It almost happened, the people of Peru were almost allowed to have some fun with their children in a beautiful park and end the day with a small fireworks event that would be non threatening to any of the home owners in the area. Any debris that accidently blew into their yards or streets would be less than the trash we residents encounter daily throughout this town.
Almost all new members voted yes and all the CSO members voted No. Conflict of interest sure but that doesn't matter in Peru because "that's the way we always did it" the phrase left with us by former Ald. Jack O'Beirne.
Looking ahead to 2013 when I hope to hear some members singing "They are breaking up that old gang of mine"
6 comments:
Alderman Perez was the one that said if they could not have fireworks he would not have the family fun day without fireworks. That was an option given to him by the council, He said no
Great , chalk one up for the people! As you can see the NEW people are self centered and NOT citizen responsible for which they represent.
The new members of the council will have a tough time the next election. Out, Out, Out.
"A dynamo take some time to get up and start to turn at maximum revolutions but it has started to turn."
Citizens lets get involved and not get run over like the last election by a few of the current trouble makers, which during the council meetings usually sit in the back of the council room.
What upsets me and many others the most on this issue is that people only come in at the tail end and upset the apple cart. They haven't attended previous meetings, they haven't talked to all parties involved, and they have no true clue as to what is being proposed or under discussion. Why did our lst ward aldermen have to go talk to residents the day before the vote? Why didn't they do it when the proposal was first presented? In the Baker Lake vicinity (and I'm sure other parts of town) we already have many, many illegal fireworks being shot off days before and after the 4th. These are not controlled, scaled down fireworks like alderman Perez suggests. They are not designed for all to enjoy - only those who have them. Can we vote to make our police enforce the law and get these fireworks out of the hands of neighbors? It always seems as though those citizens with prestigious, expensive homes are pampered and catered to much more than those citizens with older more established homes. Does anyone ask those people close to water street if the noise disturbs them or if the traffic and parking is a mess in their neightborhood? My guess would be - NO. We are all a part of this town, not just the elite.
The council was only allowed to vote as the matter was presented on the agenda and that was written to include the fireworks. Ald. Potthoff was too anxious to get this over with, evidently the discussion was making him feel very uncomfortable is what it looked like to me.
Anon 9:05 Just because people oppose your candidate or voice "their" opinion on a topic does not make them trouble makers. No two people will always agree on every subject but that does not make one right and the other a trouble maker. I resent that statement and that is exactly why our council meetings are not discussions or debates but out and out battles. Those trouble makers in the back are voicing their opinions and concerns just as you are yet, they are not labeling you a trouble maker. That's the difference between you and them. They have class!
8:55 I spoke to Alderman Perez this afternoon and asked him about your post.
Perez told me the council can't amend an event and go forward with it without first consulting with the group that was going to volunteer, and sponsors that were going to commit donations to fund the fire works. Perez said if he would have let Potthoff amend it and it went through and didn't have the support then he would have been left standing with little or o support. Perez also told me if the Aldermen would commit to helping fund- raise,organize and commit to volunteering then he would do it.
I could never imagine Potthoff, Waldorf or Ankeiwitz stepping up and helping, especially when Potthoff couldn't even manage, or work the Taste when it was here.
I guess I can see why the Alderman said " NO" it's obvious he doesnt have the support needed from the city that it would take.
I would imagine the people around the lake changed their minds due to their front doors being HOUNDED. One other thing I don't understand. If Perez said he went to certain homes, why did Ferrari and Radke go back even after the petitioner guy went there. They obviously knew they were hounding these residents.
That just shows that Aldermen Radke and Ferrari either didn't trust Perez or wanted to change their minds.
I'm dissapointed in Alderman Radke, Ferrari I can understand but the new guy??
Post a Comment