Tag Archives: local government

Suburbanites who like to vote in national elections but not in local ones

Posted on by

Ahead of yesterday’s elections, I read this from the DuPage County Clerk:

Photo by Polina Kovaleva on Pexels.com

“While it’s too early to make predictions, it appears that DuPage County is on track to have a large turnout for this presidential election. There’s excitement in the air,” Kaczmarek says. “In 2020, the turnout was 76.55% with 491,067 ballots cast – the largest turnout in DuPage history.”

In recent years, DuPage County has had the highest voter turnout in the region in every election.

In other words, voter turnout was high with a presidential election. But this high level of turnout does not carry over to local elections. See posts from 2022, 2019, and 2018.

I can understand why turnout is high during presidential and national races. The rhetoric is persuasive, the stakes are high, and the advertising is plentiful.

But suburbanites like local government and local control. They like seeing their tax dollars at work in the community. They like the access to local leaders. They select communities based on particular amenities that they want to preserve or enhance.

National and state politics do affect what happens in communities. But the huge drop-off between voting for the president voting for the local mayor or council is a bit odd; in day-to-day life, the suburbanite may see experience more affected by local government than by the president. With the federal system the United States has, local government (municipalities, townships, counties, etc.) have significant decision-making and monetary powers. To not participate in local elections at similar rates to national elections is to indicate less concern and interest for the former.

Trying to count all the government bodies in Illinois

Posted on by

Different sources provide different counts of government bodies in Illinois:

Photo by Tim Mossholder on Pexels.com

There are so many units of government in Illinois that people can’t even agree on the total because of differences over what technically qualifies as a government body. The U.S. Census Bureau says 6,930, while the Illinois Department of Revenue, which tracks governments authorized to levy property taxes, reports 6,042. The state comptroller’s office lists 8,529, and a study by the Civic Federation tallied the number at 8,923 as of 2019.

Regardless of the exact answer, the number of governments in Illinois outpaces that seen in bigger states, including Texas (which has 5,533, according to the Census Bureau), Pennsylvania (4,851) and California, a state with a population three times the size of Illinois but half as many local government units…

Today the state has more than 5,700 special-purpose governments, including 851 school districts, 861 drainage districts, 838 fire protection districts, 376 library districts, 348 park districts and 320 multi-township tax assessment districts, according to the state comptroller’s office. Many of the state’s nearly 1,400 districts dedicated to roads and bridges have boundaries overlapping its 1,425 townships.

Most of these governments are outside the Chicago region and represent only a sliver of the state’s population. Nearly two-thirds of Illinois residents live in the six-county Chicago metropolitan area. Meanwhile, 51 of Illinois’ 102 counties have fewer than 25,000 residents, and 15 of those have a population under 10,000, according to a 2021 Civic Federation report. About two-thirds of Illinois’ school districts have fewer than 1,000 students enrolled, and there are 26 school districts with fewer than 100 students.

Two figures stand out:

  1. How do the different counters get to numbers so far apart? The difference is roughly 2,000 bodies of government – what exactly is the scope or taxing ability of these bodies? On the national level, who is considered to have an official count in these area?
  2. Americans tend to like local government that responds to local needs. On one hand, all these government bodies are exerting the will of the people to control local activity. On the other hand, this could be viewed as micromanaging. Certainly there are merges that could happen in some of these categories to take advantage of economies of scale and more efficiently serve a slightly larger population? (I have discussed townships before.)

The focus of this long article is the corruption and lack of oversight than can happen because of so many government bodies. The few times a resident might be reminded of all these bodies is when they see a property tax bill or during election season when there are candidates for all sorts of spots in different bodies.

So is one way to interpret the number of government bodies in Illinois is to suggest that the price of corruption is not enough to convince residents and/or local leaders to give up local control?

Acting at multiple levels to provide alternatives to lawns in a Minnesota suburb

Posted on by

If residents and leaders want more options to grass lawns available, who needs to act? This story about working to provide spaces for “the endangered rusty patched bumblebee” in one Minneapolis suburb describes what happened:

Photo by Abdul7amid Al Fadhly on Pexels.com

The city of Woodbury in recent years has made native landscaping and pollinator gardens more intentional in some of the city’s 500 stormwater basins. The homeowners associations that rule many of Woodbury’s residential developments, dictating everything from front door colors to permitted landscaping, have become more lenient. The just-built Westwind New Home Community has in its recorded covenant a stipulation that allows homeowners to use native plantings and shrubs.

The Legislature weighed in last year with a new law saying cities cannot ban pollinator gardens or native plantings in front yards, opening a path for those who want to create a bee-friendly spot. The conflict got widespread attention after the city of Falcon Heights sued a man who planted vegetables in his front yard…

When visitors ask her for advice, Boyle sends them to Metro Blooms, a Minneapolis nonprofit that helps communities create healthier landscapes. There’s some cost to a project like Boyle’s, but the larger barrier was the social stigma…

Hong has pitched an idea to developers to allow homeowners to choose their landscaping, much the same way they might choose the home’s paint color or countertops, and to give them the option of planting native grasses and pollinator gardens. If someone just bought a new house that came with sod and in-ground irrigation, “it’s asking a lot of the homeowner to rip that all out and do something different,” Hong said…

The counterargument is that most builders choose sod for new houses because of state and federal rules about stormwater and erosion control, said Nick Erickson, the senior director of housing policy for Housing First Minnesota, the state trade association for builders.

From the story, it sounds like at least these sets of actors have gotten involved: a municipal government, homeowner’s associations, the state legislature, non-profits, and some residents. On the other hand, developers and builders may privilege grass lawns because of state and federal guidelines. Additionally, the story hints at more informal interactions as residents talk offline and online about lawns and draw upon long-established patterns about lawns and yards.

All of this suggests to me that moving away from lawns is not an easy task. Americans, particularly in the suburbs, tend to like lawns and what they represent. To present viable alternatives takes work. Many homes already exist. What might motivate people to take out a lawn and replace it with something else? What incentives are available? In this particular situation, a danger to wildlife is motivating some people to act. Elsewhere, it might be drought or limited water supplies.

If people want to envision a United States with substantially fewer grass lawns in thirty years, this article hints that multiple actors will need to work. Each could have a part to play in incentivizing other options. And as noted above, having new homes that do not start with a lawn is a potentially powerful change that could take some time to pursue.

The culture wars come for traffic policies

Posted on by

Should motorists or others take precedence on streets and roadways? Legislative battles over traffic policy in Washington, D.C. show how this has become a culture war issue:

Photo by Sora Shimazaki on Pexels.com

One of the proposals would forbid Washington’s local government from banning right turns at red lights. Another would do away with the automated traffic-enforcement cameras that ticket D.C. drivers for speeding, blowing stop signs and other violations.

The provisions are not just a case of earnest traffic-engineering wonkery sneaking into Congressional oversight. They represent a culture-war cause just as real as D.C.’s needle-exchange efforts or mask mandates, two other targets of current GOP riders. At the core of it is the politically revealing question of cars versus other ways of getting around.

In blue cities across the country, local road policy in the past decade has been tweaked in the name of making things safer and more enticing for non-drivers — often by making things slower and more annoying for motorists…

In a polarized country, it was inevitable that this would become more than just a disagreement over traffic circulation and moving violations. After all, the 21st century push to promote alternative modes of transportation cites a Democratic-coded cause (climate change) to promote ways of getting around (by foot, bike, bus, or subway) that are a lot more convenient in dense blue cities.

On the right, for more than a decade, there’s been a refrain about the “war on cars” right alongside the war on Christmas. “There is a loud constituency that does not want you to drive your car,” said Jay Beeber, executive director for policy at the National Motorists Association, which has championed the measures dictating Washington policy. “A lot of this is virtue signaling.”

Four thoughts:

  1. Is it “inevitable” that this would become a culture war issue? I am sure there is an interesting history in here. Does this go back to seat belt laws? Speed limits on highways set in the 1970s?
  2. It is relatively easy to break this down into cities versus other areas. What about groups or political discussions in between such as suburbs promoting more walkability and bicycling, small towns and rural areas trying to lessen dependence on cars, and regions emphasizing different transportation policies? Are there Republicans for different road policies and Democrats for more driving?
  3. The interplay between federal and local policies is worth paying attention to. Americans tend to like local government oversight of local issues. Do Americans tend to think the federal government does too much regarding traffic policies or not enough?
  4. Where does this issue rank in the range of culture war issues? Is this more like a proxy war or the big issue? Americans like driving so this could get at core concerns about American ways of life.

Many years can pass – at least 17 for one suburban development – between proposing and completing a project

Posted on by

Some development projects take a long time from beginning to end. Here is a recent example from the Chicago suburbs:

Photo by Markus Spiske on Pexels.com

The Glen, a large residential development that was to be built in Elgin 17 years ago, has come back to life with the help of a new builder.

Moda Homes is partnering with Lennar Homes to build the first phase of a project that calls for 83 single-family homes, 54 age-restricted homes, a 150-unit senior assisted living facility and a neighborhood park on 73 acres off Nolan Road, according to plans presented to the Elgin Planning and Zoning Commission.

The unincorporated property was zoned in the early 2000s for a subdivision. Moda Homes is requesting the site be annexed into the city and a preliminary plat for the project be approved, both of which are now headed to the Elgin City Council for approval…

Elgin council members must approve the annexation agreement and the preliminary plans before construction can begin. A meeting date at which the project will reviewed has not been set.

If this is approved, this development may take about 20 years to complete.

This may seem like a long time. But lots of factors can slow down the process. This story does not say but I wonder if the 2007 proposal was shelved by the housing bubble of that era. Developers can face money issues or there can be a decrease in demand. With the current proposal, local officials might have concerns about annexation and the plans. Questions about or changes to the plan might slow or stop the process. And numerous other issues could pop up.

Perhaps a different question to ask is how long a development proposal “normally” takes. Then could such a prediction factor in local conditions (municipalities can vary), economic conditions, and particular developers or builders? If twenty years seems long, is 4-5 years “normal” from start to finish?

Of course, some developments are proposed – some seriously, some not so much – and never get built. In the Chicago area, think of the Burnham Plan or Frank Lloyd Wright’s idea for a one mile high skyscraper. For any development to be completed, lots of things have to go right.

We need solutions to continued low turnout – less than 20% – in Illinois elections

Posted on by

The primary elections earlier this week in Illinois excited few voters:

Photo by Tara Winstead on Pexels.com

Though thousands of properly postmarked mail-in ballots are still being tallied through April 2, state election officials believe it will be hard to crack 20%.

Unofficial results from the 20 most populated voting jurisdictions in Illinois — which represent more than 81% of all voters in the state — show less than 17% voter turnout combined.

Turnout tallies in the suburbs remain below 20% as well, with Lake County currently showing only 11.7% of registered voters cast a ballot.

Why so few voters?

“Most of the races were completely uncontested, with just one contested county board race on the Democratic side,” said Lake County Clerk Anthony Vega. “That lack of motivation could have resulted in voters not coming out.”

With that lack of choice, combined with the fact that Democratic President Joe Biden and former Republican President Donald Trump had all but secured their nominations ahead of Tuesday’s vote, low turnout was inevitable, experts said.

These are plausible reasons. Yet, I have heard little about significant solutions. Such options could come from multiple angles: local officials, voters, advocacy groups, the state government, employers, civic organizations, etc. Illinois may face serious problems in numerous areas but this strikes me as one that affects numerous others and is foundational for the supposed American system of government.

The one feature of this I think about is the ways that the suburbs grew, in part, because Americans like being closer to local government. Compared to big cities, states, and the federal government, a suburban resident can more easily interact with local officials and local government activity. But, if people do not even want to vote for those local measures – and there is a suggestion in this article that local referendums might have pushed voter turnout up a few percentage points – then this interest in or connection to local government may be severed.

Low turnout elections and planning tax-related questions on the ballot

Posted on by

A low percent of eligible suburban voters turn out in some years, meaning relatively few people often decide the fate of certain questions on the ballot:

Photo by Karolina Grabowska on Pexels.com

But a Daily Herald analysis of vote totals for 22 ballot questions posed to suburban voters in Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake and McHenry counties last April showed District 101’s turnout was the highest of those initiatives. Fifteen of the 22 were decided by less than a quarter of the eligible voters, including four that were decided by less than 10% of eligible voters, records show…

Another analysis showed similar findings of recent ballot questions in Cook County:

The study showed that 75 property tax-related questions posed to voters during that time were decided by less than a third of those eligible to cast ballots.

Having these tax-related questions on the ballot in low-turnout elections may be intentional:

Ryan Tolley, executive director of Change Illinois, a nonpartisan, nonprofit group that advocates for ethical government and elections, said taxing bodies are deliberate about when they decide to pose questions to voters that could affect their property tax bills.

“They’re thinking about it strategically by putting them in an election when voter turnout is traditionally low,” he said. “Low voter turnout is often advantageous to them at the ballot box.”

Because voter turnout is traditionally highest for presidential elections, many taxing bodies try to avoid posing expensive ballot questions to voters then. Instead, they rely on voter apathy during local elections in odd-numbered years, nonpresidential general elections or primaries like the one coming up in a few days.

Suburbanites have opinions about local taxes in Illinois, a state with a lot of governmental bodies and high property taxes. Yet, voter turnout is often low, even with questions involving taxes up for vote.

In the short term, I do not think it is easy to boost turnout. This has been a trend for years now. Many people do not exercise their right to vote.

In the long term, one solution would be to limit the number of election cycles governments have. Why not limit local elections to 2 and 4 year cycles that line up with House and national elections? This would also save money as governments could consolidate election resources.

Another option would be to reduce the number of local government bodies in Illinois, thus reducing the number of elected members and initiatives. For example, abolishing townships would eliminate one layer of government whose services could be picked up by others.

Can pro-housing movements be bipartisan in a polarized era?

Posted on by

Jerusalem Demsas tackles an interesting question: how can housing advocates navigate a society marked by political polarization?

Photo by Simon Rizzi on Pexels.com

One thing that helps bind an ideologically diverse pro-housing movement is that everyone in a community suffers when housing prices soar. Checking Zillow is a nonpartisan activity. The other thing keeping the coalition together is that, well, it’s barely a coalition at all. YIMBYs work in the context of their own states and cities. No national group dictates the bills they support or the messages they send.

On the other hand:

That doesn’t mean the bill will become law. Hobbs told reporters she’s still considering whether or not to sign the Arizona Starter Homes Act, noting that she prefers legislation with support from local jurisdictions, and this bill has been opposed by the local-government lobby. Either way, the political price is low. In a state as divided as Arizona, where the last gubernatorial election was between Hobbs and the right-wing firebrand Kari Lake, no one’s switching their votes over zoning policy.

Not even die-hard YIMBYs. “I’m a Democrat; I voted for the governor,” Solorio told me. “And if she ended up being the biggest NIMBY in our state, I’d still vote for her reelection because zoning, even though I’m one of the biggest zoning-reform advocates in the state … still doesn’t rise high enough for me to flip my vote.”

I have argued before that housing is a local issue. Theoretically, Americans are less partisan at the local government level as they focus more on addressing community needs. Or, perhaps they are just less partisan here compared to the state or national levels.

If the YIMBY movement is able to be less partisan, is this partly because such movements are still rare or not that popular? It takes a lot of work to convince American property owners that more housing should be added near them. It is one thing to support housing in the abstract and another to support it nearby.

Might another path forward be to have third-party candidates that only promote more housing? This means they would not get entangled in other issues and could focus on one issue.

Grocery taxes and local government revenue

Posted on by

A recent announcement by Illinois Governor J. B. Pritzker that he wants to eliminate the 1% tax on groceries has some suburban official upset:

Photo by Carlo Martin Alcordo on Pexels.com

In his budget address in February, Pritzker proposed raising taxes by almost $900 million, but called for eliminating the 1% grocery tax as a regressive tax that hurts poor people.

Revenue from the tax goes entirely to local governments. The mayors laid out how that would affect their municipalities.

The change would cost retail-rich Algonquin around $2 million, about 10% of its budget, Sosine said, calling it “unacceptable.”…

Libertyville Village President Donna Johnson said the mayors are sensitive to financially strapped residents, but said the cuts affect basic services like police, fire, public works and roads…

In anticipation of such criticism, the governor’s office released a statement that it supports local government operations with more than $1 billion annually in additional funds from sources including an internet sales tax, gas taxes and transportation bonds.

Local governments have an ongoing balance to keep in generating revenues and then providing services to their communities. On one hand, they have mechanisms by which they can raise their own revenue. As noted above, the small grocery tax has generated some monies that municipalities count on. On the other hand, local governments receive revenue from other governmental bodies. As noted above, the state of Illinois provides monies to communities through a variety of means.

The concerns expressed by these local officials hint at both immediate concerns of needing to address a potential budget shortfall if the grocery tax is halted and long-term concerns of making sure state funds continue to go to communities. Cited elsewhere in this story is that the percent of income tax monies going to communities has dropped several percentage points in recent years.

What is the ideal percent of revenue for municipalities that should be generated within the community? (Is the correct answer something like 110+%?) Answering this question has consequences for zoning and land use decisions as well as what local governments will offer to residents.

Needing thousands of signatures and a ballot initiative to start building a new community

Posted on by

To build on rural land, the backers of a proposed new city in California need to collect signatures and get on the ballot:

Photo by Matthias Zomer on Pexels.com

Former Goldman Sachs trader Jan Sramek unveiled his closely guarded ballot initiative for the proposed community between San Francisco and Sacramento in January, a plan that envisions 20,000 homes, transit infrastructure, schools, jobs and green space for an initial 50,000 residents. He has since amended it twice to address concerns raised by Solano County and a neighboring U.S. Air Force base.

Thursday is the deadline for the county counsel’s office to give the ballot initiative a title and summary, which will allow signature gatherers to hit the streets in search of the 13,000 they need — and preferably thousands more as a cushion. The delays mean the campaign has just two months, not three, to collect signatures if they want to give elections officials the maximum time to verify them…

“We’ve been walking a line of making sure we get this right and also realizing that the clock is ticking,” he said. “At the same time, we believe that the amendments that we made to the measure will significantly help increase our chances of success in November, and it was definitely worth the additional time that it cost us to get it right.”…

California Forever could have avoided this had the campaign shared its proposal with local officials ahead of time, said Ross, the consultant. “It’s very much an outsider approach,” he said…

The initiative specifies that the development agreement will include the 10 guarantees made by California Forever, such as $400 million to help county residents and Travis Air Force Base families buy homes in the community and $200 million for the county’s existing downtowns. An environmental impact review would also be required.

A friendly reminder: you cannot just start building a city or community in the United States. You may have been able to do this in the days before states or even afterward with more undeveloped land and smaller populations. But, at some point, communities had to appeal for incorporation. Later, they could appeal for home rule or other recognition.

Today, land use is governed by zoning guidelines at the county and municipal levels. Any change usually has to be approved by some body of local government. Local officials and local residents may disagree with developers and property owners about the best use of land. Some proposals are turned down while others are approved.

It sounds like this proposal has multiple local governments steps to proceed through. Will there be enough signatures to get on the ballot? Will it be approved by voters? What will local (and state) officials do? There is a long way to go even before any ground is broken.