Smith & Riverside Party/Caucus Slate Running to Perpetuate System Smith Called “Part of the Problem”

Once decried “Caucus dominated administrations,”
now embraces them.

“For, if you are part of the problem (Caucus dominated administrations, past and present), you cannot be the solution.” Those are the words of now Caucus-selected, Caucus-endorsed Riverside Party candidate for Village Board President Kevin Smith, as he campaigned against long-time one-party rule by the Riverside Caucus in Riverside in 2001.

The question now posed by the Riverside Community Alliance, which is running a slate of candidates to challenge long-time, one-party rule by the Caucus, is does candidate Smith of 2009 agree with candidate Smith of 2001?

The Riverside Community Alliance slate calls on candidate Smith to explain why he and the rest of the Riverside Party/Caucus slate are running to perpetuate the single-party rule of the Caucus and running on a platform of continuing the policies of the current Caucus-dominated Board when he is on the record as saying “can Riverside afford the cost of turning its government entirely over to a single political party?” Between 2001 and 2007, the Caucus-dominated Riverside Village Board increased overall village spending by 47%, with non-capital expenditures rising 42% during that period. The Village spent more money than it has taken in every year between 2002 and 2007.¹

And if Smith was concerned enough about one-party Caucus rule in 2001 to write “If Lord Acton’s famous observation is correct, that ‘power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely’: can Riverside afford the cost of turning its government entirely over to a single political party?”, then why should he expect voters to feel any differently in 2009 about Smith and the rest of the Caucus-backed “Riverside Party?”

“Mr. Smith uses very strong language to describe the effects of Caucus-dominated administrations. Words like ‘corrupt’ and ‘exclusionary,’” said Mark Shevitz, one of Riverside Community Alliance’s Village Trustee candidates. “He was forcefully against one-party Caucus rule just a few years ago, yet now he is leading a slate that would continue longtime Caucus domination of the Village Board? This seems like a case of ‘I was against one-party rule before I was for it.’”

“In the last two village elections, residents voted against the Caucus-dominated Board’s plans for a TIF and 32% property tax increase by a 4-to-1 margin,” said Jim Reynolds, one of Riverside Community Alliance’s Village Trustee candidates. “Perhaps this is a manifestation of ‘political survival tends to take precedence over building broad-based community support,’ as Smith describes it. Although Smith was on the Board during both votes.”

According to both the Riverside Brookfield Landmark and Riverside Suburban Life, the ‘Riverside Party’ candidates, including Smith, were “selected” by the Caucus to run for Village Board for the 2009 election. Smith also ran on the Caucus slate in 2005.

Smith’s comments can be found at:

http://www.riverside-illinois.com/Candidates/KevinSmith.htm

The site contains a number of compelling arguments in favor of breaking the longtime — and continuing — dominance of the Riverside Caucus in Riverside village government, including:

“A major concern is that with a single political party controlling the entirety of Riverside’s elected government and its purse strings, exclusionary tendencies will set in. This is not meant to cast aspersions on anyone, but to call attention to a natural phenomenon: the structure that assures political survival tends to take precedence over building broad-based community support.”

“If Lord Acton’s famous observation is correct, that “power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely“: can Riverside afford the cost of turning its government entirely over to a single political party?”

“For, if you are part of the problem (Caucus dominated administrations, past and present), you cannot be the solution.”

The Riverside Community Alliance believes that one-party rule is a contributing factor to issues such as the Village Board spending $100,000+ in pursuit of a failed TIF plan and the 2008 attempt to raise Riverside property taxes by 32%. Both measures were rejected by Riverside voters by an 80% to 20% vote, indicative that the Caucus’ longtime domination of the Riverside Village Board has created a government that is out of touch with the needs and desires of residents.

The Riverside Community Alliance slate of Mike Gorman (Village President candidate), Jim Reynolds, Lonnie Sacchi and Mark Shevitz (Village Trustee candidates) is running to provide Riverside residents with a smarter alternative to one-party rule by the Caucus. The slate is running on a platform of fiscal responsibility, attracting sustainable businesses to Riverside’s downtown, and open, transparent government.

¹ Village of Riverside Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Year Ended December 31, 2007