As with any election, there are a lot of opinions and comments offered some of which are not accurate and/or misleading as the candidates try to better their position. The race for the Grafton Township Supervisor is no different. So let’s take a few minutes and look at some facts:
1. The Grafton Township budget has increased with the incumbent. A couple of examples on record are:
a. Attorney fees incurred because the township supervisor and road commissioner have difficulty working together and therefore each rely on an attorney to handle their differences
b. A staff member who was constantly praised for doing a good job was suddenly dismissed under very questionable circumstances. She was replaced with two new employees thereby increasing the overall salary expense to the taxpayers by over $17,000 per year
c. Expenses incurred for some employees to work from a home office.
d. The Supervisor’s salary has increased to the where he currently receives $42, 070 per year with plans for further increases. (The incumbent is a full-time employee of the state. He arrives at the township offices around 2:30 in the afternoon, thus, with the township office closing at 4:30, his equivalent hourly pay rate is around $82 per hour).
2. Most of Grafton township falls within and the boundaries of Huntley and Crystal Lake, and, as such, the residents receive most of their services from these cities, not from the township.
3. Arguments offered for the need of a new building just don’t add up.
a. As we have not seen “lines at the food pantry” we believe this is grossly overstated. But if this is the case, has a comprehensive study and cost-benefit analysis of all the alternatives been done to make a build verses rent decision? To our knowledge, no such analysis was done and/or shared with the taxpayers.
b. Why does the senior transportation service need additional space with the township office building? There is a dispatcher and the drivers who are out on the road. We don’t understand how this would change in a new building.
c. It escapes us to believe some might try to justify the need for a new building partly on a polling place. Why not use the schools for a polling place like most communities do?
d. How can a $3.5 million structure be built without having a tax impact? Mr. Rossi said, "We were able to secure funding without raising taxes and without needing a referendum," Rossi said. "We were able to do enough belt-tightening."
We believe it is misleading to tell the taxpayers there would not be a tax increase. The money has to come from somewhere. As their source of income is from taxes, it is only logically to assume this money will come from the taxes we pay and additional taxes will be required.
However, if Mr. Rossi is able to do enough “belt-tightening” to find $3.5 million, it seems to follow the township either has a surplus and has over levied in the past, and if the building is not built, we should see some tax relief as the surplus is used to cover existing expenses.
In addition, it logical to assume the cities within Grafton Township will continue to grow and annex more of the rural areas of the township. With this, Grafton Township responsibilities will diminish over time further questioning the need for a $3.5 million building.
The bottom line, if additional space is truly needed for the township offices and a comprehensive study was done regarding the alternatives and this was shared with the public, we would not see all the email and letters to the newspapers. Therefore, it not only seams as good business but also fairness to the taxpayers that this project be suspended until some hard questions are asked and good business practices prevail.
