The first committee meeting was informative and mainly discussed the underground infrastructure problems. They will look into pressure reducing vales to hopefully reduce the number of water main breaks. Chris Perra although not a member did much of the talking and there was also a member of the Peru Water Dept. who has had first hand knowledge of the problems.
The second meeting the Peru City Council was a display of the issues and problems before the city. It remains a divided council 4-4 with the Mayor breaking the tie. As many of you know I believe in letting people voice their complaints and problems because I hope we still live in a Free and Open Society. Tonight the Mayor knew he had many in opposition to his 3 million loan proposal in the audience and there were those who wanted to speak before the council vote took place. Mayor Harl would not allow any comment before the vote was taken even though Ald. Waldorf asked him to. The Mayor knew he had the vote on his side and yet he chose to defy those who opposed him by only allowing them to speak at the end of the meeting and the proposal had been voted upon. The Mayor gained nothing by this attitude but simply increased the division among people and the aldermen on the council. If you believe that what you are doing is the right thing to do, then don't worry about what a few people who don't like you or your policies say. It looks like Pay Back Time.
17 comments:
I'm not sure I agree with this infrastructure committee having 4 aldermen on it. It seems to me that this could quite often put some pressure on the remaining aldermen. It also keeps them out in the cold until an ordinance or such is presented to them at full council. And, with the mayor on the committee and him representing the tie breaking vote I feel this is a conflict. It appears as though he is the leader and the spokesperson for this committee. And yes, I have often felt that the public is left out of decisions and discussions because they do not get to speak until everything is over and done with and then they are limited to a certain amount of time. Open, honest, transparent - I thought this was what we were going to live by in this new era of government. And why was it necessary for the fire chief to say he wouldn't miss the xmas parade with a snicker?
The infrastructure committee are not elected by the residents of Peru and only serve as a advisory committee. The Aldermen voted for the loan, without discussion. Don't blame the committee. The residents voted for the sales tax increase on a advisory postcard. They voted yes. There was no promise on what they were to get for the tax increase, it was infrastructure improvements. Nobody has a right to question the mayor, it was all done in a democratic professional fashion.
"Nobody has the right to question the Mayor" Hmmm... with attitudes like that, our republic is lost.
Lois wrote: Tonight the Mayor knew he had many in opposition to his 3 million loan proposal in the audience and there were those who wanted to speak before the council vote took place.
Can you explain why a resident in the audience who has NOT attended the meetings of the Infrastructure Committee and most likely NOT ever attended a Water & Sewer committee meeting take the floor of a City Council Meeting
and ask questions or give opinions based on WHAT.
Anonymous 12:5o pm wrote: I'm not sure I agree with this infrastructure committee having 4 aldermen on it.
And: It also keeps them out in the cold until an ordinance or such is presented to them at full council.
First “you are not sure” Alderman should be on the committee.
Then you think the Alderman not on the committee will be “left out in the cold”.
Give me a break. The Alderman have, had, and always’s will have the materials and their fellow Alderman and City workers to ask and discuss any subject that the Alderman care to investigate.
The Alderman were all prepared to vote last night but they disagreed.
That does NOT mean they were not prepared.
3:04 PM
There was a second plan that was NEVER brought up at a city council for discussion. It was only discussed at the infrastructure committee. I personally was only able to attend this last meeting due to personal reasons.
Actually the Mayor wanted the vote last week when even the 4 "nay" aldermen had not even been given the material.
I cannot tell you how many times something is brought up for a vote and an alderman will say, I just got the material in my packet tonight and have not even had time to read it.
So if you think they always have the material, I suggest you check into it a little further or attend some meetings and listen.
3:03 PM
How do you know who has attended what meetings and how often unless you are speaking as a member of those committees? And if you are a member of one of the committees, I take offense at your comment that insinuates that the person asking a question has no knowledge of the subject. You don't know that!
Perhaps more of the aldermen should schedule public information meetings like Ald. Perez has been doing.
The Infrastructure Committee meetings are open to the public. The 4 aldermen who are not on the committee, along with every other citizen of Peru, had the choice to go to the meetings to see what was being proposed.
Anon 12:50 - That snicker from Chief King was an inside joke between him and me.
Sherry Mayszak
Anon 1:48 You can't be serious "it was all done in "a democratic professional fashion". A referendum in which a voter gets to vote in a closed booth in a democratic professional fashion not a numbered advisory postcard which could be traced back to the sender. After reading your comments I envy you as you seem to be the kind of person who could be happy anywhere.
To Lois: You wrote to Anon 3:04 PM:
There was a second plan that was NEVER brought up at a city council for discussion. It was only discussed at the infrastructure committee.
Lois this was true at the Nov 30th meeting and Alderman Lukosus rescinded his motion to vote on the road project. The Alderman were given the “second plan” last week and had time to review it for last night’s meeting.
So now I will give back to you your “very own comment” you made to Anonymous 3:04 PM.
“I suggest you check into it a little further or attend some meetings and listen. (quote from Lois)
Funny how a statement like that can come back to bite you.
anon 3:03 please understand that everybody should be represented in a working democracy,not just those who are chosen to represent a committee. I think more than a few residents were left out in the cold and Yes everybody is welcome to their opinion. Why place limits on those residents that have a different or same point of view. We will never know!
You are absolutely wrong 3:04. The aldermen do not always have the necessary information. As a matter of fact, the second proposal (the one without the borrowing) was given to them at the meeting after they were asked to vote.
I'll second that Brian!
4:10PM
I had very good reasons for not being able to attend those meetings and I don't need to explain to you or anyone else. You might ask the aldermen if I attend other meetings.
Yes but they were asked to vote before they received the report, you might check that one too. I don't believe the minutes are posted. If I don't attend a meeting I assure you I do read the minutes.
We all missed how the Republic hired 2 engineering firms to handle the new improvement areas. It was stated in the Newstrib that the city hired or contracted Chamlin for the 3 million dollar project and in the same breath will be hiring a city engineer. I guess the building expector needs some company chasing pawn shops and garage sales signs.
To 9:05 AM December 07
More stupid comments from someone with no information or ability to gather information.
Alderman Potthoff asked questions about what a City Engineer would do and it was explained to him by the Mayor and Alderman Radtke. Some of the answers were included in the Alderman’s packets a week ago as to the reasons for the proposal of a City Engineer.
Alderman Waldorf, Radtke, Lukosus and Perez attended many meetings and heard many opinions on the subject of a City Engineer and the role that person would have.
It was further explained at the Council meeting that the City was to instruct Human Resource’s to begin the process, not to hire someone next week.
Also stated was a City Engineer would not replace the need for an outside engineering firm on large projects.
I wish some of the Bloggers put a little effort before making stupid comments.
Thank goodness our Alderman ask questions and attend meetings before they vote.
For your information 2:38 you are incorrect in a sense when you state that 4 of the 8 aldermen attend the infrastructure committee meetings - THEY ARE ON THE COMMITTEE!
Post a Comment