Tuesday, January 04, 2011
Aldermanic challengers are paying attention and learning what to do in office and maybe what not to do
Most of the challengers for the four aldermanic seats up for election in April have been attending council and committee meetings on a regular basis the past couple of months. Mike Radtke, Rodney Perez, and Mary Landseidel are taking the time to develop as much understanding as possible of the "workings and non-workings" of Peru city government. I believe any serious candidate knows they must gather as much knowledge as possible about every issue out there in order to be considered a legitimate candidate. In fact, Mr. Radtke and Mr. Perez have taken the time to meet individually with Treasurer Gary Hylla for a financial reality check in order to get an honest accounting of the city's financial condition. Joe Witczak has also been attending council meetings regularly. Jim Hurst was in attendance last evening as well. Joe Witczak is very familiar with the ways of the current council as he was one of them for two terms prior to losing his seat to Dave Waldorf in 2007. I have to mention that Joe also accompanies the aldermen to their favorite watering hole after the council meetings as well as the Chamlin and TEST lobbyists, Chris Perra and Roger Chamlin. Mike's Tap is apparently the place to socialize for like-minded public officials and the executives of the companies whose contracts are voted on by these same aldermen. While I do not believe it to be illegal for aldermen to get together to knock down a few cold ones after a meeting, I do think they are showing poor judgement gathering in mass and allowing themselves to be lobbied by TEST and Chamlin. There is no doubt in my mind that during these "Meetings at Mike's" the topic of discussion will ultimately include city business. If so, the individuals discussing a particular issue of city business at any given time can be considered a "quorum" of aldermen from either a committee or the whole of the council, that would indeed be considered a violation of the Open Meetings Act. Now, just wait a minute before you start ripping me with nasty comments. Please understand, I could not care less if these guys want to "loosen up" a bit after the council meetings. I don't care if all eight of them get together for a kegger once a month. My point is this. The aldermen show poor judgement when they socialize with and or accept gratuities from individuals or companies who do business with the city and whose business and contracts are voted upon by the aldermen recieving the gratuities. And I'm not only talking about a cocktail or two at Mike's Tap. I mean a complimentary trip to a CUBS or WHITE SOX ballgame(spouse optional). Or a comped fishing trip to Canada(spouse not included). Or a gift basket with an invitation to the company Christmas party(spouse included) during the holidays. Or a free dinner for two at a swanky Chicago restaurant(spouse included) during the annual IML Convention. Or even a retirement gift(spouse might be included) for a long-time alderman who has been exceptionally "accomodating and generous" to a certain city contractor during his entire tenure.
These are just simple ethical standards that all elected officials should have no trouble observing. When elected officials open themselves to influence from private interests, the public has every right to question their judgement and every right to question their decisions.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
48 comments:
Steve looks like you are left out of these gatherings so what makes you comfortable to run for aldermen. You are not on the same team nor would you be able to do anything for our 4th ward citizens with this kind of talk.
If you can't get along with people now what will change with an election ?
I am sure Steve will answer you but I must say this. When many of us vote on April 5, it will definitely be for someone who is not on the same team that is currently in office. An alderman runs from a specific ward but most of his work and his decisions will involve the city as a whole so get off the 4th ward nonsense. This election has nothing to do with getting along with the currently elected but it has to do with being an independent thinker who has researched and consulted and finally decided what is best for the city as a whole There was a comment made a few months ago by a second ward alderman that he had to approve and vote for the topic being discussed because the person who brought it up was his friend. Talking about Ald. Mikyska supporting Jack O'Beirne. This is not the way to run a city. We are looking for independent people voting and deciding what is best for the citizens of Peru and not their friends.
Whoever you are why are you so concerned about your ward (the 4th) only? Are things not going well in that ward? Maybe a change in representation is warranted. As Lois stated at 4:10 while an alderman is from a specific ward he or she still represents the city of Peru as a whole. He or she also needs to be an independent individual. It seems to me that whoever you are your biggest problem is that for some reason you dislike Steve and are afraid he might be your next alderman. Maybe you should talk to him and discuss your concerns. I'm sure if you behaved civily he would speak with you and be open and honest. Give it and him a chance - you might be suprised.
After going to city council meetings for many years, about the only thing that comes up in individual wards are things like water main breaks, neglected property, traffic problems and each aldermen as far as I can see brings up the problem when it occurs and it is directed to the right department. These are the easy things and not what I would base my vote upon.
It is the finances, bad roads, water and sewer problems city wide, recreation and new ordinances that take up much of the council meetings.
How about the fire department, police department and ambulance service?
The number of times either of my aldermen has brought up a ward problem I'm sure I could count on one hand.
That's some interesting logic you have there. Let's review your comment answering your questions as we go. There is no doubt I would be about as welcome as a turd in the punchbowl at Mike's. I'm comfortable running for alderman because for me socializing at Mike's Tap is not the place to conduct city business. Being an alderman should not be about being on the same team. The "same team" philosophy does not allow for individual thoughts and ideas. Not being on the "same team" will not prevent me from representing the 4th Ward and the entire city. You apparently don't understand that it's not mandatory that the aldermen be in lock-step with each other on every issue. In fact, that type of lock-step or "rubber stamp" mentality, which was the operating philosophy of the Baker administration, only served to stifle creative thoughts and progressive ideas. I don't plan to make good friends with the other aldermen, I plan to make good policy first. Good policy trumps good friends as far as I'm concerned.
To Steve 8:36AM
What are you saying ? As you were Mayor Harl's campaign manager , you now will only support the Mayor and not cooperate with the other aldermen? That means there is only ONE vote/voice to support the Mayor and the other aldermen will be against you , How does that help the city of Peru?
What garbage are you peddling here ?
To 8:41AM
Steve is peddling honesty and independence above being concerned about whether he is voting against his friend. Being an alderman should never ever be about supporting your buddy whether he is the Mayor or a Council Member. It is about integrity and honesty. If you have any friends, I'm sure you don't always agree with them but when you don't agree with them, true friendship is not broken although you have not changed your mind and agree just to agree.
8:41 Alderman Potthoff (4th WARD) many times does not agree with the other 7 alderman and votes against them. Does that make him a bad alderman and friend to the other alderman because he voiced his opinion and his opinion was different than their's?
So let me get this straight. Steve is mad because the aldermen have a beer together, go to a ball game, receive a fruit basket at Christmas, and have a dinner with their wives. This doesn't seem like excess just an engineering company and a business' way of saying thanks to their customers. What we should be worried abou is 7 million for storm separation, 2.5 million for ne generators. 1 million for plank road water and sewar extension to nowhere, east ravine work for who knows how many dollars, ditch digging north of wenzel road for who knows how many dollars, etc.
11:23AM
I don't know whether Steve is mad but I am furious at the way you try to fool the people of Peru attitude you are displaying. We are not taking about a private company doing business with a private individual. This is a City a public government, that exists to do the peoples business, not the aldermens private affairs. Your attitude is why this entire country is in the trouble they are. Irate is not a strong enough word to explain how I feel about your comment. You should have signed your post "just trying to fool Peru voters"
11:23AM
Maybe if the private corporations had wined and dined the aldermen a little more they could have talked them out of working on the mentioned projects. Some of which are necessary and others doubtful and are just maybes. You do know the Mayor was not in favor of the 1 million for the Plank Rd. extension?
Perhaps we should outlaw generators, as they cause the city to coninually lose money. Should we just ignore the EPA mandates regarding storm separation.
Do you have any clue how many cities are have EPA mandates? What was the need for new generators. Polution controls could have been added for 1 million dollars. What was the need for north Plank road. A sewer to nowhere. Trust me with this mayor if its a project that digs up the ground it gets funded. over 10 million and counting. I'm not trying to fool anyone but if you say the city is broke then quit spending money. There is a cause for the lack of money it's no leadership which causes counsel run amuck.
To 8:41 a.m. - I don't know what to tell you other than please re-read my comment. Only this time take your time and read it out loud. That may help.
To 11:23 a.m. - As you just put it. Of course it's just a couple of companies saying "thanks" to their customers. That's why it's wrong. The legal term for it is "Quid Pro Quo" which means "Something for Something". If you really believe it's acceptable for elected officials to recieve gifts from contractors and consultants or anybody else who does business with the city then I will not waste any more of your time or mine trying to convince you otherwise. Also, I agree we should be concerned about all those projects you mentioned and more. What issues do you have with those projects you listed? Are you saying some or all are un-necessary? What's your point?
12:21PM
Open your eyes and read my post again I SAID THAT THE MAYOR WAS NOT IN FAVOR OF THE PLANK ROAD EXTENSION TO NO WHERE BUT THE ALDERMEN THOUGHT WE SHOULD DO IT AND VOTED FOR IT.
Now can you read that and perhaps a new pair of reading glasses needed.
Maybe if routine maintenance and upkeep had been on the agenda for the past 40 plus years our city would not be in the state of disrepair that it is today. Maybe if more thought was put into the expantions that were added to the city we would not have the flooding and traffic problems that exist today. Maybe if a new city hall hadn't been built we could have had a pool for our children. Maybe, just maybe, with a little bit of hind sight from the past our future would not be so bleak. I hope new alderpeople, with new ideas, are in our future.
12:21p.m. - Share some of your knowledge with us regarding EPA mandates and why you think they don't apply to Peru. Then give us an in-depth report on the 1 million dollar pollution control system the city should have installed on the existing generators. Also, please explain to us how this "lack of Leadership" you talk about would have the first damn thing to do with any of these capital projects you are talking about.
You seem to have run amuck without providing any details.
Steve if Peru would have the same damn thinking as you we would have no mall, no hydro, no retail extensions and no electric agency. The mayor was in favor of the Plank road extension and the New Tif area. Most of us read the newspaper and the only thing he has stated is he doesn't want a swimming pool. I believe the choice the city made to buy new generators was either buy or lose 1,000,000 a year in revenue, even your mayor supported that choice. Please be specific about who does what and the differences that the alderman have with the mayor. Public differences that we can gauge in. Not the office chatter that seems to make assumptions. Details Steve!!
2:47PM
You mean you really believe everything you read in the newspaper. Better watch it as they are wrong as many times as they are right. The Mayor was not in favor of spending that money on the Plank Road extension regardless of what you read in the paper. Yes on the TIF and no on the Plank RD. And I say NO to the TIF.
I have been at council meetings and I will say that many have voiced their comments at staff, mayors, clerks, others. I don't believe Potthoff is on anybody's holiday gift list. You make assumptions that all the city dealings are done by illegal means. List the details of these illegal decisions.
I would suggest to clearify most of these issues described on this blog is to get an OPEN ADMINISTRATION AS PROMISED and get all of the city council with meeting minutes video transmitted (Televised) each and every meeeting.
Why are we in the start of the third year of this Mayor Harl and STILL NOT TELEVISED OR OPEN meeting to the public? WHY WHY !!!!
4:21PM
Thanks for bringing up the topic of televised meetings as that is a question I recently put to Mayor Harl and he said he has approached members several times and they have shown no interest or inclination to make it happen. I guess when new members sit in those council chairs when we have a good chance of televised meetings happening.
not when we have a good chance but then we have a good chance of televised meetings.
Steve 12:49
I am curious how is it any different for the aldermen to drink at a local establishment than the Mayor and Superintendent enjoying the holiday festivities at a different establishment?
I too have spoken with the Mayor regarding televising the meetings and he said the alderman don't want it and of course, you know, THEY have to VOTE on it for it to happen.
All this Plank Road bashing reminds me of many years ago Peru ran utilities north along 251 and the officials in the town east of Peru laughed their heads off. Eventually the Mall killed their downtown. I think too many people don't believe in 'build it and they will come'. If new development brings job, let's do it.
To 2:47 p.m. - I don't know what "damn thinking" of mine you are referring to but you are making some pretty extreme assumptions about what I think. Are you suggesting that the mall, the hydro, the retail, and electric department could only be conceived and implemented in bars and back-room deals that include gifts of appreciation to elected officials? Come on! As Lois stated, if you count on the newspaper exclusively for information you will remain uninformed. As is indicated by your comment that the mayor said he doesn't want a swimming pool. When did he say that and how did I miss it?
The decision the city council needed to make regarding with the Gen-Sets was, do we keep the ones we have and pay the substantial cost to add the mandated pollution control equipment for X amount of dollars or sell the ones we have and purchase new Gen-Sets, that already comply with the soon to be mandatory emission standards. The Electric Committee took the advice of the IMEA and decided it best to purchase new. The possibility of losing approximately $1 million in subsidy from the IMEA would only occur if the new EPA emission standards could not eventually be met. Those are the "details" as I recall them.
I don't claim to know how every elected official feels about every issue, including the mayor. When I post something I try to be as detailed as possible. It's your responsibility to be informed and aware of how your elected officials feel about the issues.
Potthoff was a big pusher for the TIF and the Plank road expansion. We don't need to expand our city. Lois I understand your thoughts and support your efforts for replacing him.
To Christy - I suspect you know why it's not the same but I will bite on your question. As I said in the post above, it's not about the aldermen having a couple of cocktails together. It's about elected officials accepting a couple of cocktails(or any other gift, gratuity, meal, trip, etc) from contractors, consultants, or individuals who do business with the city of Peru. Again, it's not about a couple of cocktails, and I think you know that.
Let me put it this way. If Roger Chamlin and Chris Perra decided not to accompany the aldermen to Mike's Tap after a meeting and instead joined Mayor Harl, Gary Bleck, Jim Potthoff and Gary Hylla at another establishment for the purpose of lobbying and establishing a "Quid Pro Quo".... As far as I'm concerned it's the same thing and it would be just as wrong.
Isn't it also about a quorum of aldermen or committee members meeting and "possibly" discussing city business? Isn't that a violation of the Open Meetings Act? Let's face it, we're all human and you know darn well that their rehashing the council meeting (especially if the mayor proposed something they don't want or disapproved something they wanted). I don't believe it's because they like each other that much because they sure don't display that emotion during meetings.
Steve @ 10:07
I understand your philosophy and can not totally disagree with you. I do question though how the Mayor (who is responsible for employee issues/relations) can wine and dine with those employees.
Please keep an open mind because I understand many on this site do not like this issue or feel it irrelevant; but the employees are sponsored by Local 150 and the "Mayor" is also a member of the same local correct? When the Mayor gathers with the employees after hours isn't it the same as lobbying for HIS contractor aka. the local union?
Like you stated if it is wrong for one group; it should be wrong for the others.
11:23AM
This was not a weekly event, it was a once a year Holiday Party. Employers frequently do this and I cannot imagine that any business was even brought up.
Are you promoting a new law that employers who happen to be union members can no longer be in the presence of a union employee if they both happen to belong to the same union?
Change: It was a Xmas party for the Public Works Dept. A once a year occasion not a weekly meeting as is held at Mike's. We also need to realize that the aldermen are the voting members of our government. For them to meet and "possibly" discuss business in a location other than city hall is in violation of the OMA. I do not understand where you feel the Mayor is lobbying his own employees. They already work for him and the city. He doesn't have to wine and dine them - they're already on the payroll. And, besides that, they do not represent the people of Peru as your aldermen do.
To Lois 12:41PM
It is totally amazing to me that you speak for the whereabouts of the mayor through out the year.
Does the Mayor check in with you each and everytime he leaves the house?
I believe he is fratinizing and you support him because you do not know where he is, unless you are there also !
Well !
So if the mayor goes to other department parties why isn't he criticied then? Change is out of touch and only gets one side of the story from her pal Ken Drennan of the public works. FACT!!!
this is a small city-everyone knows everyone, what is the big deal if friends want to get together after a meeting? you people are so cynical, seriously the residents of the city of peru should be proud of their city and of the people that represent them, if not move out-we are still the leading city and hopefully will reamin so, is really sad that this is all you have to complain about-get a life
5:38PM
You are rather silly aren't you. If you are a frequent reader of this blog, you should be aware that the Mayor is in attendance at the city council meetings since that is part of his job. Since many times I attend them also, I just ask questions as do many other people. Don't try to make an issue when there is none it just makes you look like a silly goose.
6:18PM
You don't get it, very few of the aldermen are friends outside of the council chambers and they aren't visiting each other at their homes. They most likely get together because after a meeting they have something to talk about and complain about and plan.
The leading city mentality is what got us into trouble over the past years. We always had to be spending money to look like we were better than other area towns. Well it has now caught up with us and all the towns that were wisely managing their money have some dollars to spend on their cities and Peru is sitting here with a huge debt over their heads and can do very little.
To Christy - Yes Christy, as you well know the mayor is a member of Local 150 as are the city employees within the Public Works Dept. I understand how some people, like yourself, see this situation as a conspiracy and conflict of interest. The fact of the matter is, if the mayor were to attempt to influence or actively intervene on the behalf of Local 150 or any city employees of Local 150 it would indeed be wrong and improper on the part of the mayor to do so. That is why Harl has from the very start of his term not participated in any way in any matters between the city and Local 150.
There is no need for Harl to lobby employees on behalf of Local 150 or vice versa.
The mayor was invited and attended
a holiday gathering of city employees.
I will repeat it for the last time because some of the commentors seem to be missing the point of my original post. This is not about a couple of cocktails. It's about elected officials accepting gifts, any gifts, from those who benefit from doing business with the city of Peru. It has been going on in Peru for a long time and it needs to stop. I suppose every elected official at every level will eventually be offered a Quid Pro Quo by somebody. If there were a "Litmus Test" based on who accepts the gifts and who politely declines, I'll go with the latter every time.
I understand how some visitors to this blog would not like this issue. I understand your interest in this issue.
I do not understand how anyone would see it as irrelevant.
The gifts are not giving to "get" the business, the gift are given to "thank" the city for the business. There is a difference between a thank you and a bribe. The city is always in a position to seek out other firms, but if its not broke why fix it?
WOW! 12:28 you are discussing a lot more than the "cookie jar". If you are thanking the city for the business you reward the city not the city official. If you reward the city official it is a bribe.
The city seeks out other firms for competitive bids to make sure it is getting the citizens the best price, quality and delivery time frame available. The city officials are elected to represent the entire citizenship not themselves!
The competitive bid keeps the buyer updated to the current trend of the market. It makes one aware if its broke and needs to be fixed or improved upon. It is another and essential tool to judge how are we doing".
Cecil, how do you know its not broke. Maybe it does need fixing.
To 12:28 p.m. - Your comment could be the most ridiculous and lame excuse I have ever heard anyone give in an attempt to justify unethical behavior by elected officials. I should say "thank you" on behalf of all the visitors to the blog who certainly got a good chuckle from it. I especially enjoyed your opinion that "there is a difference between a thank you and a bribe". If you really believe what you wrote I actually feel bad for you. You are the "texbook" example of why the gift giving has continued in Peru. You're getting screwed and you don't even realize it. WOW!
12:28 p.m. - I would like to answer you with the initial thoughts I had when reading your comment but in fairness to the blog I'll simply state that you prove that it is difficult to answer stupid. If you entered this comment to stir the pot shame on you as I believe your attitude is very unethical and unprofessional.
Great replies 4:01 and 1:38 to 12:28 p.m.
I don't post Anon. So the person who assigned the 'broke/fix' comment to me is dead wrong and I figure I know who that person is. I wish the posters wouldn't be so chicken-hearted but would step up to the plate and let everyone know who they are.
The aldermen together in one location is not considered a violation of the Open Meetings Act as per the letter I posted from the City Attorney.
True - unless they are discussing city business. And, come on Change, they are just as human as you and I. They talk and discuss. Do you REALLY believe if they were sitting around a table only 2 would be talking shop and the others would be minding their own business? That's almost too funny to think anyone would believe that.
sounds to me like "change" (if that makes sense) is a fan of the alderman. What a "change", "change"!
Now its known why you call your blog "CHANGE', "CHANGE".
Post a Comment