Home / Blogs / Junad Rizki's blog / Evanston city council members have been putting lipstick on a pig for years!
Evanston city council members have been putting lipstick on a pig for years!
I don’t need to go to Wasilla Alaska to look for misuse of the tax payer money – all I have to do is go to my local city council meeting. In this national election both sides want to talk about the issues, one issue is health care. So let’s talk about our local officials and how they take care of themselves and their families with a gold plated health care package.
Our part time elected city council members have created a very special compensation package for themselves when it comes to health care.
That is they pay between $11.50 a month for single cover for a HMO to $37.25 a month for family coverage. That is they can cover their families with a top of the line Blue Cross/Blue Shield family plan for $37.35 the cost of this plan to the tax payers is $1,404.32 a month. Thus the real salary of council members is $10,000 plus $16852. –thus their total compensation if they take the family coverage is almost $27,000 a year, not bad for a part-time job. (That is if you want to even call it a job?)
Do all city employees enjoy such good and inexpensive coverage? No other part-time city employees are offered medical coverage. That is city council members are the only part-time employees with this special perk. Some of them will complain they work a full time job here, but let’s get real; many of them have other jobs in which they are highly compensated. A few even hold jobs with other government units.
What do other city employees have to pay to cover their families per month? Our police and firefighters pay $165 and $150 a month to cover their families. Our non-union city employees to cover their families pay $185 a month. The majority of the cities employees are not highly compensate individuals such as our council members who in many cases clearly have house hold income above $100,000. a year. The majority of city employees appear to be making $40,000 to $60,000.
Who sets the council member compensation? You guess right, they do! Every four years they appoint a hand pick committee to set the compensation for the next council. By the way they screwed up appointment of the committee and had to pass a special ordinance since they missed the date for this year.
Most of these council members think they are here for life. So last time they did not raise their $10,000 a year salary what they did is they said they would just continued to take the medical benefits.
I have been asking under freedom of information which council members are ripping the taxpayers off taking the medical coverage. First I asked for names then I just ask for numbers of council members taking each coverage. Staff is trying hard to protect their masters. They have refused all my requests. They have cited they can not give me the information since it is in the council member’s personnel files. I found it very interesting the city keeps personnel files on elected officials.
Of course looking at the total cost of medical benefits of council members in the budget of $109,000. it is clear most of them are taking medical benefits. I have been told off the record only one council member is not taking the coverage.
To me this is a huge and distasteful rip off of the taxpayer’s money; some might remember the city last year dismantled the health department. That is the cut services to many low and moderate income residents here in an attempt to save $1 million dollars.
While I do not have data and others might, I would suspect about 1/4 of all Evanston residents do not have health care coverage. (Looking at national numbers) Thus this excessive benefit being taken by public officials is all the more distasteful.
What is fair compensation for being a city council member here? We don’t need a hand pick committee to tell us. No council member or the mayor should get health benefits. Compensation is not set on this being a full time job. The reason it might appear to some council members they work a full time job is because they are so incompetent. Just last week at the Administrative and public works committee they spent over a hour and half discussing an apartment rental that the city owns that the tenant was behind on rent. How long did they spend discussing our $30 million capital improvement plan for next year?
Right now they get $10,000 a year, this is enough – if they want to added 3% inflation for the last four years and the next four years fine. Give the next council $13,000 a year with no medical benefits. If some of them feel they need use the city of Evanston medical plan. I am Ok with that as long as the taxpayers do not pay for it! For example if they need family coverage let them pay their entire $13,000 salary and the additional $4,000 out of their own pockets. I am of the opinion many of these council members have other sources of medical coverage but they are taking advantage of this cheap coverage at taxpayers expense.
There are many citizens in Evanston who are not compensate at even $30,000 a year for full time work, many lower income residents work several jobs to try to afford to live here, so why do council members have the nerve to suggest they deserve a compensation package of close to $30,000 for a part-time job they do not even do well? Any taxpayer or council member’s friend who wants to suggest the current compensation is fair, should please explain to us why it was OK for them to raise taxes and revenues last year 13.33% and not eliminate their own excessive medical benefit?
Hey Junad,
This is a post not a face-to-face chat at the local cafe. It's not who I am but what I say that matters.
We type our opinions and make our arguments on this forum. Why would anything I say be any different if you knew who I am? Now, if I were at a city council meeting you would see me and hear me etc. But this is simply a place to post an opinion.
I guess I owe a thanks that you responded to me.
You compare an anonymous post to a crank call? Pa leeeze.
Anonymous Al
Go ahead and ignore the comments from anonymous posters, Junad and Peter. Your comments just show your hubris.
BTW, if either one of you plan to run for city council, chances are at least this anonymous poster will ignore you.
Anonymous Al
Anonymous Al you miss the point - I for one. like to know who I am talking to. I have never met Peter Sanchez, I know Vito - and see him at the council now and then. But I like to put a face to a comment.
You know who we are - we don't know who you are - you claim you want your privacy - but in a way it is like a crank phone call -
Some people who were commenting here have told me they have stopped since they don't like the anonymous posters,
With out a face - or name the comments clearly have much less value - like it or not. ( Anonymous Al or Mr Who knows are not names )
Vito, Junad,
Save yourselves the grief and ignore the anonymous/unverified posters. These people don't have enough confidence in their own ideas to use their names. For all we know they could be writing these posts from a correctional facility or from somewhere in the Alaskan tundra. I must admit though that reading some of the anonymous posts does have an entertainment value.
Peter Sanchez
Political Science Professor (perhaps I should run for alderman?)
Peter - many of the views express by certain anonymous posters show their lack of knowledge of what is going on here in the town. I also agree they lack confidence in their ideas. They also must have some type of fear - that the rest of us might bother them - in some way. As if we care!
I respect those who give their names and I have talked to at public events even if I disagree with their views. Those "WHO" hide behind their computers, I agree with you have more "entertainment value" than anything else.
Junad,
I stopped responding to them a while back. They either don't want anyone to know who they are for some personal or professional reason (since they are known in Evanston) or they don't live in Chicago, so of course they don't want people to know that. I refuse to engage someone who hides behind a wall and throws stones. They seem to have lots of time on their hands and all they are doing is stirring the pot.
On another note, when they insult us, they are insulting (perhaps slandering) and individual. If we "insult" them, we are only criticizing words on a page.
I think that Bill Smith should stop these anonymous posts. Or, offer to make their names known if they continue their insults.
Peter
I frankly don't understand this post and what the big issue is with the salaries (and the specific and overly focused emphasis on health insurance by Mr. Rizki) of the alderman. The entire thing - money AND benefits - is a payment for their service just like any other job. Is is reasonable to compensate (by whatever combo of benefits and salary) these people for their time? Does it have anything to do at all with the members of the school board? Perhaps. But, with so much going on that really needs attention, is this the issue that we should focus any efforts on? There are larger and more systemic issues at hand here.
One of these issues is the idea of changing our system of 'wards' such that every alderman is elected by every voter in Evanston. Since the alderman get to vote on every issue, why shouldn't I be able to vote for every alderman? Our current system is out of date and I think is one of the major issues that perpetuates the council's "decision gridlock". For example, if I live in Alderman Wynne's ward and don't like the way that Alderman Moran votes on something, why at the next election, shouldn't I be able to vote for alderman Moran? All alderman should be up for city-wide vote by all voters. It is very frustrating to only be able to cast your vote for your alderman, when the budget and all other items that effect you are voted on by all of them. Maybe 1/2 of the council should be up for election every 2 years for a term of 4 years, so that you always have some continuity.
I am starting to recognize that until we have city-wide elected officials, nothing can change in this City.
The council member jobs are not full time they are public service. That is to serve the community not to make a living from the job.
Barb - I feel that giving any of these people $27,000 a year for the work they do is excessive compensation.
It makes no sense to give someone a $10,000 a year salary and then give them a $17,000 beneift this is not done in the real world.
My use of school board members is simple, they put in alot of hours and are not compensated at all. Not that I think many of these people are qualified either,but that is beside the point.
I think term limits would be a better solution to public officals here. Too many of them have gotten elected then not done their jobs and quit in the middle after having the job for years.
Electing on city wide basis would have its problems - some areas then might have no representation. If elected like school board members it would be quite possible to get all council members from one part of town - thus those in other areas would have not representation.
Barb the $109,000 we pay for their medical benifits requires about 15 -20 million in real property value to support - I see no need for this -
Barb - I have been involved in many issues here over the years - I will most likely be involved in this issue during the next election cycle - and as they and their friends on the compensation committee work to give the next council compensation.
I have been to many budget hearings over the years - we need to cut this type of waste period. We don't need greedy elected officials who are raising taxes and fees 13.33% who have gold plated health insurance - do you think it is right that all the other part-time city employees do not have this benefit? I think many part-time employees are providing as much if not more value than some of the people who sit on the council.
I have been asking under freedom of information which council members are ripping the taxpayers off taking the medical coverage. First I asked for names then I just ask for numbers of council members taking each coverage. Staff is trying hard to protect their masters. They have refused all my requests. They have cited they can not give me the information since it is in the council member’s personnel files. I found it very interesting the city keeps personnel files on elected officials.
What's the scandal here, Junad?
1. Of course the city has to keep files on all of its employees, including elected ones, on issues related to benefits and pay.
2. While salary and other information is public record, I really don't think that it is any of your business which particular health insurance choices the aldermen or their dependents make. We know what plans are available - but personal coverage issues are private.
What kind of insurance do you have, Junad? HMO or PPO? How many claims have you made in the last year? Enquiring minds want to know.
More importantly, your constant harping on the issue of health insurance is - like most of your hysterical muckraking - silly.
While the alderman position is a 'part-time' job, the fact is that in most cases being an alderman makes it impossible to maintain a full-time day job. So we have aldermen who are lawyers or college instructors and have flexible schedules. These people often cannot get decent coverage through their day jobs, being part time or solo contract workers - so they need to be part of large employee groups to qualify for coverage.
Now Mr. Who Knows does not approve of employment-based health insurance, and hopes that the system will change in the future. ( Senator Obama and John ('I was a POW') McSlime have both proposed plans to move the country away from employment-based insurance.) Still, that is the system that the country has, and until that is changed, if we want to attract decent aldermanic candidates, offering health insurance makes sense.
As for your cheap rhetoric:
There are many citizens in Evanston who are not compensate at even $30,000 a year for full time work, many lower income residents work several jobs to try to afford to live here, so why do council members have the nerve to suggest they deserve a compensation package of close to $30,000 for a part-time job they do not even do well?
True, there are many people who do not make $30,000 per year. But we do we want unskilled workers or teenagers serving as aldermen? Do we want one of the panhandlers on Sherman Ave. (who probably makes less than 30K per year) running the city? Do we want the busybodies (like Junad) with plenty of spare time running the city?
Do we want people to become aldermen because they have nothing better to do with their time? Maybe you do, Junad, but I would like experienced and qualified people to run for alderman. While money should not be their only concern, we don't want to make it impossible for qualified people to afford to serve. We want someone with experience and knowledge running the government, not a Sarah Palin type.
Consider the consequences of having underpaid aldermen:
1. Only wealthy people will be able to serve.
2. Aldermen will find other ways to pay their bills (taking money from the dreaded 'special interests' )
Who`you continue to show youre lack of understanding of the real world.
You also continue to show you lack understanding of what is really going on here in Evanston.
It appears you support giving Alderperson excessive medical benefits. Since some how you are of the belief no one qualified would run. Who it is not a well know fact to most citizens the city gives these people the medical benefits - maybe this year when they tell people its time to run for alderperson they will tell everyone?
Youre statement no one qualified would run is more nonsense. Looking at the people on the council now - maybe you can lighten me on their real world qualifications? That is what experience do any of these people have in running a large organization or running a large project?
By the way WHO - you believe giving Medical benefits allows everyone to run for public office. Give me a break - here again you - know little - most of those who are on the school boards and council are quite well off - a few have been very wealthy. These positions are not full time - but are for public service. Bottomline Who the medical benefits make no difference on getting the vast majority of people to run.
Who I doubt you are married or have children - thus you know nothing of the public schools here - should we now give school board members medical insurance?
Who - school board members put in the same amount of hours as council members - they get no pay.
Who no one here is subject to the same review as in the national election - some of these people if subject to the review would clearly have serious problems running. You believe that by giving these benefits that it stops alderperson from taking money?
Who this is more nonsense. I am not stating anyone is taking money. But there are plenty of other ways beyond handing someone an envelope with cash to pay off public official for a vote. As we all know it can not always be proven in a court of law.
WHO - why don't you answer my last statement "Any taxpayer or council member’s friend who wants to suggest the current compensation is fair, should please explain to us why it was OK for them to raise taxes and revenues last year 13.33% and not eliminate their own excessive medical benefit?"
And please don't tell me you will solve the problem by replacing the Civic Center with a IHOP!
Youre statement no one qualified would run is more nonsense. Looking at the people on the council now - maybe you can lighten me on their real world qualifications? That is what experience do any of these people have in running a large organization or running a large project?
I looked up some of the 'Meet the Alderman' profiles. I know that there are a few lawyers ( Jean-Baptiste , Wynne , Bernstein , Moran ) . While I am not very fond of lawyers, it seems that this is an appropriate background for an alderman, since it is their job to write laws.
Anjana Hansen is also a lawyer who has worked as a prosecutor. It seems that this is the kind of experience one would want in an alderman. ( Also, Hansen's opponent was a notorious NU-hater whose only 'experience' consists of running demagoguic anti-NU campaigns)
Cheryl Wollin has a long history of being involved in civic affairs. It looks like in addition to being an alderman, she teaches political science part-time at Oakton. While the legitimacy of 'political science' as an academic discipline is a subject of debate (a certain Professor at Loyola has made some rather bizarre statements), it seems that this is the kind of person who may need the City benefits. Teaching part-time at Oakton will not provide benefits, and I have no problem if the City uses its group purchasing power to make benefits available to aldermen.
Delores Holmes has a background in education and leading a social services agency (oh, I can't imagine how that is relevant to city government). I saw Elizabeth Tisdahl's profile too. I am not really impressed by her background, but she is one of the most notorious NU-bashers.
So I think that most of the alderman - even if I do not always agree with their positions - have the proper qualifications for the job. Day to day management of the organization - such as personnel matters, getting potholes filled, etc. - falls under the direction of the City Manager. Aldermen are supposed to look at the bigger picture.
I understand that you ran for alderman, Junad, and I don't see how your background makes you any more qualified than the current group.
Anyway, if we believe Vito and his Republican friends, only elitists who eat arugula and read the New York Times (instead of EvanstonNow) care about education and experience, and anyone can run a government.
Mr WKW? accuses me of being a Republican, the very "label" mongering that he accuses others. I am a recovering liberal and I would match my liberal credentials against his/hers.
Question: In the last Cook County primary whom did Mr WKW? vote for - Todd Stroger or Forest Claypool? I voted for Claypool. BTW Obama endorsed Stroger. I hope you enjoy the sales tax and rest confident that the Cook County picnic bench inspectors remain on the job while medical staff were reduced at Cook County jail and that Stroger's relatives were added to the payroll.
As for aldermen, this current "qualified" crop has hired some "great" city managers, who with their acquiescence, have mired us in a fiscal mess.
Thought of joining ACORN?
Obviously from his political rant Mr Who Knows What? is an aspiring community organizer, perhaps a member of MoveOn or ACORN? But from his slam at Palin, dismissing her experience, is he suggesting He Who Walks on Words to be unqualified or not at pay grade. After all, he couldn't even do a real estate deal without getting into trouble.
Are you suggesting that McCain's POW sacrifice was not worthy of respect and of less value than that of a community organizer?
I think Junad should put lipstick on his pink pig.
Are you suggesting that McCain's POW sacrifice was not worthy of respect and of less value than that of a community organizer?
Vito-
I think that McCain has cynically milked his POW days for 30 years now. Every time he answers a question, regardless of the issue, he resorts to a story about his POW days.
I also think that it is fair to ask if the qualities that are desirable in a fighter pilot ( recklessness, willing to face danger) are desirable in a president.
McCain's recent sliming of Obama, suggesting (inaccurately) that Obama wants to teach sexually explicit material to kindergarteners, is especially vile, dishonorable, and McCarthyist. McCain is so desperate to be elected that he has sold his soul to Karl Rove.
In fact, McCain and Palin and the Republicans are resorting to many of the same tactics that our local NIMBYs use. Peddling fear (crime! skyscraper!) , mischaracterizing the opponents' statements, blatantly inconsistent arguments ,xenophobia and intolerance, anti-intellectualism (NU-bashers) , praise of 'small-town values' and demonization of the 'cosmopolitan big cities' (Chicago) , and a yearning to return to the magical good old days when the 'uppity' minorities stayed in their place , and bogus economic arguments.
I am not a fan of big government or unions, and would have no problem voting for Alf Landon ,Everett Dirksen, or Nelson Rockefeller should they return from the dead, but tolerance and rationality matter more than anything.
Mr Who Knows What? (Mr WKW?), as a recovering liberal, I find both candidates less than appealing. Unfortunately that is the choice we have, and I am forced to select one who would do the least damage. Given that we have a Democratic Congressional majority, your stated aversion to big government and unions would tend to eliminate He Who Walks On Words (HWWOW). His experience as a community organizer is seemingly negated by his un-Alinsky endorsement of Todd Stroger and the typical Chicago/Cook machine candidates. His sponsorship by Emil Jones does not bother you? You are contradicting your claims.
He has agreed to endorse and approve labor legislation such as the Free to Choose legislation. HWWOW also endorses BIG government. Thus your claim of "tolerance and rationality" seemingly do not matter.
Your lack of rationality and tolerance is further evidenced by accusing those who desire a modicum of civic responsibility by NU as anti-intellectual. You also throw around smear words such as: "NIMBYs, Peddling fear, skyscrapers, xenophobia and intolerance, anti-intellectualism, praise of 'small-town values' and demonization of the 'cosmopolitan big cities'. I am sorry to say that you are guilty of the very things you accuse others.
Post new comment