Lake County board chairman Aaron Lawlor

The Lake County Board unanimously approved a resolution aimed at putting teeth into a proposed senate bill that would allow voters to select candidates for the position of county board chairman, beginning in 2020, during its Feb. 14 session.

The bill’s sponsor, state Sen. Terry Link (D-Vernon Hills), also the assistant senate majority leader, filed the legislation last month. It currently resides with the Local Government Committee, for review.

The bill also permits a candidate seeking the chairman post to simultaneously seek a regular county board seat. Lake County is the only remaining jurisdiction within the state, which does not elect its board chairman. Nearby McHenry County entered into its first such selection process with the November 2016 general election. Former state Sen. Jack Franks (D-Marengo) was picked over the incumbent chairman Joe Gottemoller (R-Crystal Lake).

The agenda item No. 57 contained the “Resolution Supporting Government Reform Measures and Amendments to Illinois SB0669,” leading to a 48-minute discussion on the topic. Using Link’s proposal as a starting point, Lake County Board Chairman Aaron Lawlor outlined the intention to place a referendum question on the 2018 ballot that would solicit voter input on: the countywide elected chairman concept beginning in 2020; the redistricting and reform of board boundaries through an “Independent Map Amendment;” and the reduction of county board seats.

“A bunch of my time has been dedicated to focusing (on this bill), which mandates that a countywide election occur for the post of county board chairman,” said Lawlor. “The legislation does focus solely on Lake County. However, [we] are the last of the collar region and Chicago-area counties to elect its chairman from among the board members. And the bill, as presented today, has not been amended to allow a referendum. I believe it’s critical to give voters the final say.

“I believe the bill has merit, I believe the bill doesn’t nearly far enough, and it can’t be passed without putting the power where it belongs … the decision-making power should go to voters,” he said.

Whether the referendum would be under the county’s aegis for management, or through the state’s mandate, as prescribed by law, was open for deliberations and debate centered on the issue of redistricting. A “flat” map would also move in a direction of fewer county board seats, and fewer representatives. District 14 board member Audrey Nixon reiterated a theme of “Board members working together, as always,” as well her pledge to contact Link for further information.

Sandra Hart, of District 13, stated, “To implement a fair mapping process, which will be transparent and impartial … the county board redistricting must be determined without the number of Republicans or Democrats within that district, but instead by the natural, political, or geographical boundaries,” said District 4 board member Sandra Hart. “Essentially, let the voters choose their representatives instead of the representatives getting the voters most likely to keep them in office.”

The McHenry County Board has been the past object of government reduction calls, with 24 seats covering 17 townships, and an estimated population of 307,500 inside 611 square miles. Franks’ tenure in the state legislature was marked by efforts at government reduction, as was his campaign last fall for the chairman slot.

Lake County’s attempt at government reduction through the resolution comes as a measured response and is not based on a template being promoted by McHenry County. Lawlor also voiced concerns, saying, “I’ve also heard that Sen. Link’s motives are political, purely political, he’s said it to members on the floor, he’s said it in the Capital (building) … it’s to get rid of me, and take control of this office. And I think that’s wrong.

“I think we can present an alternative vision. We can present an agenda that is bold, what our constituents want to see … and serve as a model to fix our broken state,” he said.

An attempt to reach Link for comment was not successful.

In the month following the Nov. 8 general election, McHenry County has undergone some change through the consolidation of its board committees. The reductions through merging panels with common duties included: Finance and Audit; Human Resources; Internal Support and Facilities; Law and Government; Planning, Environment, and Development; Liquor and Licenses; Transportation; and Planning and Community Services.

Also since that time, board and committee meetings have been marked by contentious actions, and allegations of politically motivated items being placed on agendas for discussion and voting. A proposal, sponsored by Franks, at a January meeting, was summarily defeated by a 17-7 board vote. He sought to place a referendum question on the April 4, 2017 consolidated election ballot asking if local taxing entities should require voter approval for raising taxes.

It was largely discouraged through a board rules technicality clearly stating that it must first go through committee hearings, prior to a direct vote. Local governments currently have the capacity to amass tax increases from prior year extensions, if the percentage does not exceed the rate of inflation.

The polemic arguments ranged from gerrymandering accusations to former chairman Gottemoller’s reply that the board had not increased taxes for several years, and that the referendum was non-binding.

“You’re implying that they somehow are going to accomplish something when they vote to have ice cream for lunch in the second grade … that’s exactly what this is,” he said.

A trip to a McHenry County board session was also suggested, and Hart indicated that while the venture would be instructive,

“I would hope the (our) board conducts itself with the professionalism it has shown.”

In casting his vote for the government reform resolution District 12 board member S. Michael Rummel said, “This is for our county. How it ends is another question … Sen. Link started this, and the chairman (Lawlor) has tripled up on better reforms … it doesn’t mean we’re at the end. There could be five more reforms that come out after this. I just want to point out, we’re voting on this resolution for the best outcome for our county.”