home on channel 16, but I missed the first twenty minutes. I’m hoping for a rebroadcast.

All five candidates agreed that Carbondale should not consider privatizing city services like water, sewer, and trash removal. All six also agreed that Carbondale’s liquor ordinance should be amended to allow beer and wine sales at grocery stores. Several candidates proposed police foot patrols in some parts of town.

The candidates were asked to name their two priorities if they are elected. Adams named three: renew, revitalized, and reinvest in Carbondale. Bradshaw would prioritize revitalizing the downtown and increasing sustainability. Fronabarger would prioritize economic development and balancing the budget while maintaining the quality of city services. Grant wants to prioritize financial stability and public safety. Holt would prioritize building unity in a diverse community and making Carbondale competitive with neighboring towns.

The candidates were also asked about their priorities for implementing the comprehensive plan.  Adams emphasized learning from similar communities in finding solutions to blighted neighborhoods and substandard housing. Bradshaw would prioritize a dog park – though not on the old High School football field – and improvements to the city’s housing. Fronabarger named economic development as his top priority. Grant would prioritize economic development and is willing to be flexible in the implementation of the plan. Holt acknowledged some disagreement with the plan but said he would feel honor bound to implement it. Holt stressed that the plan is a guide, not settled law.

The most interesting portion of the forum asked each candidate to write down a question. The questions were shuffled, and each candidate answered one. All of the candidates asked great questions. If I have time, I may write a separate post later this week dedicated to that section of the forum.

As I mentioned previously, I voted for Adams, Fronabarger, and Holt in February’s primary. I didn’t see anything tonight that would make me change my preference. I liked Adams’ answers best, followed by Fronabarger, then Holt, then Grant, then Bradshaw.

I think the council election is shaping up as a race for third. Obviously it’s tough to predict these things, but we do have one poll: last month’s primary. It’s an imperfect sample; historically turnout in council and mayoral primaries is much lower than turnout in general elections. Still, it is the only public poll available.

In the primary, first place finisher Don Monty (18.9%) and second place finisher Jane Adams (15.6%) were the only candidates to earn a double digit share of the vote. Since the primary, they have run two of the most active campaigns. If the primary is any guide, Monty and Adams seem likely to win in April.

That leaves one seat left to fill. In the primary, one vote separated third place finisher Tom Grant and fourth place finisher Lance Jack. Sixty-nine votes separated Jack from fifth place. Using the primary as a guide, it’s easy to look at the council election as a two person race for the third council seat.

I should point out that nothing should be taken for granted. Primaries are not a perfect guide to the general election. Sheila Simon beat Brad Cole in the 2007 mayoral primary before Cole defeated Simon by a two-to-one margin by almost 13 points in the general election. The primary electorate is different than the electorate in the general election. The number of candidates makes this election particularly unpredictable.

The Southern Illinoisan is reporting on the forum here. The Daily Egyptian has an article here. The February primary results are posted on the Btljuice blog.

Incidentally, I thought Fronabarger had the best line of the evening. He called Carbondale an “oasis in the desert of Little Egypt.”

Comments are welcome.

***CORRECTED: I received a comment (see below) alerting me that I had overstated Brad Cole’s victory in the 2007 mayoral election. The mistake has been corrected. I apologize for the error.***

The Southern Illinoisan had an article Tuesday on potential changes to the Illinois police and fire department pension system:

The Illinois House of Representatives could vote this week on the changes, which include increasing the retirement age from 50 to 55 and requiring employees to be on the job for 30 years before being eligible for their full pensions.

It also caps the salary that public employees could use to calculate their retirement at $106,800 starting next year. (This amount would increase annually by half of the Consumer Price Index.)

The Illinois senate passed a version of the changes, which would apply to new hires, earlier this year. Pension contributions are controversial because the municipal costs are mandated by the state. Municipalities must raise the money themselves.

This year’s increase will cost Carbondale $810,730, and current revenues are not expected to cover the increase. At last week’s meeting, the city council discussed options to meet the rising pension costs for public safety employees. City staff recommended levying a property tax to cover the increase. The city has abated its portion of the property tax since 2002.

Councilman and mayoral candidate Joel Fritzler suggested raising the sales tax 1/4 percent instead of levying a property tax. Fritzler pointed out that property taxes in Jackson County are higher than taxes in Williamson County, while our sales tax is 1/4 percent lower than Marion’s. Fritzler also said that many people from outside the community work and shop in Carbondale, using city services. A sales tax would collect revenue from these people.

Outgoing Councilwoman Pohlmann spoke in favor of the property tax. Pohlmann said the property tax is more stable than the sales tax and the revenue is available sooner.

City council candidate Don Monty spoke against service and personnel cuts during the citizen’s comments. Monty, a former assistant city manager, said he remembers going line by line through past budgets and making cuts. He said all the fat has been cut from the budget and further cuts would be devastating to city services. Monty also favors the property tax over the sales tax.

I can see both sides of this, but I lean slightly toward the property tax. I realize that Jackson County property taxes are higher than those of neighboring counties, but (as Fritzler and Pohlmann pointed out) this is the result of the other taxing bodies in the county. Significantly reducing property taxes would require action from those bodies.

According to Mayor Cole, the additional property tax levy will come to roughly $73 on a $100,000 home. That’s not a lot of money, and it will support the city’s pension obligations. That said, a 1/4 percent sales tax increase also wouldn’t be too great a burden.

Long term, pension reform is necessary. Unfortunately, Illinois state government is dysfunctional and genuine reform seems unlikely unless a pension crisis forces changes. At least in theory, voters could force legislative action, but municipal fire and police pensions aren’t the kind of issue that excites voters.

Comments are welcome.

WSIU and B(ee)TL(e) Juice both had articles Monday on Don Monty’s official announcement that he’s running for city council. B(ee)TL(e) Juice also had a link to the press release. Check out that article for the link. Monty is the first candidate to officially announce his candidacy for city council.

I’m going to pull a couple of quotes for comment:

1. The primary function of the City is to protect the public health, safety and welfare. Police and fire protection are the most basic services. The City also has a responsibility to protect neighborhoods and the public by enforcing codes and ordinances and by following the Comprehensive Plan. The City must maintain a safe system of streets and sidewalks. The City must retain ownership of the water and sanitary sewer systems and assure continued high-quality service. Likewise, the City must continue to operate its own refuse and recycling programs in an environmentally sound and cost effective manner. Read the rest of this entry »

The Southern Illinoisan had an article Tuesday on George Maroney’s official announcement for mayor. From the article:

The first-time political candidate said he would work to improve the city’s business climate, lead the discussion on consolidating elementary school districts to save money and attract young families, and more closely follow Carbondale’s city manager form of government.

I’m guessing the talk about consolidating school districts refers to District 95 (elementary) and District 165 (high school). Or maybe he’s talking about consolidating the various elementary school buildings into one. I assume he’s not talking about consolidating with the Unity Point and Giant City districts.  Consolidating 95 and 165 would be a great idea, but I wouldn’t want to see the elementary school buildings consolidated.

As I’ve mentioned before, I don’t like the talk of a restoration of the council-manager form of government.  An active mayor is an important source of political leadership. The functions of a mayor and city manager are different, and both are important.

But I’m not sure Maroney intends to be a weak mayor:

Maroney said he believes Carbondale’s city government has strayed from its original design and he would act as a CEO, delegating authority to its proper recipients.

Castle Perilous owner and blogger Scott Thorne had a post on the Carbondaze Gazette commenting about this:

Delegating authority to proper recipients is much easier when you are the ultimate authority, as Maroney was during his tenure at Memorial Hospital. The mayor, first, has to respond to a number of different publics and, second, has to convince the rest of the city council to agree with any initiatives he wishes to implement.

Exactly.  I would add that under the council manager system, the mayor is not the CEO. Title 1, Chapter 2, Article A of the city code (navigation on the left) addresses this. The mayor is head of the city for legal purposes in relationship to the Governor and presides over city council meetings.  Title 1, Chapter 3, Article A assigns most executive functions to the city manager.

As Brad Cole has shown, there is room in the council-manager form of government for an active mayor providing political leadership. If people don’t like the direction in which Cole led the city, they should elect someone who will lead in a different direction. We shouldn’t just decide that leadership itself is the problem. I hope voters will make this an issue in the 2011 election.

I’m wondering if a clear Cole successor candidate will emerge.  I also wonder if Cole will endorse anyone.

Comments are welcome.

I wrote three posts earlier this week touching on urban design and I wanted to follow up on those. I found this plaque on the Southeast Missourian Building  in Cape Girardeau. I’m not sure how legible the photo will be in your browser so I am going to quote the important part:

Built in 1924-25  Newspaper owners George & Fred Naeter wrote of their inspiration: “To add in a large way beauty and dignity to one’s town is to express affection for the community and confidence in its future.”

In other words, appearance counts. If building something beautiful and dignified expresses affection and confidence, then building something ugly and undignified expresses contempt for the community and indifference about its future.  Read the rest of this entry »

Last week I wrote a post about Lance Jack’s resignation from city council and I promised to follow up.  This morning I wrote one post looking at local liquor law, and a second post looking at state liquor law. This is part 3, in which I am critical of Mary Pohlmann’s remarks about Lance Jack in May of 2009.

Last year, when Fat Patties was denied a liquor license for the second time the Southern Illinoisan ran an article about the denial.  It contained a couple of paragraphs about Mary Pohlman’s remarks  that I’d like to quote and comment on:

Tuesday’s votes came after Pohlmann criticized the legal standing of Jack’s appeal and his competence to hold a license.

The state, Pohlmann said, used language that applied to the Illinois’ other communities, each of which leaves the granting of liquor licenses to the mayor and not a full commission, she said.

Citing Jack’s conviction of DUI in 1994 and “other behavior” she said she’s observed, Pohlmann said she was concerned that Jack was “not of good character and reputation in the community in which he resides.” Read the rest of this entry »

Last week I wrote a post about Lance Jack’s resignation from city council and I promised to follow up with more information.  This morning I wrote a post looking at whether granting Jack a liquor license violated local law.  This is part two, in which I look at state law.

Before we get into state law, let’s start with a quote from city councilman and mayoral candidate Joel Fritzler in the original Southern Illinoisan article about the Fat Patties liquor license and Jack’s resignation:

“My feeling before was, if I were to vote for it, I would be an accessory to violating state and local law,” Fritzler said.

Now we’ll take a look at state law.  Read the rest of this entry »

In last week’s post about Lance Jack’s resignation from the city council, I promised to do some more research and write a follow up. I’ve spent some time wading through state and local liquor laws and I have some additional information to report.

It is going to take a lot of space to cover this, so I am going to split this into multiple posts.  This is part one, in which I look at local law.

Before we get into the law, let’s start with a quote from city councilman and mayoral candidate Joel Fritzler in the original Southern Illinoisan article about the Fat Patties liquor license and Jack’s resignation:

“My feeling before was, if I were to vote for it, I would be an accessory to violating state and local law,” Fritzler said.

This is somewhat complicated, so I’ll go through it step by step.  First, Carbondale is unique among Illinois cities in that all members of the city council are also members of the local liquor control commission. In comparable cities, the mayor is the sole liquor commissioner.

A few years ago Brad Cole and Lance Jack tried to amend the local liquor ordinance to bring it in line with state law, but the angry reaction of some townspeople resulted in the measure being withdrawn.  If the change had passed, the entire Fat Patties liquor license controversy could have been avoided.

The change did not pass, however, so Jack was a member of both the city council and the liquor control commission when he applied for his liquor license for Fat Patties.  Both the city code and state law address this situation.  Read the rest of this entry »