His objection to this resolution is as follows:
Failure to implement and pass ordinance to certify and acknowledge that the City of Peru has 100 percent of the funds necessary to fulfill the qualifications of this resolutions as required by the State of Illinois........
...In closing I am not against filing for a grant for the public swimming pool, however, I choose to be fiscally responsible for the benefit of the city's future generations.
The council of 7 men voted to have the resolution put on the agenda for the next meeting to overide the Mayor's veto and the motion was brought up by Ald. Jamie Mertel of the 1st Ward.
After the meeting, I asked Ald. Potthoff and Ferrari as to who would sign the DNR request and also asked Atty Schweickert and none of them could give me an answer. The Atty said in 30 years as City Atty serving Peru, he has never encountered this.
I came home and went into the DNR web site and found their rules for applying for grant assistance and in black and white number 7 states "A signed document by the applicant verifying the applicant has the resources to initially finance and subsequently manage the project area and will comply with program regulations and indemnify the Department from any liability relative to the project and 8. a schedule of proposed expenditures/reimbursements from anticipated start through project completion.
Either someone is not reading the rules of the DNR or is just trying to make a political statement which is not adding to any credibility the members may have had.
When you ignore the rules for applying for a grant by ignoring the rules the department has set up to apply for a grant, is this rather like fraud. To knowingly submit an application with NO MONEY to fulfill the necessary obligation, how does that make you look and how does it make the city of Peru look. Not too bright in MHO anyway.
Tell me where I am wrong. And who is going to sign the PARC grant application since the Mayor will not for the above given reasons and it requires a signature.Would one of the members of the council be willing to put their name on the dotted line and accept financial responsiblity?
12 comments:
The people of Peru, should see how unreasonable the council is. There are 4 up for reelection, so you have a chance to vote comming up. Otherwise you are going to have a $5.00 surcharge on your electric bill.
People of Peru Think.g
Lois: Shouldn't the aldermen have been aware of the rules and regulations before they even thought about applying for this grant? Wouldn't they be asking the mayor to falsify his signature by asking him to sign something they know is a lie? Why didn't they first pursue the necessary means and obtain the finances before proceeding with the grant application? If proper procedures were followed, and knowledge had been obtained before the onset, wouldn't this situation have been avoided? From my point of view it seems as though their main concern is opposing the mayor on this issue.
It was the mayor's idea to build a new pool. Did you forget? He was the one that initiated the grant for the new pool. It was the mayor that continued to argue the point that pool needs a new pool. And now he changed his mind. I suppose you can blame the council or residents that wanted a new pool, this mayor should also take some blame. But I understand that you believe he walks on water. The tax increase or fee proposed was discussed by Alderman Joe M but no action was taken. It was a example, not a ordinance. No surcharge was extended to anybody. It sounds to me that our mayor roped and doped his way to getting rid of some costs of running a summer pool. What worries me is the what he wants to spend tax dollars on?
11:01AM
Not sure where you are getting the information for your comment but it so wrong. The Mayor never ever wanted to build a new pool. He wanted the old pool closed because it did not meet safety codes. I don't remember exactly who brought up the PARC grant but seem to remember it being the members of the Recreation Committee. If you remember a letter was sent to all residents on whether they wanted a new pool and of course something like 46% wanted one but what the letter failed to tell them is that if you say you want a new pool, you must decide how you wish to pay for it.
The Mayor never argued for a new pool, he argued to close the old one. If our aldermen were at all in tune with what the residents will pay for, they would not have voted as they did last evening. This is just like most things in life for most people, we do not have the money to pay for our wants. So lets get busy and start the fund and save for a new pool.
So Ald. Mertel made a motion to override the veto. The same Ald. Mertel who was handed a number of businesses that failed. We can see as to why they failed! Spending money that the business(city) does not have! Is this the same alderman who wanted a bike path? The same alderman who voted against selling the gen-sets for a higher profit? Also he is up for re-election! People might not agree with the current mayor, but how can anyone agree with Alderman Mertel's Philosophy; spend what you don't have. In fact to falsify current financial status to obtain a grant is obviously deceitful! How many other things has alderman Mertel been deceitful about? People in the 1st ward need to keep these things in mind next election. The fact is you can't always get what you want!
Attn. 12:10
Some people have been spoiled all their lives and given things (like Businesses and such), they didn't have to work for anything, so they don't appreciate the hard work of getting what they want. They think it should be handed to them on a silver platter. First Ward voters, do not hand Mr. Mertel the aldermens seat next election. He doesn't deserve it. Hes been spoiled all his life.
Yes Mick could you possibly be a retired employee or current employee that would like higher taxes to go toward higher wages, or retiree benefits and pensions. Thats what we need is a few more disgrunted employees running for city office that will prevent any progress in Peru to insure their own self interest. I can hear the cry now...underfunded government pensions...more out of pocket insurance expenses....we need to raise taxes. Maybe a revolt if the retirement age goes to 62 in Peru.
Driving by on Peoria Street, I see that a business called P & P Pantry has a sign on the building in the small strip mall between 7 th and 8th St. Could we be getting another convenience store in the location?
If so we seem to be getting a few small businesses that will be filling a need in Peru. First Steve's Bakery
and now this store.
I know this is out of topic but I wondered if anyone else had noticed it or had information about it.
I noticed it yesterday. For some reason I thought it was going to be a liquor store. I'm definitely not sure about that.
Anon 4:17 Nope neither employee or retired employee, but I imagine you are one of the alderman who keep "gaffing" at making sound decisions for the city! If taxes are raised it is because our council was not fiscally sound in making past decisions, putting the people of Peru in a terrible mess. That is why we need new alderman next election! If the mayor, alderman, or whoever are inept at filling their positions they should be voted out!!Period!! Who's disgrunted anyway???lol by the way its Matt, not Mick, WRONG AGAIN, chicken little!
I see the Pool issue TOTALLY Mayor Harl's fiasco.
He does not know how to run a city and consequently does not know HOW to find fund needs for the city. (Check out Utica progress with Rte 178) The treasurer indicates the city of Peru basically is BROKE.
The Mayor and the aldermen know that. I CALL ON MAYOR HARL TO DROP THIS POOL ISSUE AND FORGET IT . SPEAK UP SO AT THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING! Bury the issue now. NO more talking.
The news trib blog comments that La Salle and the Y have ample swimming pool facilities for the city of Peru.
Fill in the pool and plant grass.
In ten years after the fund reaches a specific goal,when we have the money, after Mayor Harl is gone, we could possibly have a pool if the census shows enough people in town to support to use a pool.
There's 1 thing wrong with your statement above ANON 6:17 - You say the mayor knows we're broke - TRUE that's why he refuses to sign the grant application. But, you also say the aldermen know we're broke if so, where do they intend to get the $3.5 million they need to front the project?
Post a Comment