Video: More Hot Air From Romanelli

Steve Romanelli is the president of the political action committee Winfield United which has a legacy of failure and incompetence, first with the Rudy Czech administration and now with the equally dismal Deborah Birutis administration.

Romanelli’s defense of his hand-picked village board members is laughable especially since the facts reveal a completely different story. For someone who has stated publicly on more than one occasion his organization has no control over Winfield’s village government, it is puzzling as to why Romanelli finds it so necessary to continually defend this pitiful village board.

Winfield United’s politics and their results can be summed up in one word: FAILURE.

It should come as no surprise Romanelli and his organization Winfield United oppose Districting Winfield into 6 separate and equal voting districts. It is all about power and control with Winfield United and Districting would strip Winfield United of the power and control Romanelli’s organization so badly covets.

At this difficult time in Winfield’s history, the community simply cannot afford to turn the page back to another failed Winfield United run government. We can’t let Romanelli and his organization fail Winfield again.

Winfield’s Good Old Days Near an End?

At the June 17 Winfield village board meeting the topic of discussion was the road referendum that will be on the Nov. 2 ballot. The village board is asking the village residents increase our property taxes by 200 percent to fund $18 million in deferred road maintenance.

I understand that Winfield’s roads are in disrepair but I find it foolish to give my authority to the village board to increase my real estate taxes without them first composing a plan to create sustainable revenues for the future. This plan should probably include developing Winfield’s most promising retail corridor which is Roosevelt Road. In what can only be described as a rhetorical “red herring,” Village Manager Curt Barrett informed me that in order to address the needs of the village roads we would need sales taxes of “$100 million,” and it was not as easy as “flipping a switch” to find other funding sources in place of the referendum.

Twenty minutes earlier Rich Bysina from the Winfield Chamber of Commerce asked village board members if they could pick up the tab for police services for the annual Winfield Good Old Days. Based on the responses from the trustees there is about a 50 percent chance there will be no Good Old Days this year.

I find it hilarious that Mr. Barrett can compartmentalize my demand for sustainable revenues into “only” needing them for road maintenance. From time immemorial money has been made for villages through the careful cultivation of commerce. Winfield should have started 20 years ago but there is no time like the present to have a plan. It’s time for Winfield to make money the “old” fashion way, by earning it, or Winfield’s Good Old Days will truly be behind it.

Video: Winfield Village Board ‘No Plan for Generating Needed Revenues’

Click the link below to go to the story.

Winfield’s Good Old Days Near An End?

Are Winfield’s Good Ole Days Behind It?????

At the June 17th Winfield Village Board meeting the topic of discussion once again turned to the road referendum that will be on the November 2nd ballot. The village board is asking the village residents if we would like to have our property taxes increased by 200% to fund 18 Million dollars in road maintenance that should never have been deferred in the first place. As usual I rose to the podium during public comments to reiterate that I was actively working to educate the citizens about the road referendum. I understand Winfield’s roads are in disrepair and need to be fixed but I also understand our current administration is actively working to deny any vision or plan to create sustainable revenues such as developing our most promising retail corridor on Roosevelt Road. As such, I find it foolish to give my authority to the village board to increase my real estate taxes without first hearing some kind of plan that assures me I won’t have to be taxed again the next time some piece of Winfield’s infrastructure wears out.

When I finished speaking Winfield Village Manager Curt Barrett, in a display that would have given his high school rhetoric teacher apoplexy, trotted out not only a straw-man but also a dish of red-herring. He informed me that in order to address the needs of the village roads we would need sales taxes from “$100 Million in retail sales on Roosevelt Rd” and it was not as easy as “flipping a switch” to find other funding sources in place of the referendum.

Now hold that thought for a second.

Twenty minutes earlier Rich Bysina from the Winfield Chamber of Commerce rose to the podium to ask the village board if they could see their way clear to picking up the tab for police services for the annual Winfield end of summer event known as Good Ole Days. The cost is $6000, the same as it was last year. There was plenty of trepidation and from this observer’s point of view, there is about a 50% chance the village board will say “NO” and there will be no Good Ole Days this year.

Now contrast the fact Winfield cannot find a measly $6000 in it’s budget to fund a long standing Winfield institution against the chiding I took from Village Manager Barrett about not being able to “flip-a-switch” or the unlikeliness of finding “$100 Million in sales tax revenue” in developing Roosevelt Road.

Mr. Barrett, our politicians have not even laid the groundwork to have revenues of 6 flipping thousand dollars, to create a table-scrap of a “quality of life” Winfield wide event. How pathetic is that?

Village Manager Curt Barrett

I find it hilarious Mr. Barrett can compartmentalize my demand for sustainable revenues into “only” needing them for road maintenance. At the February 27th road referendum town hall meeting Mr. Barrett suggested to the gathered crowd that Roosevelt Road could create sustainable revenue but the political will was such that it was not an option that was available. So I guess I am to understand that either Mr. Barrett drank Village President Birutis’ Kool-aid or else the water-boarding she gave him for making such statements in public has adjusted his attitude. What is perplexing to me is that President Birutis is on vacation this week. The boss isn’t there to suck up to. Shouldn’t Mr. Barrett leave what was an obvious political defense to the politicians?

From time immemorial money has been made for villages through the careful cultivation of commerce. Both sales tax AND commercial real estate tax help to remove the burden of funding government from the shoulders of the citizens. It will take time, maybe ten years or more. Winfield should have started on this twenty years ago but there is no time like the present to have a plan and a vision for how we will make sure we never find ourselves in this position again. It’s time for Winfield to make money the “Ole” fashion way, by earning it, or Winfield’s Good Ole Days will truly be behind it

Romanelli Rants

Editors Note: The following is a series of email exchanges between Tim Allen and the President of the political action committee Winfield United, who is now going by the name Steve J Romanelli. The emails were forwarded to us by Mr. Allen with his permission to post them for everyone to read.

Email 1

Hi Tim,

Just wondered how your WU debate went. I am sure I know the outcome. I saw you had quoted me from some conversation we had a year ago (as you stated) about why I started WU. Interesting recollection. Is that all I had to say?

Anyway, I do remember a conversation we had several years ago when we first met at the chamber installation dinner when you were a candidate and you told me that I looked bad wasting my time on 411 swinging at “ghosts”. At least you still have the balls to identify yourself, but why on earth are you wasting your time supporting such a group of gutless wonders?

If people want change, it is hard to do so when you are some fake alias on a dead end blog site.

Good luck with your battles. I like your energy but wish you focused on doing some positive things inside the village with positive people.

Steve J. Romanelli

Email 2

Steve,

The Winfield Debate Club meeting about Districting has not happened yet. I moved it to the Wednesday after the next village hall meeting. The next Referendum meeting at the village hall is May 22. Of course they never advertised it so I am sure the room will be empty. The next debate club is May 26 (Wednesday) 7:00 at John’s Buffet.

Winfield411’s last incarnation was counterproductive. It’s a blog now and the writers are more than happy to put their names up there. You may notice Patti Weber did a nice post that is up there now. The comments are still anonymous but that is no different than any blog anywhere including places like the New York Times.

I don’t think that it is a dead end anymore. I also need a place to communicate with the people on a daily basis. 411 suits that purpose fine. The way I see it there are people that hate the site, people that like the site and people that have never heard of it. I am interested in communicating with the last two.

Considering we don’t have a newspaper and we certainly haven’t had one that was unbiased in awhile I am thinking that 411 is as good as it gets.

The way I see it I AM doing positive things for positive ends. Roosevelt Road is going commercial and I am going to put everything I have behind that charge. Having sustainable revenues is the most positive and important and pressing opportunity to come up in my 7 years in this town. You should help me get it done.

-Tim

Email 3

Hi Tim,

Sorry but that is a sad state if you need a place like 411 to get your message across. You are better than that…..at least I think you are. Any blog that “controls” who is able to post and uses selective editing on comments they choose as beneficial to their site is not a blog by any sense, just a self serving propaganda tool.

I have no problem supporting sustainable revenue and if Roosevelt Rd. is the best option, so be it. If it was a good project that provided a nice look (I don’t believe your concept drawing is realistic, but sure is pretty), then I would be in favor. However, I have always wanted a Town Center with a Riverwalk and my efforts would be focused on at least making this a reality. Why not join me on doing this first?

We have some spots on the committee and could use someone with excessive energy ;)

Steve J. Romanelli

Email 4

Steve,

Excessive energy. Heh. Very funny.

Your indignation is selective. You should have found your voice when Stan Zegel’s propaganda tool was self-serving you.

Work on Town Center first? I learned a few things from knocking around the North Woods in Wisconsin. More hooks in the water catche more fish. Your support for Roosevelt Road is a head-fake. There is no more work involved in changing the town center plan to allow for development on Roosevelt Road than there is in working on Town Center. It’s not like Deb Birutis is digging the foundations to those spectacular buildings in town center herself. The reality is that the documentation (comprehensive plan) is the only “work” involved. There is no good reason to start one project “first” before starting the other. I would like a vibrant town center as well but to borrow another phrase from fishing, you have to fish were the fish are. There are tens of thousands of fish driving down Roosevelt Road every day.

I will believe you are serious about sustainable revenues for Winfield when Winfield United puts that as a goal on your website.

-Tim

Editors Note:

Contrary to the self-serving rantings of  Steve J Romanelli, President of the political action committee Winfield United, Winfield411/blog is an information blog publication that goes against the grain and tells stories that many in power and especially Romanelli’s organization Winfield United would prefer to be kept secret.

Since our founding, we have generated a truthful counter-narrative to the false narrative that has long dominated Winfield.  We’ve done this by bringing together columnists, editorial writers and residents, who dared tell the unwelcome truths about those in control of our town.

Winfield’s Road Referendum Won’t Benefit Residents

The residents of Winfield are currently agitated by the specter of having to pony up $3.3 million and another $14 million over 20 years for deferred road maintenance. So far, there have been three town hall meetings, one hosted by the village and two hosted by me for the purposes of educating the people about the referendum.

There is another issue that runs hand in hand with the road referendum and that is the Winfield politicians’ disinterest in finding sustainable revenues through retail sales taxes and commercial real estate taxes to help take some of the burden off the citizens of this town. Six out of seven of our politicians are either members of the Winfield United Political Action Committee or are hand-picked by President Deborah Birutis, who was elected as the candidate choice of Winfield United.

When you consider that Winfield’s best opportunity for creating sustainable revenues is on the Roosevelt Road corridor, it calls into question the motivation of the members of Winfield United. Based on records from the state, I have compiled a list of Winfield United political donors and where they live. Not surprisingly, they all live in a one or two block radius of Roosevelt Road.

The choice to not develop Roosevelt Road into a commercial district that can be harnessed to alleviate some of the financial burdens associated with running a village represents a wealth transfer payment. The wealth transfer is from all of the other 9,000 people who do not live along Roosevelt Road to the few people that do. It is a miscarriage of justice that Village President Birutis is using her political station not to the benefit of the whole village but to the benefit of a small cabal of landowners who have paid $32,000 in political donations for a small town village election to make sure their backyard view never has to change.

NIMBY stands for “not in my backyard”; this self-serving attitude is a sad commentary on the state of Winfield politics when our elected officials run the town for themselves and their cronies at the expense of the rest of the residents. The $32,000 represents a small amount of money to pay to buy an outcome to an election that ensures the rest of the town gets taxed for $18 million over 20 years.

I am writing to you today to let you know that as you cover the story of the Winfield Road Referendum which will be on the ballot this November, there is a back story that explains the motivations of this referendum. I would also like you to know that I plan to have on that same ballot, an opportunity to vote to district the Village of Winfield so that each section of Winfield is represented and the needs of the whole town are considered when planning this towns future.

CDH ‘welfare’ idea typical myopia

The Winfield Inn

As I hear and read about Winfield’s budget shortfall to fix our streets, I can’t help but think that developing Roosevelt Road is part of the solution.  I realize our village board is diligently working to develop our Town Center to bring in revenue and I’m very hopeful that it happens someday.  But just as a wise investment advisor tells you to diversify your portfolio, Winfield must diversify its sources of new revenue.  We can’t put all our eggs into the Town Center basket and we can’t keep hoping that more businesses will open on Geneva Road.  We have to open up the most widely traveled road in Winfield to the development community.

I’ve been thinking about the types of business that would fit in well in the Roosevelt & Winfield Roads area and what came to mind was Cantigny.  Since 2008, when Cantigny opened Les Jardins restaurant, they’ve gone from booking 5 to 8 wedding receptions per year to 65 wedding receptions per year!  When asked where they refer the wedding guests, they told me they refer them to the Lisle Hilton.  What a perfect opportunity for Winfield to offer accommodations across the street from Cantigny at The Winfield Inn.  I imagine something quaint to fit with the character of the village nestled among the trees across from Cantigny.  We could also expect these guests to patronize other Winfield businesses as well as Central DuPage Hospital visitors to take advantage of the Inn as it would be the closest accommodations to the hospital.

I believe that if done correctly with proper attention to architecture and location, the Inn will be an asset our community can be proud of.  I hope tour elected officials endeavor to find ways to capitalize on this opportunity.

CDH & Winfield’s Road Referendum

The State of Illinois seems to be scrutinizing not for profit hospitals. While this is very interesting it’s not a silver bullet for solving Winfield’s revenue issues.

See if you are with me on this. Let’s suppose that CDH’s facilities are worth 500 Million Dollars. The property taxes on that parcel of land will be worth 10 Million. The part the village receives would be 3% of that, which is $300,000. It’s better than a sharp stick in the eye but it isn’t the $705 Thousand per year we need for road maintenance and it isn’t the $3.3 Million we need for reconstructive work on the roads that are wrecked beyond compare.

If CDH’s tax exempt status were to change, it wouldn’t be without a fight from CDH and their lawyers. So you are looking at 6 to 10 years before Winfield sees a dime. In fact, if you can see exactly what CDH would be willing to budget for the lawyer expenses by looking at the above calculations. They would be able to spend $10 Million fighting per year and if they eventually lost the case they would still have broken even.

Bottom line is, it is irresponsible to put all Winfield’s revenue generating eggs in one basket. To be responsible, we need a mix of residential, commercial and sales taxes to properly fund village operations. Praying that CDH or their questionable tax status is going to solve Winfield’s revenue problems is a foolish delay in doing the heavy lifting that needs to be done to get this village fiscally solvent again.

A Compromise Plan for Rt 38

With all the recent talk about Winfield residents being faced with massive tax hikes, reductions in services, higher fees, and the looming possibility the police department will be disbanded, we set out to find a copy of the study, Sustainable Revenues for the Village of Winfield — A Compromise Plan for Roosevelt Road.

Fortunately, we were able to obtain a copy of the study. We have provided for your convenience a link to the plan. Compromise Plan For Rt. 38 We found the Compromise Plan to be very realistic in its’ short and long-term goals in helping secure Winfield’s future.

Communities that fall on hard times are usually those who don’t listen; don’t want to follow a proven program; want to stay with the status quo; and who don’t set realistic goals.

‘A Compromise Plan for Roosevelt Road’ is an interesting and informative study that every taxpaying resident of the village should read. If Winfield wants to succeed it must set goals for the future, make them realistic and distance itself from the unsustainable status quo that has left the town financially crippled.

Editors Note: The Compromise Plan for Roosevelt Road was written by former Winfield Trustees Dale Bianco and Chris LeVan in October of 2005.