Palatine officials defend tax hikes in budget

Palatine officials don't deny the waste, exorbitant spending and refusal to cut costs that plague many units of government.

But they say critics or a lone critic, as it were Monday night to Palatine's 2011 budget are barking up the wrong tree.

The council unanimously approved what it called a bare-bones budget and its accompanying tax and fee increases, satisfied it took painstaking measures to cut personnel and spending while maintaining services and the “fabric” that makes Palatine a desirable place to live.

The vote followed a lengthy encounter with Palatine tea party Coordinator Craig Mijares, who said he will no longer allow governments to get blank checks, and that officials didn't do enough trimming.

“There is tremendous waste,” Mijares said as a fellow tea partyer stood in the back videotaping, a common tactic of the grass-roots organization. “I have been able to easily shave $2 million off this budget in less than two hours without even batting an eye.”

When prompted, Mijares quickly rattled off a list of examples including $85,000 budgeted for training and travel, $64,500 for cell phones, $52,000 for street beautification and $150,000 for gateway entrances. He also criticized a lack of transparency in the village, saying it keeps secret information about salaries and benefits its biggest expense.

Councilman Scott Lamerand, who helped draft the budget as finance committee chair, said the reason for measures such as a new electricity utility tax is plummeting revenue, not spending. And certain costs like salary hikes can't be eliminated when about 80 percent of staff have employment contracts, he said.

“We don't want to pass on costs to our residents,” he said. “That's why 12 people won't be coming back next year.”

Officials also reiterated that 100 percent of Palatine's 3.99 percent tax levy increase, which will cost property owners about $40 more per year, is supporting its fire and police pension obligation.

The council noted that Mijares didn't stick around for its vote, and dismissed his appearance as grandstanding out of a “duty to scream about taxation,” when he could have provided more productive input during four previous open budget hearings.

“For somebody to sit down and start to scream and holler, and bring their cameras in and then disappear after they get their sound bite and leave becomes frustrating because it's disingenuous,” Lamerand said.