To my fellow elected officials:

It has now been almost two years since I assumed the office of Trustee in the Village of Lake in the Hills. In those two years, I have had an opportunity to participate in the legislative process at the most basic level — local government. This experience has given me some insights which I would like to share with you, my fellow elected officials.

Too often these days, local government, like its state and federal counterparts, seeks legislative solutions to every problem. Although we, at the local level, are the first to complain about state- and federally-imposed unfunded mandates, many of the ordinances we approve impose unfunded mandates on our constituents which are simply additional forms of taxation. I would urge my fellow elected officials to step back when considering any piece of local legislation and ask yourselves certain basic questions:

1. What is the function of local government? Too often we start from a presumption, as our counterparts do at the state and federal level, that the government's role is to solve every problem. We should constantly question whether the problem is of a public nature and whether private solutions have been exhausted.

2. What problem are we trying to fix? Do we have a public problem or do we have a private problem that is stampeding us into passing an ordinance which will cover our entire municipality?

3. If an ordinance is necessary, how broad must the regulation be? Are we using an elephant gun to kill a gnat?

4. Are we creating an unfunded mandate? What are the costs to our residents? What are the costs to the municipality?

5. If there is a municipal-wide problem, is the legislative proposal the least amount of regulation necessary to bring the desired result? Is the legislation too broad?

6. How is the ordinance written? Is it overly complex or difficult to understand? Or is it simple and direct? Is it really necessary that a municipal zoning ordinance be ten times the length of the U.S. Constitution?

7. Have you invited and received citizen input regarding the ordinance? Does that input reflect a broad based need for the ordinance?

If, after answering all of these questions you feel that legislation is necessary and that it is appropriately drafted, then it should also be properly considered. If an issue is important enough to find its solution in a law, then appropriate consideration should be given to the law. It should not be passed the first time it is raised at the Board or Council level. Rather, absent an emergency, it should be considered at a minimum of three Board or Council meetings and only after further input from affected residents and interested parties of the proposal.

While this set of procedures hopefully stems the tide of new legislation and regulation, it does not address the four-inch thick ordinance book which most of us have inherited. I recommend that every municipality annually review all existing ordinances to determine which are no longer effective or useful and repeal them.

There is little doubt that most Americans feel we are over-regulated and that we are drowning in a sea of laws. We, as local elected officials, should not add to this burden. As the government closest to the people, we should reflect their exasperation with this avalanche of laws and implement procedures so that we are part of the solution rather than part of the problem.

May 1995 / Illinois Municipal Review / Page 7