Mayor Elizabeth Tisdahl leapt to the defense of City Manager Wally Bobkiewicz at Saturday’s budget workshop when a resident criticized his budget cutting plans.

Irene Gregory of 1900 Sherman Ave. had said the manager was “taking a hatchet to cherished programs and would make an empty hull of the city.”

Mayor Elizabeth Tisdahl leapt to the defense of City Manager Wally Bobkiewicz at Saturday’s budget workshop when a resident criticized his budget cutting plans.

Irene Gregory of 1900 Sherman Ave. had said the manager was “taking a hatchet to cherished programs and would make an empty hull of the city.”

The mayor responded that the city manager “is doing exactly what the City Council asked him to do — come up with a budget that doesn’t raise taxes.”

She added that the aldermen “value the diversity of the community and don’t want to increase taxes and thereby increase the number of people losing their homes to foreclosure.”

So, where does the budget process stand for now for homeowners?

First, while the manager’s budget proposal technically does not raise property taxes, it does include a $1.4 million increase in trash hauling fees. If those costs were place on the property tax bill rather than the water bill where the city collects its trash fees, it would amount to a 3.5 percent increase in property taxes.

Supporters of the new trash fee scheme say it will give residents an incentive to recycle more and send less refuse to the landfill, because rates will vary depending on the size of trash carts used. That gives individuals more control over how much they pay than they would if the increase was added to the property tax bill.

But on balance it’s still a net increase in the cost of city services.

Otherwise, so far the aldermen have come up with a few suggestions for additional cuts. For example, Alderman Delores Holmes, 5th Ward — thinks the city could cut back on tree trimming and possibly on elm tree injections.

But mostly they’ve identified some cuts they don’t like — such as closing the branch libraries.

Support for the branches wasn’t unanimous. And Alderman Ann Rainey, 8th Ward, who was out of town during the budget workshop, has since posted a note on her message board favoring closing the branches. She says she is convinced branch library supporters won’t be able to come up with private support they claim they can find and that “this ridiculous battle will rage on again next year.”

Rainey, by the way, doesn’t like Holmes’ proposal for postponing tree trimming and the elm tree injections.

Meanwhile some budget-balancing ideas proposed by the manager may not be achievable because the other entities he’s counting on to pick up the tab won’t play ball.

That’s the case with a $290,000 proposal to have the school districts pick up the cost of police school resource officers. The school boards say they can’t afford it.

And several of the manager’s proposals for trimming employee benefit costs require the agreement of city unions which haven’t signed on to the plan so far.

So, whether the City Council will actually adopt a budget next month that doesn’t raise property taxes and does start to rebuild its reserves is still an open question.

Bill Smith is the editor and publisher of Evanston Now.

Join the Conversation

1 Comment

  1. City Spending Again
    Doesn’t the Council, rest of city government and apparently residents get it. We can’t just keep spending money on every pet project and expect it will all work out in the end.
    The Daily Northwestern reports the city has spent more on ‘art’ projects during 2009 than probably most people were aware of—trying to sneak them in and hope no one noticed? And they plan to spend more in 2010 ! If there are, and I doubt, legal restrictions on how it can be spent, at least put it in the bank so it can earn interest until—if—we get out of this budget hole.
    If residents want to save the branch libraries, Cultural Center, Ecology Center, recreational centers, and many more, make all staffing volunteer only. Also all city committees and commissions. Let us see who really things these are important.
    Who is going to tell the mother who is on welfare and barely getting by that dental, mental health and other assistance will be cut so that a highly privileged mother near the North Branch can walk to the branch—and not have to [horror of it all] take the CTA downtown to the Main and be near people she does not want to associate with. I suspect city workers who are laid-off or hours reduced will also resent the north shore privileged—or are they expected to grin and bear it ?
    When taxes go up, bond rating down, city services decrease, etc. will the privileged pitch in with extra tax payments? Will they pay the mortgage and taxes of the poor who are being forced out of their homes ?
    Come to think of it we can probably save $135,000(?) on a budget director since it is evident the Council and others are not paying any attention to him. In any event he will probably leave out of frustration or moral protest.
    We cut the Council before, maybe it is time to do so again. Chicago has one alderman for every 50,000 residents, Evanston has one for less than 9,000. Surely councilmen will give up their positions to help with the budget—after all every one of them needs to make promises and cave to special interests to get elected. The fewer doing so, the fewer ‘gifts’ they have promise. Also those who find satisfaction with slowing down growth [zoning, sign inspectors, property inspector, and committees and bureaucrats we don’t even know about], should be willing to step aside for the good of the city.

Leave a comment
The goal of our comment policy is to make the comments section a vibrant yet civil space. Treat each other with respect — even the people you disagree with. Whenever possible, provide links to credible documentary evidence to back up your factual claims.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *