This blog is maintained for the sole purpose of allowing the people of Peru and those interested in the cities of the Illinois Valley to express their views.
“It doesn’t take a majority to win, just a tireless minority that will keep starting brush fires in the mind and hearts of their fellow men.” Samuel Adams
11:27 If you believe that the people should decide on the tax then you, and others like you, need to start attending meetings and voicing your concerns and ideas. I believe there is another sales tax meeting scheduled for August 16th.
The voters entrusted those elected to decide if a tax raise is wanted. Ald. Perez already did a survey and the greater majority wanted the city to raise the taxes, about 98%. We now have somebody that has the pulse of Peru, so lets get behind him and the Mayor.
I don't know why we are making such a big deal about voting yes or no for the sales tax increase. We will, in the end, have no say in the decision. Ultimately our alderman will make that decision for us. And, I don't know about you, but I did not vote for my alderman because he wants to raise my taxes. I voted for him because I hoped he would listen to the people and vote accordingly.
Are you telling me that 98% of the citizens of Alderman Perez district want this sales tax to go to 7 1/2%???? What is being fed to them is that it is only 50 cents as an increase, not the $7.50 on a $100.00.
Best way to sell something is to reduce it to the lowest common denominator while not giving the full total. Sure it is only 50 cents but it has to be added onto the already 7%.
Much to my surprise I did see alderman perez on my block several weeks back talking with my neighbor across the street. I later found that the alderman was asking about the sales tax increase. The alderman did not make it to my house but spent a good hour on my block. I was hoping to talk with him but will hope to see him soon. I am just happy to see that he cares enough to be out talking to us being that we live on the south side of rt6 This was a first for us to see a city official down this way.
A poll was taken by Rodney and it said 98% want a sales tax increase. And last week most people want to get rid of the fireworks on water street. Please respect those votes, we have a Alderman that is taking polls and asking people want they want. Time for the rest of the city council to listen to what the people want.
Anon 10:30. I hope you will write him out a check when he stops over. Please pay my sales tax portion also. Were you in the 98% sales tax yes voters and is the vote now 98.67% in the 2nd ward.
Agreed. Let's not let the topic of the tax increase, whether we're for it or not, outshadow the fact that Perez has positive energy working for the people. On a side note to 5:25, the increase impact on $100 would be 50 cents, the other 7% is already in place. Not criticizing, just clarifying.
My comment regarding a sales tax increase was taken from another post but it sums up how I feel. "Until our government makes better use of it's current funds I cannot and will not support an additional tax." No more wasteful spending! And, I still cannot believe the "friends of the mayor" are hosting a golf outing during working hours.
If a true and unbiased political poll is to be taken the first step is to eliminate a alderman from going door to door taking it. Please do not publish this poll outside of Peru because you could be convicted of homicide when marketing research personnel laugh themselves to death when reading that a reported 98% of the surveyed want a tax increase of any kind. At 98% there is no need of a plus or minus variance. This type of poll creates a need of a referendum to enable our representation to be educated to the truth and the proper methods of finding it. I'll guarantee that 98% of the 2d ward will not vote in favor of a sales tax increase in a secret ballot and no one should be foolish enough to think that it will in a democracy.
The question regarding Perez's poll is 98% of what? The total number of constituents in his district, 98% of 4 blocks (this wud depend on how many in the block, etc.)
Along with my concern regarding this proposed tax increase is the fact that we have a new alderman who looks to be someone who has the citizens of his ward at heart and is open to suggestions. He must realize that when quoting figures they cannot be an arbitrary percentage off the top of his head. The statistics should be documented and "for real". I believe he means well and I would also apologize to him if this is a true statistic that he can document - but I don't think it is. He is learning and I applaud him but he has to be able to validate what he says.
Regarding 11:03 AM 7/21 yes we do already have to pay 7% but adding the 1/2 % only makes it more. I sincerely hope you are getting your raises because senior citizens have been taking nothing but cuts in pay with increase in medicare costs, supplemental costs, food costs, gasoline costs and on and on. We can no longer support city deficits, state deficits and federal deficits.
From 11:03 to 1:42 and all fellow blog readers, my post in reference to the proposed tax increase was to clarify that the impact on a $100 purchase would be an additional 50 cents, to the current 7% tax rate. Thanks for your feedback - it will help me dial in to clarity on future posts. And I did not get a raise this year either, but am equally sympathetic to the senior population.
Anon 12:46 Did you mention a educated poll? Why not trust a Alderman when they give you the plain truth? What was the percentage of those who want to move the fireworks from Water Street to Washington Park, I bet it was high. The point is don't take Peru taxpayers for uneducated fools that would believe that 98% of us want a tax increase. Don't back up your thoughts and validate it as a voting majority. It make you want to put a sign on your door that says NO Solicitors and Please No Alderman taking polls. Maybe I will get the sign up beware of the pitbull answering my door. Last poll we had was about the swimming pool. How did that go?
Lets also clarify the comments Anon 2:42. if you decide not to spend than you get 0% of all purchases. And those with a fixed income or lower income pay a greater majority of their spending percentage in the favor of a higher tax. Those who support the senior or those that support the working wage person would never support a higher sales tax. Income tax yes, but not a sales tax increase. Fireworks is a publicity stunt and nothing more. The Rec. committee will come to a conclusion that the best spot is water street and they may throw out the CSO as a way to appease those who resent the group. That will solve nothing and encourage more alcohol from outside the beer garden. And you will get rid of a group that pays for decorations. Maybe we will have another fundraising committee to pay for fireworks, public pools and soon to be Christmas decorations. Its makes great publicity but really amounts to nothing more than photos in the newspaper.
2:57 are you trying to answer 12:46 or are you trying to muddle 12:46'S comments? Could you explain what you mean when you mention an educated poll? There was no mention of not trusting anyone, only a mention of trusting the validity of the alderman's poll. The subject of the door to door poll was a 1/2% increase over and above an already 7% sales tax. The movement of the fireworks display is an entirely different subject. It was Perez who stated that 98% of those he questioned were in favor of a sales tax increase not 12:46.
What is your need in trying to continuously change the subject to fireworks, to swimming pool from a tax increase. Perez stated that 98% wanted a sales tax increase. It would be best for you to question him as you are the one referring to Peru taxpayers as uneducated fools. This is just another accusation which only you yourself have made. I hope I have made more sense than what you attempted to state in your blog. I confess I was confused!
It seems to have been lost in the clutter - but the loan on the City Hall building has been paid off. How is the money that was being used to pay the loan being used now? I believe that every city loan not tied to a reveneu source has been paid. The Mayor needs to explain the cash flow before asking for more.
How about the money that was used to fund the swimming pool in the past. That had to be a HUGE bill. Water replacement due to leakage, electricity used, chemicals purchased, the labor force cost seems to be still in place, general labor upkeep from city employees (full timers), and what else. That budgeted costs should have aided the deficit funding. Where was this ever reported and what was it allotted to..........
The City Treasurer should be held accountable to answer KS & 10:32's questions, as he and the finance committee should be held responsible for compiling a trail of all financial aspects of the city. What positive steps has the administration made in the direction of implementing the use of a time clock for city employees?
What, what, what, who, who, who, why, why????? Lots of questions. Home rule seems to have been a poor vehicle of accountability. Perhaps we need to go back to square 1 in accounting. Lets find out where the money should have been, who or what line item it should have covered. I know it would be an accounting nightmare but isn't this a 3D nightmare, we are in? We need to stop pointing fingers, right the ship and set sail. BUT FIRST, WE HAVE TO QUIT SPENDING MONEY!!!!!!
The latest Moody information I found on the internet was dated July 15,2011. "Moody affirms A1 rating on the city of Peru (IL) general obligation bonds. Removes stable outlook"
This all seems so simple, when you and I are short of cash, we have to cut back because unless we have a "rich uncle" to give us more we have no choice. The city on the other hand simply says, we will add another tax when we want more of your money. It looks like we cut back on our food etc., but it looks like the city instead is giving raises to selected employees. In my opinion, the city has not reached deep enough and is overlooking what they don't want to touch like overpaid contractors to the city for a start.
How can we as a city keep spending and wasting money we supposedly don't have? Oh, I know, we can raise a tax on the citizens to cover our wasteful spending!!! When is this nonsense going to stop? When we (the citizens) run out of money??
28 comments:
ABSOLUTELY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
11:27 If you believe that the people should decide on the tax then you, and others like you, need to start attending meetings and voicing your concerns and ideas. I believe there is another sales tax meeting scheduled for August 16th.
The voters entrusted those elected to decide if a tax raise is wanted. Ald. Perez already did a survey and the greater majority wanted the city to raise the taxes, about 98%. We now have somebody that has the pulse of Peru, so lets get behind him and the Mayor.
I don't know why we are making such a big deal about voting yes or no for the sales tax increase. We will, in the end, have no say in the decision. Ultimately our alderman will make that decision for us. And, I don't know about you, but I did not vote for my alderman because he wants to raise my taxes. I voted for him because I hoped he would listen to the people and vote accordingly.
Perez does not have the pulse of the entire city so lets not make a story that is not true by your numbers.
Sounds like a republican view of a picture that is distorted.
Are you telling me that 98% of the citizens of Alderman Perez district want this sales tax to go to 7 1/2%???? What is being fed to them is that it is only 50 cents as an increase, not the $7.50 on a $100.00.
Best way to sell something is to reduce it to the lowest common denominator while not giving the full total. Sure it is only 50 cents but it has to be added onto the already 7%.
Much to my surprise I did see alderman perez on my block several weeks back talking with my neighbor across the street. I later found that the alderman was asking about the sales tax increase.
The alderman did not make it to my house but spent a good hour on my block.
I was hoping to talk with him but will hope to see him soon. I am just happy to see that he cares enough to be out talking to us being that we live on the south side of rt6 This was a first for us to see a city official down this way.
A poll was taken by Rodney and it said 98% want a sales tax increase. And last week most people want to get rid of the fireworks on water street. Please respect those votes, we have a Alderman that is taking polls and asking people want they want. Time for the rest of the city council to listen to what the people want.
Anon 10:30. I hope you will write him out a check when he stops over. Please pay my sales tax portion also. Were you in the 98% sales tax yes voters and is the vote now 98.67% in the 2nd ward.
Agreed. Let's not let the topic of the tax increase, whether we're for it or not, outshadow the fact that Perez has positive energy working for the people. On a side note to 5:25, the increase impact on $100 would be 50 cents, the other 7% is already in place. Not criticizing, just clarifying.
My comment regarding a sales tax increase was taken from another post but it sums up how I feel. "Until our government makes better use of it's current funds I cannot and will not support an additional tax." No more wasteful spending! And, I still cannot believe the "friends of the mayor" are hosting a golf outing during working hours.
If a true and unbiased political poll is to be taken the first step is to eliminate a alderman from going door to door taking it. Please do not publish this poll outside of Peru because you could be convicted of homicide when marketing research personnel laugh themselves to death when reading that a reported 98% of the surveyed want a tax increase of any kind. At 98% there is no need of a plus or minus variance. This type of poll creates a need of a referendum to enable our representation to be educated to the truth and the proper methods of finding it. I'll guarantee that 98% of the 2d ward will not vote in favor of a sales tax increase in a secret ballot and no one should be foolish enough to think that it will in a democracy.
The question regarding Perez's poll is 98% of what? The total number of constituents in his district, 98% of 4 blocks (this wud depend on how many in the block, etc.)
Along with my concern regarding this proposed tax increase is the fact that we have a new alderman who looks to be someone who has the citizens of his ward at heart and is open to suggestions. He must realize that when quoting figures they cannot be an arbitrary percentage off the top of his head. The statistics should be documented and "for real". I believe he means well and I would also apologize to him if this is a true statistic that he can document - but I don't think it is. He is learning and I applaud him but he has to be able to validate what he says.
Regarding 11:03 AM 7/21 yes we do already have to pay 7% but adding the 1/2 % only makes it more. I sincerely hope you are getting your raises because senior citizens have been taking nothing but cuts in pay with increase in medicare costs, supplemental costs, food costs, gasoline costs and on and on. We can no longer support city deficits, state deficits and federal deficits.
1:42 PM Will Rogers, Harry Truman, and myself could not say it any better. City debt is millions, state debt is billions, federal debt is trillions.
From 11:03 to 1:42 and all fellow blog readers, my post in reference to the proposed tax increase was to clarify that the impact on a $100 purchase would be an additional 50 cents, to the current 7% tax rate. Thanks for your feedback - it will help me dial in to clarity on future posts. And I did not get a raise this year either, but am equally sympathetic to the senior population.
Anon 12:46 Did you mention a educated poll? Why not trust a Alderman when they give you the plain truth? What was the percentage of those who want to move the fireworks from Water Street to Washington Park, I bet it was high. The point is don't take Peru taxpayers for uneducated fools that would believe that 98% of us want a tax increase. Don't back up your thoughts and validate it as a voting majority. It make you want to put a sign on your door that says NO Solicitors and Please No Alderman taking polls. Maybe I will get the sign up beware of the pitbull answering my door. Last poll we had was about the swimming pool. How did that go?
Lets also clarify the comments Anon 2:42. if you decide not to spend than you get 0% of all purchases. And those with a fixed income or lower income pay a greater majority of their spending percentage in the favor of a higher tax. Those who support the senior or those that support the working wage person would never support a higher sales tax. Income tax yes, but not a sales tax increase. Fireworks is a publicity stunt and nothing more. The Rec. committee will come to a conclusion that the best spot is water street and they may throw out the CSO as a way to appease those who resent the group. That will solve nothing and encourage more alcohol from outside the beer garden. And you will get rid of a group that pays for decorations. Maybe we will have another fundraising committee to pay for fireworks, public pools and soon to be Christmas decorations. Its makes great publicity but really amounts to nothing more than photos in the newspaper.
2:57 are you trying to answer 12:46 or are you trying to muddle 12:46'S comments? Could you explain what you mean when you mention an educated poll? There was no mention of not trusting anyone, only a mention of trusting the validity of the alderman's poll. The subject of the door to door poll was a 1/2% increase over and above an already 7% sales tax. The movement of the fireworks display is an entirely different subject. It was Perez who stated that 98% of those he questioned were in favor of a sales tax increase not 12:46.
What is your need in trying to continuously change the subject to fireworks, to swimming pool from a tax increase. Perez stated that 98% wanted a sales tax increase. It would be best for you to question him as you are the one referring to Peru taxpayers as uneducated fools. This is just another accusation which only you yourself have made. I hope I have made more sense than what you attempted to state in your blog. I confess I was confused!
It seems to have been lost in the clutter - but the loan on the City Hall building has been paid off. How is the money that was being used to pay the loan being used now? I believe that every city loan not tied to a reveneu source has been paid. The Mayor needs to explain the cash flow before asking for more.
How about the money that was used to fund the swimming pool in the past. That had to be a HUGE bill. Water replacement due to leakage, electricity used, chemicals purchased, the labor force cost seems to be still in place, general labor upkeep from city employees (full timers), and what else. That budgeted costs should have aided the deficit funding. Where was this ever reported and what was it allotted to..........
Not only the outdoor pool but also the indoor pool that no longer exists. And what about the cost of employees who were not replaced?
KS & 10:32 - two of the most logical questions I've read so far. Nicely presented.... Who has the answers?
The City Treasurer should be held accountable to answer KS & 10:32's questions, as he and the finance committee should be held responsible for compiling a trail of all financial aspects of the city. What positive steps has the administration made in the direction of implementing the use of a time clock for city employees?
What is our new Moody rating that we should have gotten at least a week ago if not longer?
What, what, what, who, who, who, why, why????? Lots of questions. Home rule seems to have been a poor vehicle of accountability. Perhaps we need to go back to square 1 in accounting. Lets find out where the money should have been, who or what line item it should have covered. I know it would be an accounting nightmare but isn't this a 3D nightmare, we are in? We need to stop pointing fingers, right the ship and set sail. BUT FIRST, WE HAVE TO QUIT SPENDING MONEY!!!!!!
The latest Moody information I found on the internet was dated July 15,2011.
"Moody affirms A1 rating on the city of Peru (IL) general obligation bonds. Removes stable outlook"
This all seems so simple, when you and I are short of cash, we have to cut back because unless we have a "rich uncle" to give us more we have no choice.
The city on the other hand simply says, we will add another tax when we want more of your money. It looks like we cut back on our food etc., but it looks like the city instead is giving raises to selected employees.
In my opinion, the city has not reached deep enough and is overlooking what they don't want to touch like overpaid contractors to the city for a start.
How can we as a city keep spending and wasting money we supposedly don't have? Oh, I know, we can raise a tax on the citizens to cover our wasteful spending!!! When is this nonsense going to stop? When we (the citizens) run out of money??
Post a Comment