The County Board offers, and confronts a peson with challenges beyond the imagination. County government is front porch, day to day in America, and a challenge I can not resist. This challenge is why I am running for re-election, because I believe I can, and will, make a difference. My experience and education in local and regional planning, law, transportation and local government, allow me a unique opportunity to recognize, address and solve problems confronting our area and the County.
I have been an effective County Board Member because of my ability to develop a consensus to solving a problem. By opening lines of communication we can identify, and solve, any problem. I meet regularly with our City Councils, Townships, Park and School Boards, and many of the homeowner associations in our District. In addition, I meet regularly with our Mayors and Managers and other elected officials.
Since I have been on the County Board I am proud of my record. As a parent of younger children I understand how traffic congestion can wreck havoc on the every-day lives of busy families. That’s why I worked to improve Hobson and Ferry Roads, and the interchanges at Naperville and Eola Roads. In addition, I am working on a District-wide review of County Roads to construct new turn lanes and reduce backups at intersections.
I have worked to make our roads safer and our children safer traveling on those roads. I worked to install sidewalks, stop lights, stop signs and other traffic control devices so our kids are safe going to school and the playground.
I have worked to hold the line on taxes and spending. DuPage County’s share of your property tax bill is the lowest of any county government in the metropolitan area, and possibly in the state.
Finally, I am the first DuPage County Board Member to actively work with the City of Aurora. In addition to meeting with City Staff and the Mayors Office, I am a member of the Aurora Seize the Future Development Foundation and the Aurora Economic Development Committee.
Transportation issues continue to be a high priority at the County. A good, dependable, transportation system is pivotal to DuPage County’s continued economic success, and for improving our quality of life. Being stuck in traffic, or at the airport, costs us more then we think; it increases our gas costs, our reliance on foreign oil, and the amount of pollution our car puts into the air. But more importantly, traffic congestion steals from us hundreds of hours each year we could have spent with our families instead of stuck in traffic.
As Vice-Chairman of the County’s Transportation Committee I have pushed for a new approach to transportation in DuPage County. I believe we must look at transportation as one giant integrated and intermodal system; and not separate highway, railway, or bus systems.
The following is a list of transportation projects for this area that I have, and will continue, to work on at the County:
1. Naperville Road / I88 interchange - completion of the project; 2. Eola Road / I88 interchange - re-energize the agreement and start the project; 3. Eola Road extension to Roosevelt Rd - get a consensus and start planning phase; 4. EJ&E / Star Line - work with the Canadian Nt’l Railroad, and get this project moving; 5. Increase commuter parking at train stations - work with METRA and build more now; 6. Western Access to O’Hare - work to make this a ‘national priority project’; 7. Aviation Modernization - O’Hare and DPCA - Aviation Re-Authorization Bill; 8. Bus Rapid Transit Expansion - Naperville/Aurora to O’Hare, and other routes; 9. Trail Integration - Additional ‘spurs’ to trains / schools & an Eola Rd. connector; 10. Safe Routes to Schools - expand program to all County roadways; 11. Use prairie grasses along roadways to reduce operating costs, and increase esthetics.
I have worked to make our roads safer and our children safer traveling on those roads. I worked to install sidewalks, stop lights, stop signs and other traffic control devices so our kids are safe going to school and the playground.
New revenue sources must be found for the future, or the County will not be able to meet its mandated roles in public safety and human services. In order to keep County services at the level most taxpayers want and expect, I support either the current call for a cigarette tax, or the Public Safety Sales Tax Referendum. Either of these revenue sources would allow the County to move forward without further service cuts. But this is a choice for the people of the County to make, and should not be mandated by either the County Board or the State Legislature.
New revenue sources must be found for the future, or the County will not be able to meet its mandated roles in public safety and human services. Accordingly, in order to keep County services at the level most taxpayers want and expect, I support either the current call for a cigarette tax, or the Public Safety Sales Tax Referendum. Either of these revenue sources would allow the County to move forward without further service cuts. However, this is a choice for the people of the County to make, and should not be mandated by either the County Board or the State Legislature.
If neither of these revenue sources come to fruition, it has always been my position that ‘user fees’ are the preferable way to pay for County services. The person who uses the service, should also pay the costs associated with providing that service.
State law dictates how much we can charge for county services. However, many of these user fees have not been increased for 10+ years, so we must now also use property tax dollars to continue providing these services. If the County must continue providing these services, the state legislature must allow the County to increase the fees that pay for these services; otherwise the state should allow us to discontinue the service. It is not fair that everyone pay for the special services only a few residents use.
No! The city sticker idea is costly, archaic, impossible to enforce and would end up hurting many of the people the extra funds are supposed to help. All in all it is a wholly bad idea!
The cost of the program would be several million dollars just to implement. You have to pay for the cost of the stickers, the extensive number off staff needed to sell the stickers, the mailing of the forms out to people, the mailing of the stickers back to the people, and / or the outlets that would sell the stickers. In addition, the city stickers can not be deducted from your federal income tax (property tax can be deducted).
It is also difficult, and nearly impossible to enforce. Will the police department in Aurora write a ticket for failure to have a county sticker? Can they? Why would they? Who would prosecute the ticket even if they wrote it? Finally, the Sheriff’s office does not have anywhere near the manpower needed to enforce the sticker across the county.
Much of the increased funds from a sticker are supposed to be used to help people who are on a limited income. Yet the sticker will also cost these same people $50 that they most likely can’t afford. A large percentage of these people will therefore not be able to purchase the sticker. A percentage of them will eventually get a traffic ticket for not having a sticker. So the person on a limited income, who couldn’t afford the sticker in the first place, must now not only pay for the ticket, but also the original sticker they couldn’t afford.
Finally, a percentage of these people will be unable to pay for the ticket, so they will eventually have their licenses suspended. This will cancel their insurance. Then the uninsured, suspended driver (who still doesn’t have a sticker) gets in an accident with you. So the person who couldn’t afford the sticker now ends up in jail (costing you money to house then in jail), and you end up paying higher premiums on your insurance because your insurance company had to pay for the damages. In the end, everyone looses.
I am not comfortable with the County’s 2008 budget, which is why I proposed an alternative budget. Working with the Countywide Elected Officers, I was able to make surgical cuts to the budget that allowed public safety and human services to continue operating at the minimum levels needed. In addition, I pointed out additional revenue sources that will be realized in the coming year, which would be used to balance the budget. Unfortunately, my alternative budget lost 11-7 on the Board. However, I believe my alternative budget will be back before the Board in February, as a template for us to use when we begin adjusting the 2008 Budget.
New revenue sources must be found for the future, or the County will not be able to meet its mandated roles in public safety and human services. In order to keep County services at the level most taxpayers want and expect, I support either the current call for a cigarette tax, or the Public Safety Sales Tax Referendum. Either of these revenue sources would allow the County to move forward without further service cuts. But this is a choice for the people of the County to make, and should not be mandated by either the County Board or the State Legislature.
If neither of these revenue sources come to fruition, it has always been my position that ‘user fees’ are the preferable way to pay for County services. State law dictates how much we can charge for county services. However, many of these user fees have not been increased for 10+ years, so we must now also use property tax dollars to continue providing these services. If the County must continue providing these services, the state legislature must allow the County to increase the fees that pay for these services; otherwise the state should allow us to discontinue the service. It is not fair that everyone pay for the special services only a few residents use.
No on both counts. As I stated previously, I am not comfortable with the County’s 2008 budget, which is why I proposed an alternative budget. Working with the Countywide Elected Officers, I was able to make surgical cuts to the budget that allowed public safety and human services to continue operating at the minimum levels needed. The cuts made by the administration just hacked off a percentage of employees and expenses in an effort to balance the budget. Little thought, and no effort was made to make policy choices on cuts.
Little if any effort was used to work with the Countywide Elected Officials to determine if there was a way around the cuts in their areas. My alternative budget did not reduce the number of police officers, states attorneys or probation officers. My alternative budget kept the public safety net intact in DuPage County! In addition, my alternative budget increased the funding to several of the County’s most needed social programs.
In addition, my alternative budget pointed out additional revenue sources that will be realized in the coming year, which would be used to balance the budget. Unfortunately, my alternative budget lost 11-7 on the Board. However, I believe my alternative budget will be back before the Board in February, as a template for us to use when we begin adjusting the 2008 Budget.
Where does Jim stand on the environment?
As past Chairman of the Forest Preserves Operations Committee I proposed, and passed, an initiative to make that District’s fleet of vehicles a “Green Fleet” within 7 years (vehicles in our fleet would only use alternative fuels that are environmentally friendly). The District is now the first of its type in the nation to move forward in this direction. In addition to grants to implement the plan, the District has received national recognition for its actions.
I intend to bring this same initiative forward for the County fleet. A “Green Fleet” will save money in operational costs in the future from less engine wear and cheaper fuel. In addition, the reduction of VOC’s in the environment is dramatic.
Accomplishments
Last election the Daily Herald said … Jim Healy is a hard-working, well informed (County) Board Member who has taken an active role in several areas of County governance. Jim Healy is one of our County Board's most active members.
The County maintains a wide variety of infrastructure, including: buildings, bridges, dams,and other “big ticket” items. We must inventory these infrastructures, estimating: their life expectancy, cost [and frequency] of repairs, the ultimate replacement cost, and the future functional need or obsolescence. These factors must then be reduced to a capital plan for the future, stretching out up to 50+ years.
The County’s computers are obsolete, in disrepair and lack even minimal safeguards. As the former Chairman of the IT Committee, we repeatedly warned the administration the IT Department needed a complete overhaul which will cost $20+ million dollars. Unfortunately, we were unable to get the administration to recognize the problem.
What needs to be done is already part of a plan prepared by an independent consultant 2 years ago. The County must immediately begin working with the Countywide Elected Officials, and other stakeholders, to prepare for implementation of that plan, including funding options.
The first step must be to have an independent Chief Information Officer (CIO). Counties one-tenth our size have independent CIO’s who make informed, unbiased assessments of what is needed. Presently, the County has a dysfunctional decision making process, and a computer system waiting to crash.
The County has many attributes to attract and retain businesses. DuPage Biz can be good start in an effort to expand our economic base. But instead of dictating, the County needs to listen and work towards consensus. I will continue to work with all our stakeholders to maintain an available, educated and reliable work force; and to seek relationships with business, education and government to provide an environment conducive to expanding businesses in DuPage County.
That is a question for the voters to decide! I personally do not support the County obtaining Home Rule Taxing Authority. When a County becomes a Home Rule unit of government, their ability to levy new and greater taxes increases dramatically. I believe this increased taxing authority creates a lazy way out of tough decision making, and creates an anti-homeowner and anti-business climate. Just look to our east, and watch as Cook County (which is the only county that has Home Rule Taxing Authority) taxes the average person and business out of their County.
But the decision on whether to have Home Rule Taxing Authority is a decision the voters in DuPage County must make. The attempts by a minority of the County Board, and others, to obtain Home Rule Taxing Authority through judicial fiat, must not be allowed. This back room, slight of hand maneuver, attempts to take away the voters right to make this important decision. I believe the issue should be placed on the ballot for all the voters of the County to decide, not just the few who believe they know what is best.