Q&A with Dist 4 candidates

Three people are seeking two seats representing District 4 of the DuPage County Board, which serves all or parts of Addison, Bloomingdale, Carol Stream, Glen Ellyn, Glendale Heights, Lisle, Lombard, Wheaton and Winfield.

The candidates are Mary Dickson, Grant Eckhoff and Debra Olson. The Daily Herald asked the candidates questions about their views on local issues. Following are their responses. Some have been edited to meet the requested maximum of 150 words.

Q. Why are you running for this office, whether for re-election or election the first time? Is there a particular issue that motivates you, and, if so, what is that? What will be your main priority in office?

Dickson. I love DuPage County. My experience with the county dates to 1980 when I was a reporter covering the county. In 1983 I was hired to work in the public information office, where I served principally as the media liaison for the county board. I seek election for two reasons: (1) To provide a leadership voice for District 4, and (2) To serve as advocate for the men and women who work for the county and provide exemplary service to the residents every day.

Eckhoff. I am running for office because I made a strong, positive impact on the county board during the first five years, and I can continue to have the same impact in the future. The budget is the overriding concern at the county. We need to continue to deliver essential county services at the lowest possible tax rate.

As DuPage County continues to mature, many of those county services will simply be rebuilding the county infrastructure. Beginning in 1996, the county continued to reduce the tax levy and, at the same time, cut or consolidate staff. Pressure was put on the other county elected officials to take the same steps with their offices.

Now it appears that we have come to a consensus that the budget has been cut to the bone and that an additional funding source needs to be put in place.

Olson. I am running for county board because I believe strong, independent leadership is more important than ever. I refuse to be a rubber-stamp politician. As an independent voice, I have often been one of only a couple of members to stand up to (and vote against) bad budgets, wasteful spending and (I believe) ill-advised policy.

Addressing the current financial issues responsibly and leading in a new direction for the future are my priorities. My strong involvement and engagement in the communities I represent, and maintaining good collaborative relationships with local leaders, will continue. Assisting constituents with their concerns has been very important to me; each success is a joy.

I will continue to endeavor to bring common-sense policy and fiscal responsibility to county government, no matter the resistance, if re-elected.

Q. If you are an incumbent, describe your main contributions. Tell us of important initiatives you've led. If you are not an incumbent, tell us what contributions you would make.

Dickson. I am uniquely qualified for election to the county board because, as a journalist, I covered the county and understand its functions and departments and, as an attorney representing local governments, I work on a day-to-day basis with issues affecting the county, i.e. contracts, agreements, personnel, liability issues, etc. Both careers have taught me to ask hard questions and accept no easy answers.

Eckhoff. Initially, as a result of my municipal background, I made important contributions regarding zoning issues (voting against major variance requests) and transportation issues (encouraging the expansion of Jewel Road.)

The main initiative that I have led is to prepare the county for the opportunity to install "red light cameras." These cameras take pictures of drivers who violate a red light and, if approved by the sheriff, a ticket is issued to the violator. The state legislature recently gave collar counties the authority to install the cameras so that we can work to save lives at intersections.

I remain very interested in the development of O'Hare (Airport) so that the county can work with other local leaders to take advantage of development opportunities. I also would like to work to keep the DuPage County Museum minimally operated until the budget situation improves or the museum can raise more funds on its own.

Olson. I have fought for limited government, fiscal accountability, long-term budgeting, cost-cutting and performance measures. Assisting constituents is a priority. I have worked with township, municipal and state officials to accomplish mutually beneficial goals in a cost-efficient manner. I have led or co-led initiatives in:

• Cost-cutting/efficiency through public-private partnerships, county vehicle maintenance and usage policy changes, reorganization and space/energy audits, reducing benefits and perks.

• Finance/budget policy changes such as fiscal impact statements for new and expanded budget items and long-term budgeting.

• Public Works policies/projects in flood relief and clean water.

• Judicial Policy - Drug and Mental Health Courts.

• Transportation and Environmental policies such as the Alternative Fuels Vehicles Policy, Clean Air Policy, the Safe Roads to Schools Initiative, the Trails Maintenance Task Force.

• Development Policy (revised building codes, Green Development).

I have also fought rule changes to obtain home rule and am leading efforts to move forward on the Strategic Plan.

Q. What is the primary function of the county board?

Dickson. The primary functions are to govern unincorporated areas, oversee the budgets of and provide space for constitutional offices, and things such as transportation and storm water services in the county.

Eckhoff. Public safety. That function is accomplished by maintaining effective offices with the state's attorney, sheriff, public defender, probation department and court system. We need to maintain these offices at the highest level possible in order to continue to maintain the high quality of life in DuPage County.

There are many other priorities in DuPage County, such as transportation and protecting the public health and welfare. However, if I have to select only one priority it is public safety.

Olson. The DuPage County Board has regulatory and fiscal powers and is responsible for appropriating county funds, management of departments and agencies not under the authority of other countywide elected officials, and the levying of taxes. We represent constituents and assist them in addressing their concerns. We are the legislative and policy-making body of the county, the "city council" for the unincorporated areas and the watch-dog of tax dollars.

Q. The county is considering enacting a fee for storm water services. If you support this, explain why. If you don't support this, explain why not?

Dickson. As I understand the fee, I generally can support it as a "user fee." However, at this time, it appears to be non-discriminatory, affecting private citizens, churches, etc., some of whom can least afford it. Therefore, before committing, I would have to learn more about its effectiveness and whether it is truly necessary.

Eckhoff. The "fee" is essentially a user fee since it will charge more to the entities that have more impervious on their property. These entities place more storm water in the system and should be charged accordingly.

We are all users of this system, from driveways to rooftops, so the fee should be spread out and not simply levied against a few. With the fee, DuPage County can continue to provide effective storm water solutions so that we can continue to avoid extensive flooding as we were able to in the fall of 2007.

Olson. Residents, businesses and institutions in DuPage County have benefited enormously in recent years from millions of dollars of widespread infrastructure we have put in place to control flooding by addressing large storm water and localized drainage problems.

That infrastructure must be maintained properly to continue to work well. We also are required to meet new regulations in the Clean Water Act, but will not be receiving funds from the federal government to do so.

Though more information is needed at this point to address maintenance of infrastructure and compliance with Clean Water Act mandates, I prefer shifting the dedicated storm water levy back to its original level or more (not a property tax increase).

Q. There has been some discussion of cutting the salary of DuPage County Board members. They now earn $48,620 annually. Should this pay be reduced or not? Should board members continue to get mileage reimbursement, pensions, committee chairmanship stipends and health benefits, or not? Please explain your positions.

Dickson. The issue of cutting county board member pay and benefits at this time is simply for headline purposes, as it is not legal to do so. Notwithstanding this, however, I support cutting county board member pay, eliminating stipends and mileage (in most cases), and providing pensions on a level comparable to that provided the rank and file. To the extent the county board is viewed as a full-time job, I support health benefits provision.

Eckhoff. Yes, I voluntarily reduced my own pay by not accepting the raises that we offered in the early years after I was elected. In addition, I have authorized staff to eliminate my 2008 stipend (I was not eligible to receive any in 2007.) I think returning the wages to the 2002 level of approximately $42,000 would show leadership.

I would also eliminate the mileage reimbursement and chairmanship stipends. Given the extensive amount of time devoted by board members to their job, I would retain the pension (in the form offered to employees) and the health benefits.

Olson. When first elected to the county board, I was surprised to find out what county board salary and benefits included. Since that time I have promoted a reduction in all areas.

I have voted against salary increases and stipends for elected officials, and have not taken them even though they were approved. As chairman of the Cost Efficiency Committee, I proposed a reduction in county board member salaries, elimination of stipends and either elimination of pensions for county board members or reducing the pension to the same benefit given to county employees.

I also support the elimination of mileage reimbursement and a ban on reimbursement for travel.

Q. Should the county government have home rule? If yes, why? If no, why not?

Dickson. I have personally seen home rule work well in allowing local governance; however, I have read news articles where I believe abuse has been shown. Therefore, home rule should only occur with voter approval.

Eckhoff. Yes, if approved by the public in a referendum. Our county is larger than seven states in terms of population, yet we need to go to Springfield for the authority to manage many of our county issues.

For example, until recently the county could not install red light cameras, ban smoking in restaurants or issue new policies to regulate massage parlors without the authority from Springfield, since we do not have home rule powers.

Many municipalities in DuPage County have home rule powers, such as Wheaton, and they have been used responsibly. I think the county can also use them responsibly.

Olson. No, I believe county government should not have home rule, and in no event should obtain home rule through rules changes and court action.

Home rule would allow greater regulatory powers (such as restricting massage parlors and the like), but would give almost unlimited authority to raise taxes and fees (other than property tax). Restricted taxing authority exerts greater pressure upon government to cut costs, become more efficient, create partnerships, reduce duplication and do with less.

When the need truly arises for more funds, the county can go to the state legislature, or must make its case to the voters. Through referendum, the voters have the final say in whether or not taxes will be increased to fund operations/projects/programs. I believe that's a good check and balance to have on government.

Q. How should the county fund its operations in the future? What do you think of increasing the county sales tax to fund operations? What do you think of creating a county vehicle sticker tax to fund operations?

Dickson. The county makes up only a small portion of the property tax bill each year; therefore, cutting this type of tax for the sake of touting a cut is not acceptable.

However, I also favor specialty taxes, such as the cigarette tax, and user fees. If I was on the county board now, I would have favored the vehicle sticker fee as a quantifiable fee. In that the board did not approve the fee, its only option is the public safety tax, which I can also support with voter approval.

It is a hard sell, however, as I don't see much agreement among the county board as to the size of the deficit and the manner in which the funds raised by the tax will be used.

Eckhoff. As I stated above, I prefer to institute "user fees" whenever possible. However, presuming that we all agree on funding "public safety" as I outlined it above, the county needs to maintain a broad base of funding so it is not tied primarily to a single taxing system.

Falling property prices can reduce real estate taxes, just as the 9/11 tragedy reduced sales tax revenue. I would, however, change the existing balance because I prefer to work at further reductions in the property tax by increasing reliance on a sales tax. I think a sales tax is more progressive if essentials such as food, clothing, shelter and medicine are not included in the tax. In addition, 40 percent of sales tax would be paid by non-DuPage residents, thus reducing all of our individual tax burdens.

I do not like the vehicle sticker tax and voted to remove it when I was on the Wheaton City Council.

Olson. The county should continue to fund operations with relatively stable, diverse, long-term revenue sources. Short-term "Band-Aid" approaches, such as the vehicle sticker, are not the answer.

If voters approve an increase in sales tax, it should be accompanied by dedicating revenues to specific funds such as public safety, drainage infrastructure and capital maintenance, etc. This will achieve better fiscal management and accountability and help avoid a spending spree.

We have spent five years reigning in spending and eliminating waste. I don't want to see all of that reversed. Any increase in revenue should be accompanied by continued efforts in cost-control, efficiencies, partnerships and the like.