Party line

What happens when you take five Democrats and five Republicans
and unleash them on each other with a slate of hot topics and live microphones?

Fireworks?

Partisan posturing?

Maybe a fistfight or two?

That’s the image of the Springfield City Council promoted by the local news
media, Illinois Times included. Every time the aldermen vote Republicans
one way, Democrats the other, we in the media circle round like sharks on sushi.

Twice, IT has run headlines pointing out party-line votes. WICS-TV,
Channel 20, has aired a segment on this very subject. And in a recent news article,
the State Journal-Register — which, when the council was sworn in on
April 16, ran an editorial warning “City council must avoid partisan fight”
— referred to the council as only “nominally nonpartisan.”

So how many votes in this officially non-partisan body really have broken
along party lines? Half? One quarter? Maybe 10 percent? Actually, an analysis
of all votes taken by the current city council reveals that out of more than
250 votes, only a handful of decisions — or less than 2 percent — were determined
by party politics.

In fact, city council voting is more monotonous than momentous. The great
majority of decisions — more than 75 percent — are utterly unanimous. And if
you overlook the ceremonial votes cast by one council member against every 3
a.m. liquor license, the tally of undisputed votes would top 80 percent.

That leaves two possible explanations for this fixation with party politics:
Either conflict attracts more focus than consensus, or the party votes mark
the issues that matter most.

The current city council — elected April 1, sworn in a couple of weeks later
— is not the first evenly split body to govern Springfield. The previous council
also had five Democrats and five Republicans. Without analyzing its voting record,
the party politics depend on whom you talk to. Ward 3 Alderman Frank Kunz, a
Democrat elected in 1998, told the SJ-R in April that he could recall
only a handful of party votes in his first term on the city council. Ward 7
Alderwoman Judy Yeager, a Republican elected in 1995, says the last council
voted along party lines frequently, especially in 2001 and 2002.

“Oh golly yes, oh golly yes,” Yeager says. “In the last two years of [Mayor
Karen Hasara’s] administration, just about everything controversial was straight
party line.”

Split councils give the mayor chance to cast the deciding vote. Because Hasara
is Republican and Mayor Tim Davlin is a Democrat, the council has experienced
a power shift. Ward 2 Alderman Frank McNeil, a Democrat who has been on the
council since 1991, says the Republican council veterans may feel a special
responsibility to vote together.

“I think those who have been in power now feel they’re the loyal opposition,
so to speak, and it’s their duty to assure the public that they’re doing their
job,” he says.

Kent Redfield, professor of political studies at the University of Illinois
at Springfield, says this development is no surprise. “Historically, you’ve
had kind of a coalition of people that ran city government, a pretty comfortable
good ol’ boys network back when we had a commission,” he says. “Then, when we
changed the form of government [to aldermanic], well, everything in Springfield
is partisan. The Republican Party had been dominant, so there really wasn’t
conflict. Now that you’ve had revitalization of the local Democratic Party,
these are the kinds of tendencies that you often get. If you’ve got party groups
even in a non-partisan body, you get these kinds of splits.

“Of course, there’s no Republican or Democratic way to pave a street,” he
says. “But there are Democratic and Republican street contractors. So you’re
going to get some ideological conflicts and some [conflicts involving] who gets
hired and who doesn’t.”

The current council has followed party lines five times:

• On Aug. 5, the council passed an ordinance proposed by Ward 9 Alderman Tom
Selinger, a Democrat, relaxing ethics guidelines for city officials to match
the rules governing state officials.

• Also on Aug. 5, the council rejected an ordinance proposed by Yeager that
would have exempted neighborhood block parties from having to buy liability
insurance.

• On Sept. 30, the council approved Davlin’s amendment to his own reorganization
ordinance 6-4 (Ward 5 Alderman Joe Bartolomucci, a Republican, refused to vote).
Davlin’s original reorganization ordinance would have merged the city’s department
of public works with City Water, Light and Power into one agency to be called
the Office of Public Infrastructure. The amendment deleted any reference to
that agency.

• On Oct. 21, the council adopted Davlin’s amended reorganization ordinance.

• On Nov. 19, the council rejected an ordinance proposed by Ward 1 Alderman
Frank Edwards, a Republican, establishing a cap on the contribution City Water,
Light and Power could make to the corporate fund.

Even though Democrats have the advantage, they have not always fallen in line
with the mayor’s wishes. At the first meeting of this council, when Ward 8 Alderman
and Sangamon County Republican Chair Irv Smith expressed his reluctance to vote
on six Davlin appointees without having the chance to see their resumes, McNeil
made the motion to postpone the vote.

“I felt that it was not an unreasonable request,” McNeil says. “I try to treat
people by the Golden Rule — the way I’d want to be treated if I were in the
same position. Unfortunately, I didn’t get treated that way [when Republicans
held the advantage], but that doesn’t mean I can’t come back and show how it
can be done.”

McNeil also refused to go along with a major component of Davlin’s reorganization
plan, ultimately forcing the mayor to amend his own ordinance at the 11th hour.
Then, after Republicans objected to having to vote on the inch-thick amendment,
another Democrat, Kunz, moved to postpone the vote for two weeks. His motion
was seconded by another Democrat, Ward 6 Alderman Mark Mahoney.

Weeks later, when CWLP director Todd Renfrow requested that the council’s
utilities committee place an ordinance pertaining to the construction of a new
power plant on the next council agenda, Kunz refused due to the council meeting
being postponed by another Democrat, Ward 4 Alderman Chuck Redpath. Kunz said
at the time he didn’t want to put such an important vote on the agenda of a
meeting some people might not know about.

The council has had close to a dozen votes that split 6-4 or 6-5 with various
aldermen crossing party lines. Two of those votes were on procedural motions
to delay or table votes on the actual question. One was a temporary liquor license,
and two involved zoning or plat approvals. The others dealt with money and personnel
matters:

• On July 15, the council approved Davlin’s appointees to the liquor control
commission by a vote of 6-4 with “no” votes from Republicans Yeager, Bartolomucci,
Smith and Strom.

• On Sept. 16, the council rejected a proposal to promote Dan Wavering to
deputy director of public works by a vote of 6-4, with “no” votes from Republicans
Edwards, Bartolomucci and Strom, joined by Democrat Redpath.

• On Sept. 30, the council voted 6-5 to raise water rates, with “no” votes
from Republicans Edwards, Bartolomucci, Yeager, and Smith, joined by Democrat
Mahoney.

• On Nov. 19, the council rejected an ordinance proposed by Edwards that would
have imposed a hiring freeze, requiring council approval to fill any vacant
position. Voting “no” were Democrats McNeil, Kunz, Redpath, Selinger, and Davlin,
joined by Republican Strom.

Some council members say party politics play no role even in their election
to the council.

“Knocking on doors and meeting people” is what determines who gets elected,
according to Kunz, who has never been endorsed by the Democratic Party. “Most
people just want somebody to answer their questions when they don’t get an answer
from City Hall. Most people just want somebody to yell at,” Kunz says. “I vote
my conscience and if people don’t like it, they will not re-elect me.”

Once elected, most aldermen say they decide how to vote by doing whatever
their conscience dictates.

“It’s not party, it’s what they think is in the best interest of the city,”
McNeil says.

“Most city issues are not partisan issues,” Mahoney says. “I look for what
it means for the City of Springfield.”

Strom prides himself on refusing to promise his vote in advance, preferring
instead to keep an open mind until he hears all the discussion at the council
meeting.

“A lot of times, aldermen make up their minds well before we get into the
chamber. I like to listen to all the arguments and make sure I have all the
information,” Strom says. “I frequently don’t make up my mind until the moment
we vote.”

But some aldermen have their doubts about the purity of their colleagues’
motives. For example, McNeil points to the hiring freeze issue. First proposed
by Edwards, the idea popped up a day later in the form of an executive order
issued by Davlin, declaring a hiring freeze that he could control with his own
appointees.

“That was more posturing than anything, on the part of them both,” McNeil
says.

Edwards, on the other hand, points to McNeil as someone who will occasionally
trade his vote in return for some other favor.

When the Republicans say they feel outgunned, “McNeil will say, ‘That’s exactly
the way I felt the last eight years,’ and then vote for it anyway. Well, OK,
why are you voting for it?” Edwards asks. “I know why he is. He’s got to support
a mayor. But God bless Frankie. It’s about time he got some stuff.”

McNeil chuckles at Edwards’ assessment. “I’m fair game, so what can I say?
I trust that Frank will grow and realize that not everything is about politics,”
McNeil says. “If he had to walk the miles that I’ve walked in these shoes, he
might be doing something a little different himself.”

As for Strom and his open-mindedness, at least one council colleague privately
points out that Strom waits until the last second to vote as a way of ensuring
a tie, thereby forcing Davlin to vote. Combined with the fact that term limits
mean Strom’s tenure as an alderman is nearing its end, and his healthy ($38,000)
campaign account, they speculate that he is laying the groundwork to run for
mayor in 2007.

“No,” Strom says. “But if the mayor has to vote on things, so be it.”

While party loyalty has a role in council politics, personal philosophies
and pet peeves account for why some members vote the way they do.

Edwards says he tries to watch out for “seniors and juniors” — the elderly
and those under the age of 21 — by refusing to vote for rate increases or tax-increment
financing districts, known as TIFs, which divert future property tax revenues
from the public school system. He also votes for temporary 3 a.m. liquor licenses
unless the nightclub making the request plans to play music outdoors.

Kunz votes against political patronage jobs, and even voted against a job
for his cousin, Frank Lesko. He also votes against most TIFs or other items
of “corporate welfare.” He votes for any permit that doesn’t involve a variance.
If a variance is requested, he says, he lets the nearest neighborhood group
dictate his vote.

Strom says he tries to support neighborhoods with his votes, and he also tends
to vote against variances for extra signage.

Yeager says she has never voted against a TIF and never voted for a sexually-oriented
business in a residential neighborhood. She is known for voting against all
3 a.m. liquor licenses, usually as the lone dissenting vote. It’s a gesture
she makes in honor of everyone who has lost a loved one at the hands of a drunk
driver. Yeager was just 11 years old when her entire family was in a wreck with
a drunk driver. Yeager still has back problems due to injuries suffered in that
wreck. Her father’s injuries were fatal.

“It’s still a very tender spot in my life,” she says. “Obviously, I have gotten
over it, but I shall never forget that a drunk driver denied me the opportunity
to grow up with a daddy.

“I’m not against drinking, but I am against drinking and driving,” Yeager
says.

She also refuses to vote for liquor sales in gas stations. “That’s just too
convenient, to have alcohol and gasoline together,” she says. “I think it sends
a very bad message.”

These votes are just gestures. They don’t affect the outcome. But Yeager says
it’s something she has to do.

“You do little personal things just so that you can sleep well at night,”
she says.

Advantage: Democrats

The Springfield City Council has five Democratic alderman
and five Republican aldermen. With Mayor Tim Davlin voting, the Democrats have
a one-vote advantage. But votes seldom break along party lines.

Democrats
Frank McNeil, Ward 2
Frank Kunz, Ward 3
Chuck Redpath, Ward 4
Mark Mahoney, Ward 6
Tom Selinger, Ward 9
Tim Davlin,
Mayor

Republicans
Frank Edwards, Ward 1
Joe Bartolomucci, Ward 5
Judy Yeager, Ward 7
Irv Smith, Ward 8
Bruce Strom,
Ward 10

This article appears in Dec 11-17, 2003.