5 to 1 Village Board approves Hanks' Budget

By Joseph Wiszowaty
SAUK VILLAGE |  It took David Hanks 4 hours to go through his speed meeting to discuss the 2014-15 budget on June 30th with the Trustees, it took him 2 ½ hours to give his opinion on nearly every word presented to him in Trustee Derrick Burgess’ analysis of his budget Thursday night.

Hanks called the special meeting so he could rebut and nitpick the analysis interjecting his opinion on the matter declaring the numbers “skewed” but not offering any new facts to refute Burgess analysis. 

Hanks said, looking to Finance Director Mohan Rao for approval as Rao shook his head, that his budget follows Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) principals and not Generally Accepted Account Principals(GAAP).  (EDITORIAL NOTE: GASB is the source of GAAP used by State and local governments in the United States) Hanks didn’t discuss the differences, if any, between the two at his meeting and some Trustees and Hanks supporters thought that was good point and made sense and bobbled their heads.  (Editorial note:  comparing GASB and GAAP is like referring to a Cop as a “police officer” and “law enforcement officer”... Now if the Village actually followed GASB that would be something!)

Hanks said that Burgess offered no solutions in his analysis, however, throughout Burgess analysis he states the Village Board needs to work collaboratively on long term solutions to these problems.  Burgess said he is just one person and there are five other Trustees and asked where was their analysis to discuss at the meeting? 

Hanks asked why none of Burgess’ concerns were brought up during the June 30^th budget meeting?   Burgess said that he was given Hanks budget on the same day of the budget meeting and had not had a chance to go through the information.

Burgess said after an hour into Hanks parsing each word in the analysis with some residents nodding off “why not just take your vote on this budget, you have no intention of making any changes.  You know you’re not going to make any changes so take the vote let’s move on” Burgess said.  Hanks argued that he wanted to meet with Burgess on Monday but Burgess countered he asked to meet with him and Mohan Rao Wednesday, Thursday, Friday or Saturday so that anything we discussed could be brought to the boards attention.  Burgess said meeting at 3:30pm on Monday didn’t afford Hanks any opportunity to resolve any issues before a vote on Tuesday.

When discussion of the now controversial grass cutting grant that the Village’s Housing Commission allegedly received, Hanks said that “it’s not the village’s grant it’s the housing commissions”.  The Village Trustees voted to payout 14 individuals on Tuesday $7,660 of village money.  Burgess said none of this was included in the budget.  Hanks didn’t seem to care saying it was the “Housing Authority’s grant”.  (Editorial note:  The Village of Sauk Village does not have a “Housing Authority” rather a Housing Commission which is a commission of the Village not a separate legal entity permitted to contract services)

After Hanks gave his opinion on Burgess’ analysis for 2 ½ hours he called for the vote on the budget.  Trustees Rosie Williams, Edward Myers,  John Poskins, Lynda Washington and Jeff Morden all voted yes while only Village Trustee Burgess voted no.

Burgess said after the meeting declared the budget “unbalanced” and arbitrarily taking water and sewer money to pay for general fund services.  Burgess cited Illinois law stating that water funds should only be used for the purpose of paying the costs of the water system not snow plowing, not police protection, not for streets, only for water fund services. 

“The Mayor's intentions of pontificating on my budget comments and concerns were not to help the residents of Sauk Village, but to further his politics. While his efforts are focused on his political ambitions, I will continue to focus on the matters that affect the residents of Sauk Village” Burgess said.

Trustee Lynda Washington thought the dialogue was good, but none of the other Trustees raised any questions during the 2 ½ hour long meeting.

(Editorial Note:  Trustee Burgess was citing 65 ILCS 5/11-129-11. "All revenue derived from the operation of a water-supply system, improvement or extension constructed or acquired under Section 11-129-9 shall be set aside as collected and deposited in a special fund designated as a municipal water fund for the particular locality. The fund shall be used only for the purpose of paying the cost of operating and maintaining the water-supply system, improvement or extension, providing an adequate depreciation fund, and paying the principal and interest on the bonds issued by the municipality under Section 11-129-9 for the purpose of constructing or acquiring the system, improvement or extension.”)