Bill Grossi: 2021 candidate for Mount Prospect Village President

Three candidates - one four-year term

Bio

Hometown: Mount Prospect

Age: 67

Occupation: Attorney

Employer: Self-Employed

Civic involvement: Mount Prospect village trustee since 2017; Mount Prospect Audit Committee; Northwest Municipal Conference Transportation Committee; Northwest Municipal Conference Legislative Committee; Mount Prospect Lions Club board member; past member of the Committee on Men's Cancer Issues of the American Cancer Society of Illinois; past president of the Loyola Academy Fathers' Club; past president of the St. Raymond's Men's' Bowling League; former outside director of the River Grove Chamber of Commerce; former board member of the Motorola Employees Credit Union; past Mount Prospect T-ball coach

Q&A

Q. What is the primary reason you're running for office? What is the most important issue?

A. I am running for mayor because the village needs a strong leader who is willing to make the difficult decisions that will be needed to be made during the next few years. I am that person. At the present time there are individuals who are actively trying to change Mount Prospect government in a partisan direction which would adversely affect the way the village operates. I have a strong finance and accounting background and will use that background to keep the village moving forward responsibly. The most important issue facing the village is the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Our income is down. We made decisions last year that kept the impact to a minimum. We must continue to watch our revenues and expenses and make adjustments as needed. If the state takes part of the distributive fund away from us we will need to adjust and consider taking action to preserve those funds.

Q. How do you view your role in confronting the pandemic: provide leadership even if unpopular, give a voice to constituents - even ones with whom you disagree - or defer to state and federal authorities?

A. My role would be to provide leadership even if unpopular. Last year I made it clear that the village did not need to grant the mayor emergency powers after the initial few weeks of the shut down since we could meet remotely. The board could and did address issues in a timely manner. It is important for the elected board to have a voice and buy into the actions made by the mayor. That sends a message to the community that we are in this together. I believe emergencies only last a short period of time. The regular process should restart as soon as possible. Ruling by executive order should be used very rarely. As for some orders from the state, I believe the village should follow some of those orders but must at the same time look out for our residents and businesses.

Q. Did your town continue to adequately serve its constituents during the disruptions caused by the pandemic? If so, please cite an example of how it successfully adjusted to providing services. If not, please cite a specific example of what could have been done better.

A. The village continued to adequately serve its constituents with a few exceptions. No village employee was laid off, all services continued to be provided but some activities needed to be canceled or changed. PPE was provided to first responders who needed to respond to the sick or injured. Village employees worked from home remotely and rotated working at their normal work location to minimize exposure. Village offices were closed to the public at times but resident issues were handled promptly. The village might have communicated better with elderly residents and those with health issues. Those living alone have suffered greatly. We should have started a check on your neighbor program.

Q. In light of our experiences with COVID-19, what safeguards/guidelines should you put in place to address any future public health crises?

A. If possible, we should have adequate PPE stored. A review by all departments needs to be conducted so that new or amended procedures are in place in the future that will provide a framework to proactively respond as needed. The village had a great financial plan in place that allowed the village to postpone projects and purchases, redirect assets as needed, and temporarily cease internal lease payments. This allowed the village to provide uninterrupted services to the community. The reduced budget was a success.

Q. What cuts can local government make to reduce the burden of the pandemic on taxpayers?

A. There are a few things the village can do to reduce the burden on taxpayers. I will look to a zero property tax levy increase as a starting point for next year's budget. Hopefully we can decrease the levy. I will propose deferring projects that can be deferred to achieve this goal. I will also work with our business community to come up with a temporary sales tax abatement so that they can remain viable. This will be targeted to smaller businesses that have less access to funds. In addition, reductions in the cost of some licenses or fees will be considered. Funds are scarce and we provided $10,000 to each qualifying restaurant last year through the use of village funds and some federal dollars.

Q. What do you see as the most important infrastructure project you must address? Why and how should it be paid for? Conversely, during these uncertain economic times, what infrastructure project can be put on the back burner?

A. The Aspen Trails Park Water Project at Levee 37 must go forward. We have secured federal, state, and other government grants to help pay for the project. We have the funds in our budget for our portion of the costs. The state, however, could cancel their grant. If that happens we will need to consider other funding sources, such as issuing bonds. This is the most important project the village has currently and it must go forward, even if funding sources fail to provide their promised grants. The pedestrian bridge over Route 14 and the Union Pacific tracks can be postponed. There is another way to cross the tracks and this project is costly. Additionally, all future annexations will be put on hold. These annexations involve significant dollar outflows over the next few years which are not readily available.

Q. Do you agree or disagree with the stance your municipality has taken on permitting recreational marijuana sales in the community? What would you change about that stance, if you could?

A. Our village had a referendum placed on the 2020 ballot. Sixty-five percent of our residents voted in favor of the sale of recreational marijuana. While I personally disagree with permitting the sale of a drug that is illegal at the federal level, I voted to allow sale since the voters approved recreational use by a significant percentage. I would have changed the promised tax revenue that were provided to the public. At the time our residents voted the state had authorized the granting of 75 additional licenses. That more than doubles the number currently in use. Therefore, unless a person believes recreational marijuana use will more than double, the tax projections are flawed. In fact, the board was told by the license holder that the first two years of sales would provide the most revenue. I believe that since the voters gave their blessing to the use of recreational marijuana it was my responsibility to approve sales. Therefore, I wouldn't change my position.

Q. What's one good idea you have to better the community that no one is talking about yet?

A. I have a few new ideas. l will announce most of them in the future. However, I will propose an ethics ordinance that includes a limit on the number of commissions and committees that one family unit (spouses) may sit on concurrently and make it clear that no family unit member can sit on any commission or committee that provides recommendations to the village board. In addition the ordinance will state that each elected official shall not have any business dealings directly with the village. I will also increase village transparency.