Updating this site as of November 13, 2024.
This site will be entirely retooled and updated.

Next Rock Island County Board meeting-

Committee of the Whole
Thursday, November 14th at 5:30 p.m.
County Office Building, 1504 Third Avenue, Rock Island, 3rd floor.

The meeting is open to the public.

Committee of the whole agenda and supporting documents can be viewed here:

https://rockislandcountyil.gov/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Agenda/_11142024-940?html=true

https://www.rockislandcountyil.gov/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Item/1617?fileID=1838

County Board Regular Board Meeting
Tuesday, November 19th at 5:30 p.m.
County Office Building, 1504 Third Avenue, Rock Island, 3rd floor.

The meeting is open to the public

https://rockislandcountyil.gov/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Agenda/_11192024-951?html=true

Next Rock Island County Board meeting-
Tuesday, June 21st 5:30 p.m.
County Office Building, 1504 Third Avenue, Rock Island, 3rd floor.

The meeting is open to the public.

All county board committee meetings, agendas, and minutes can be viewed here:

http://www.rockislandcounty.org/CountyBoard.aspx?id=39632

We're doing REAL REFORM!
We're making progress!
There remains a lot to do to get this county back on the right path.
Please support me in getting the job done.

If you are unable to make this night and you would like to make a donation, donations can be made to:
Friends of Drue Mielke, 503 E. 13th Avenue Ct., Coal Valley, IL 61240

A copy of our report filed with the State Board of Elections is (or will be) available on the Board’s official website www.elections.il.gov or for purchase from the State Board of Elections, Springfield, Illinois.

REAL REFORM Fundraiser-
for Drue Mielke
Rock Island County Board
District 22- Coal Valley-Moline

Saturday, June 4th
6:00 p.m. - 8:00 p.m.

Crabby's Bar and Grill
826 West 1st Avenue (U.S. 6)
Coal Valley

Hors d'oeuvres & wings.
$10 suggested donation.

a
a

GOALS ACHIEVED

Downsizing County Board

Hire a County Administrator

Add Public Comments to Meetings

Stopping Nepotism in Hiring Practices

Ended County Board Pensions & Benefits

REAL REFORM- Delivered.

REAL REFORM-
Special Meeting Called for Rock Island County Board

Meeting at 5:30 p.m. on Wednesday, March 16th begins a new chapter county board reform

In November 2012, the public voted 72% in favor of a non-binding referendum stating that the public wished to have a smaller county board. In response to overwhelming public demand, the Rock Island County Board Governmental Affairs Committee will have a SPECIAL MEETING, Wednesday, March 16, 2016, at 5:30 p.m. at 1503 3rd Avenue, Rock Island for the consideration of Rock Island County Board Reform Resolution regarding downsizing of the county board, removal of health insurance benefits for county board member, and removal of pension benefits for county board members.

These and other reforms will signal a new chapter county board reform.

The resolution for downsizing the county board calls for the decrease of county board members to 15 after the next decennial reapportionment in 2020 that would take effect in 2022. The resolution calls for single-member districts.

The agenda can be found at: http://www.rockislandcounty.org/WorkArea/linkit.aspx?LinkIdentifier=id&ItemID=39850&libID=1000007711

These reforms were voted on previously at the February Governmental Affairs Committee meeting and moved to teh full board. The resolution was removed from the full board agenda to allow for review by the Rock Island County State’s Attorney’s office.

These reforms must go through committee and those who have long supported the effort will vote to move this to the full board. Voting at the February meeting to move these reforms to the Rock Island County Board for discussion and vote was Vice Chair Brian Vyncke, Mike Steffen, and Drue Mielke, with the tie breaking decision by the Governmental Affairs Chair Scott Terry.

This meeting is open to the public. The public is encouraged to attend to voice their concerns during the public comments section of the meeting. Forms are provided for public comment to be filled out prior to the meeting.

These real reforms show that the public has a voice in their government.

Press release can be viewed here.

Ask voters to expand Public Building Commission

We must not circumvent the voters and tax beyond our authority.

Reform is more than smaller government and removing perks. It’s also about how we do business being
up-front with the people.

We should go to a referendum to expand the scope of the Public Building Commission. There is a
reason why the statues says....

From Illinois Complied Statues- (50 ILCS 20/4a)

The purpose of a public building commission created by the county board of any county may not be expanded until the question of expanding the purpose of the public building commission has been submitted to the electors of the county at a regular election and approved by a majority of the electors voting on the question.
From Illinois Compiled Statutes (ILCS) (50 ILCS 20/4a)

(from Ch. 85, 
					par. 1034a)

					

					Sec. 4a. A Public Building Commission may be created for the 
					limited purpose of constructing, acquiring, enlarging, 
					improving, repairing or replacing a specific public 
					improvement, building or facility or a special type or class 
					of public improvements, buildings or facilities. The 
					provisions of Section 4 of this Act shall apply to the 
					creation of a Public Building Commission under this Section,
					except that the resolution adopted 
					by the 
					municipality or county board and 
					the proposition shall specify the limited purpose for which 
					such Public Building Commission is to be created. 
					The provisions of Section 4 authorizing any municipal 
					corporation any part of whose area of jurisdiction lies 
					within the territorial limits of that county seat to join in 
					the organization of the Public Building Commission in the 
					manner set forth in that Section shall not be applicable to 
					a Public Building Commission created under this Section. The 
					county board of any county that has created a public 
					building commission for a limited and specific purpose 
					may expand that purpose by resolution.

    The 
					purpose of a public building commission created by 
					the county board of any county may not be expanded 
					until the question of expanding the purpose of the public 
					building commission has been submitted to the electors of 
					the county at a regular election and approved by a majority 
					of the electors voting on the question.
					The county board must certify the question to the proper 
					election authority, which must submit the question at an 
					election in accordance with the Election Code.

  The election 
					authority must record the votes as "Yes" or "No".

    If 
					a majority of the electors voting on the question vote in 
					the affirmative, the county board may thereafter expand the 
					purpose of the public building commission.

(Source: P.A. 
					94-355, eff. 1-1-06.)


					
					http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/fulltext.asp?DocName=005000200K4a

I understand that the current ruling determined that the Public Building Commission now has the powers.

I also believe that the powers should be formerly expanded as per statue.

Ask the voters FIRST to expand the Public Building Commission’s powers BEFORE proceeding to overreach its authority.

We must not circumvent the voters and tax beyond our authority.

Using the Public Building Commission to build courtrooms and ancillary offices I believe is the best plan for the county to comply with the Illinois Supreme Court Courtroom Standards and the American Disability Act.

But to do this, we must go to the voters and get approval to expand the Public Building Commission’s powers beyond the current and original commission, which is- “the sole purpose of such Public Building Commission ... to provide a good and sufficient jail.”

I believe that the Public Building Commission is the best way to address courtroom space deficiencies and ADA issues. But the ends do not justify the means.

1) Courtrooms and offices are not a jail.

2) We should to go to a referendum to the public to expand the powers of the PBC first prior to building the annex.

3) Proceeding without this is to impose a tax that we don’t have the authority to do. We are acting outside the color of law.

4) The ends don’t justify the means and it’s time to end business as usual.

There is a right and proper way to do things and it’s time Rock Island County makes this REFORM also.

There is a public hearing for the proposal of building courtrooms and offices adjacent to the Justice Center.

Tuesday, February 16th at 5:30 p.m.
County Board Room on the third floor of the County Office Building
1504 3rd Avenue
Rock Island
The public may enter from the back parking lot off 4th Avenue.

Conduct of public hearings concerning the intent of the County Board to enter into a lease agreement in the principal amount not to exceed $28,000,000 between the County and the Rock Island County Public Building Commission in connection with acquiring, constructing, improving, altering, equipping, repairing, maintaining, operating and securing the Justice Center

Click here to read the proposal: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_ZSyCeFTKRsRWN2dTNHU1ZPdW8/view?pref=2&pli=1

Discussion of pulling the reform resolution off the county board agenda
RICO Board member Drue Mielke visits with Dan and Dan to talk about the Governmental Affairs Committee resolution that was passed but pulled from the agenda of the upcoming meeting. The resolution would recommend shrinking the size of the board from 25 to 15, require five year budgets, and end pension and health benefits used by some board members.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3B0ED7nEN-s

Reform agenda pulled from RI County board meeting

Posted: Tuesday, February 9, 2016 5:24 pm | Updated: 5:31 pm, Tue Feb 9, 2016.

By Eric Timmons, etimmons@qconline.com
http://www.qconline.com/news/local/reform-agenda-pulled-from-ri-county-board-meeting/article_1639387b-6ca8-589c-b382-51628f82daa0.html

RI Co. residents can speak out on board size

Thomas Geyer tgeyer@qctimes.com
http://qctimes.com/news/local/ri-co-residents-can-speak-out-on-board-size/article_f83d5043-43fe-581a-9738-db84d2149be4.html

Drue Mielke speaks to Democratic Ethnic Minority Conference on County Board Downsizing Issue

Monday, February 1st, 2016

Click here to listen to what I had to say regarding downsizing the county board

"...We can we can find other counties that 24 or 25 (members) and this harkens back to when I was not on the board, but I was asking for reforms under the Open Meetings Act and that board, of which most of you people were not there, said 'well, this county doesn’t do it this way or that county doesn’t do it that way,or La Salle County does it that way'.

So they would find a county that does it wrong.

And it just angered me because I was currently an elected official but I didn’t tell them that. And I already adhered to the Open Meetings Act.

The point is that we should look at counties that have done it (downsized). An example is Peoria county who I think went to 19 from like 25 or 27. They still have minority representation. Maybe we should talk to them and say “How is your minority representation?” Maybe we should flesh it out? “How is your rural representation?”

The other thing is that in 2012 when I ran, and that (downsizing referendum) passed, that was an advisory referendum, it had no teeth, but it did give… it did test the waters on how the public felt.

We all agreed that the board should be smaller. Never did I say that the board should be downsized. Ever! What I always said was it CAN be downsized, and they weren’t telling you the truth. And who “they” is up to you guys to decide, but what I mean is that I am not an attorney, but when I read the ’74 and ’76 opinion from the Attorney General that says in all but… “the decennial reapportionment should hold in all but exceptional circumstances”, that tells me that there is an exceptional circumstance.

We all probably all agree that we do not like the exceptional circumstance for other reasons that weren’t obvious at the time. Because when you start thinking about something, you think “oh, what’s the ramification? “ Will it affect….? This district is going to be too big, we won’t have a rural district. What about the people that live in a minority majority district? How are they going to be affected when they find out all of a sudden their district is part of a (larger district). So luckily, I never said we should do it, but I got angry when I kept hitting the brick wall of whatever you want to call it: The machine, The people or whoever it was whoever it was who said “no”.

I got threatened if I proceeded with it (the downsizing question)! I had my documents stolen from me! And then they were used in political attack ads! I mean this is the kind of climate I’ve experienced on this county board. That was the welcome mat that was put out for me.

And then when I thought I was reaching out with an olive branch, saying we could get an new Attorney General opinion, which sounded very credible….. it took two years to get one (a new opinion.)

So you , know, we’ve been down this road… I mean I’ve been down this road, back and forth. Where I think we are heading the right direction, I think we should look at because of all the other issues. And the late. the clock has ran out, I am afraid.

I am going to say that I am the biggest advocate for listening to the will of the people. We need to explain to the people why, what the ramifications are if we downsize this late in the game, otherwise they are not going to get it otherwise (what would happen if we downsize prior to 2020)

The other thing that I did do, was not only did I believe in getting this to the people, was that to the people. That I spoke to the Farm Bureau, I didn’t tell them what to think but I told them what the facts were. I spoke to the NAACP, I didn’t tell them what to think, but I told them what the facts were. And I told them what the threats were, I mean as far as I what the threats were was that we were going to have eight districts if we are going to do it (downsize) this other way.

I have never said it “should” be done but I got very frustrated when I was told it “can’t be done”. And it could. It is just whether the public wants it.

I don’t think the public really does want to have multi-member districts. I think you guys all said that with the resolution that was the second resolution that followed it (the first resolution).

I just want to do what the people want.

Not what the county board wants.

But what the people want.

Pension question moved to focus group rather than to full board.

Here today's discussion with Dan & Dan from WOC's AM Quad Cities.

Click here to play. Please be patient, the file may take up to a minute to begin playing.

Click here to play.

Should Rock Island County Board make county board pensions ineligible?

Listen to IMRF interview with Dan & Dan on AM Quad Cities

Read about proposed resolution

Read Dispatch / Argus Editorial

I have drafted a resolution on Monday, October 5, 2015 calling for terminating participation in the Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) for all Rock Island County Board Members.

The resolution was sent to Rock Island County Administrator Dave Ross and to Nick Camlin, Chair of the Rock Island County Board Human Resources Committee for consideration by the County Administrator and with the intent of placement on the next Human Resources Committee meeting agenda for discussion on November 10th at 10:00 a.m. for recommendation to the full county board or consideration and vote on Tuesday, November 17th.

I have asked fellow county board member Mr. Scott Terry to co-author this resolution with me in a show of bi-partisan support.

The resolution states:

“WHEREAS, the Rock Island County Human Resources Committee recommends to the County Board to adopt the IMRF Resolution to terminate County Board member participation in the Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund; and

WHEREAS, the County Board has determined that a majority of its members will not normally be performing the minimum of 1000 hour per year; and

WHEREAS, authorization is given to the County Clerk to sign and submit the attached
IMRF Form 6.64T (03/12).

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the County Board approve this recommendation.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the County Clerk notifies the County Board Office of this Action.”

When I was elected, I was given new employee paperwork from Rock Island County Human Resources. Included in the new employee paperwork were IMRF forms. I was not told that once one is in IMRF that a county board member cannot opt out. Knowing what I have come to learn being on the county board, I do not believe that IMRF is appropriate for county board members and I do not wish to participate in IMRF.

In exploring what other counties and municipalities have done, I discover that a governmental body can opt out of IMRF participation. That is what I intend to do in this resolution. It is the right move at the right time and shows we are committed to working together for the good of the county given the dire condition of our funds.

Reform agenda pulled from RI County board meeting

Copyright © 2015 Friends of Drue Mielke