Debating home rule
Comments (...)|
|
| Home Rule Committee member Katie Chamberlain begins Tuesday night’s town hall meeting in Princeton with a review of the committee’s research into home rule designation for the Princeton community. About 80 people attended the meeting. (BCR photo/Donna Barker) |
| Buy Bureau County Republican Photos » |
PRINCETON — Princeton residents continue to hash out the pros and cons of home rule, a designation which gives city officials more taxing options, greater spending flexibility and more authority over state mandates.
About 80 people attended Tuesday's meeting at the Bureau County Metro Center, sponsored by the Home Rule Committee, a 12-member citizens committee appointed last summer to study the home rule issue for the Princeton City Council. In September, the committee recommended the city council put the home rule question before voters on the March 20 primary ballot. Members of the committee have now established a "Princeton Residents for Self-Reliance" Facebook page, which addresses the home rule issue.
In an opening 10-minute Power Point presentation, committee member Katie Chamberlain reviewed the committee's research and what the committee sees as the advantages to home rule. All communities which are at least 25,000 in population are automatically home rule communities, and all communities should be treated equally regardless of their size, she said.
"I don't think there is a problem in taking some power away from Springfield and giving it to the local community," Chamberlain added. "Home rule provides a local solution for local issues."
Following Chamberlain's presentation, the audience was given about 60 minutes to make comments and ask questions, with Al Taylor starting the conversation by asking the committee to summarize the advantages to home rule.
In response, committee member Jerry Neumann said non-home rules communities are subject to numerous mandates placed upon them, which a home rule community could reject. Non-home rule communities have more spending regulations placed upon them, while home rule communities can implement taxes to services or products, possibly through a gas tax or hotel/motel tax, in order to generate more money, Neumann said.
"Home rule just gives citizens more choices," Neumann said. "If we vote it down, the only way to generate more money would be to borrow or through more property taxes."
Committee member Joel Quiram agreed, saying Princeton has an unprecedented $28 million in debt, and that number will increase to $40 million with the new water treatment plant being built. More than 60 percent of the debt will be paid by utility bills, with Princeton's electric and water rates continuing to go up, he said.
Looking ahead to needed future infrastructure projects, Quiram said he doesn't want future debt to be paid through utility bills.
Looking at new revenue sources to help pay for those projects, Quiram said one possibility, which could be done through home rule, is to implement a gas tax. According to Quriam's research, the Illinois Department of Transportation shows Princeton has 4,000 vehicles entering the city each day through Interstate 80, with more than 70 percent of gas sold at Princeton stations sold to non-residents. An additional one cent gas tax would generate $200,000 a year, he said.
In response, Bill Smith, president and COO of Beck Oil, said Beck Oil has invested millions of dollars into Princeton and having home rule would put the company at a competitive disadvantage to neighboring communities. Smith also questioned the accuracy of some of Quiram's information. Also, other businesses, specifically hotels, would be put at a competitive disadvantage if a new tax was placed on them, Smith said.
"If we want to attract business to Princeton, it doesn't make sense to bite the hand that feeds you," Smith said. "If we aren't business-friendly, we are in trouble. The fact is if we are going to raise taxes, someone is going to suffer. It's going to be a competitive disaster for local businesses. We may have a Band-aid for a short time, but long-term if we lose businesses, we are dead in the water."
In response, Quiram said he understood Smith's concerns, but he doesn't believe people will stay away from Princeton because of any additional tax. As a side note, Quiram said not one of the gas station owners in Princeton lives in the community, which means they don't pay residential property taxes or utilities.
With that comment, Daryl Becker, owner of Beck's Oil, stood from the audience and said he may not live in Princeton, but he owns four properties in Princeton and definitely pays property taxes to Princeton.
In another issue, another audience member wanted to know if residents could be given any assurance that they could see decreases or leveling of utility bills if another a tax or surcharge was implemented to raise money for an infrastructure project.
In response, Quiram said without home rule, it is a given fact that utility bills or property taxes will increase.
Another audience member said she questioned the wisdom of home rule because it would give the city council a lot more discretion in starting projects without placing the project before the voters. When officials are elected, the citizens can't do much about it until that person's term is up, she said. With home rule, residents could be relinquishing some of their responsibilities.
The "Princeton Residents for Self-Reliance" group will sponsor a second town hall meeting on home rule at 7 p.m. Feb. 23 at the Bureau County Metro Center. The Bureau County Republican will also sponsor a public forum on the issue in March.
Comment on this story at www.bcrnews.com.
Comments
Total Comments 14 View/Add Comments |
Most Recent Comment wrote on ...
Really, Jethro? What makes you so sure? |
