Aldermen to citizens: Your request to participate in the democratic process is "DENIED"

Regardless of which side of the pool issue you're on. And because there are no less than three sides to this quagmire, it would have been nice to at least get an invite to the pool party. But, instead of suiting up for a little dip in the political process of an advisory referendum we were informed by our aldermen that they once again consider us the proverbial "Turds in the swimming pool." Last night, our aldermanic brain trust banded together to defeat a motion by Alderman Ferrari and seconded by my old pal Jack O'Beirne to place a simple question on the November ballot as an advisory referendum asking "Should the city of Peru proceed with planning and funding a new municipal swimming pool? As was predictable, the notion of the common citizen providing input or direction to our aldermen obviously left most of them feeling very threatened and unreasonable. They appeared unable to wrap there mind around the fact that this was simply an "advisory question" which did not obligate them to take any particular action. Regardless of the outcome of the vote in November the aldermen would still hold ultimate authority to determine what if any action is taken on a municiapal pool. They discussed last nights motion as if they were deciding whether or not to break ground on a new pool first thing next week. From Mertel deliberately trying to "muddy the waters" (pun intended) by claiming there needed to be a volume of information on the ballot explaining the history of pool construction in the U.S., to Potthoff patronizing us with his extensive knowledge of pool design and municipal taxes. To Waldorf thinking out loud, "After all we are the elected officials and we make these decisions". Oh my! I have to admit that I am not sure which outcome of the proposed referendum they were more afraid to have to deal with. At least a couple of them have said any move forward would have to be new construction. They are on record. This would have been an opportunity for people on any side of the issue to not only cast there vote on election day but to actively campaign and recruit others to paricipate in the democratic process leading up to the election. Why would an elected official see that as a threat and where do we find ourselves now? Believe it or not, I think there still exists a couple of "characters" on this council who will start the bizarre process all over again this coming winter by suggesting once again to patch and paint the old hole in the ground and squeel with glee, "Fill er' up Kenny". I am not currently in favor of new pool construction. At least not in the forseeable future considering city finances. That's a no-brainer. I think they must demolish the existing structure as soon as they have an opportunity to do so. By "they", I mean "city employees" not a contractor and haul the debris down to the Riviera by the River landfill "hideaway resort" of a certain city employee at no additional cost to the city. Then, I would hope that any discussion regarding water related recreational opportunities in the city of Peru be strictly limited to the "Splash Park" theme which is something we may be able to afford. Nothing more. I urge you, please do not forget those aldermen who conspired to deny us a chance to participate in the democratic process. Be sure to inform your neighbors and other residents of Peru that the culprits were Jamey Mertel, 1st Ward. Joe Mikyska, 2nd Ward. Dave Waldorf & Bob Ankiewicz 3rd Ward. Dave Potthoff 4th Ward. Ron Wren, 4th Ward was absent for last nights vote but had previously mentioned he was opposed to the idea of an advisory referendum. These are the guys who chose to leave the rest of us off the pool party guest list.