It has also been brought to me the information that according to our city budget not only was our insurance consulted rehired at the amount of $650.00 per month but that is an increase over the years before.
Is this something the Finance committee should be handling along with whoever the agent is for that particular insurance need? Many cities have commission forms of government and those elected officials are responsible for specific areas of the city structure as Finance, Public Property, Streets and Public Improvements and Public Health and Safety and they remain in those seats for a specified term and than run for the same office again. Our aldermen don't stay on committees long enough to gain long term knowledge unless their private occupation involves one of those fields.
This may sounds like a lot of topics all thrown together but in the end it all ends up on the same page, how are our tax dollars being spent? Wisely or not?
25 comments:
Regarding the insurance consultant I too noticed that for the past 5 years $2700/year was budgeted for his expenses. We just approved a $650/month budget for him - an increase of $5,100/year. Were the aldermen made aware of this before they voted?
I have criticized Peru officials, elected and otherwise for many years for allowing themselves to be placed in situation where there is even an "appearance" of "improper behavior" by accepting any kind of "gratuity" from any company or contractor that does business with the city of Peru. I don't care if it's a free meal in Chicago, an invitation to the company Christmas party, a gift basket, a ham or turkey, or a $2.25 cent cocktail after a council meeting. It's wrong for the contractor to offer, it's unnecessary for the city official to accept it, and it signals the public that there exists a "quid pro quo" between contractors and elected officials. The situation currently is nothing like it had been in years past, but it still happens. On a positive note, the influence of TEST, Inc. and Chamlin Engineering is less and less these days and weakening all the time as indicated by the recent open bidding process for Landfill groundwater analysis work that has been a blank check for TEST for fifteen years now. Make no mistake, that sweetheart deal is going to end just in time for Valentines Day and that is the direct result of the "ethical" influence provided by the newly elected and appointed elected officials who have no interest in any of the the "gratuities" that TEST or Chamlin has to offer.
That is how I know reform is taking hold and we are moving in the right direction.
I don't care what type of government a municipality chooses, it ultimately will depend upon the character of the people in office. We are fortunate in Peru that we have experienced an influx of ethically savvy elected officials in recent years and its beginning to pay big dividends.
Steve, I do believe that "influence peddling" is a real concept. We all know that it is a practice that companies soliciting their products and services engage in. It's an acceptable sales strategy businesses use to court existing and potential clients. The point that I take away from your post is the reference to "ethical", given that you're referring to elected/appointed officials empowered to manage the taxpayers' dollars and the potential influence that such treatment may have on their decision-making regarding the responsible use of the taxpayers' money. The character of the elected/appointed city official isn't to be judged on the basis of partaking and accepting of the hospitality, but rather their ability to remain objective when it's go-time. I truly believe that it is possible for a courted Peru city council member to maintain their objectivity. Some (not all) from the past, and some (not all) from the new regime. As the cliche saying goes..."Wouldn't it be nice to have the best of both worlds?" On that note, I must sign-off...it's time for me to plan who I'm going to wine & dine this week, and God willing, I will bring on a new client or two:)
Is it possible to have a list of aldermen and city administration published on the blog who did attend any functions paid for by Test and/or Chamlin at the IML this year and any form of influence peddling which has been accepted by council members or city administrators since the elections of 2009?
you are dreaming steve, has only gotten worse cant wait for a new election get this guy out
Steve: I thought only 3 of the 8 aldermen didn't participate in the Chicago party this year.
According to the Monday meeting agenda, the Test contract will be discussed at the Public Property committee meeting. This should be interesting.Although I'm not in a position to attend that meeting I'm hoping citizens of Peru show up and report what is discussed. The meeting is scheduled for either 6:00 or 6:30. Please keep us posted.
9:54PM
This is the details for the public property meeting.
"airport bids (for updating the interior) and resurfacing the tennis/basketball courts. I'm also going to put reviewing the bids for water testing at the landfill, and our meeting is going to start at 6:15 instead of 6:45 in case you want to be there"
Megan, personally I believe there is a difference when it is private versus public.
If you are working for a private corporation and part of your job is to bring in new clients and you wine and dine as part of your job, that is fine.
Doing the same when votes are the end result is different because it involves taxpayer money and in effect affects thousands of people who depend upon a honest government. We have seen enough 8-0 votes to constantly renew the same contracts without going out for bids, that is an issue that must change.
Lois, private vs. public, valid point and well taken. However, I hold on to my convictions that those with decision-making powers within our city have the ability to do what's right when push comes to shove during the voting process, regardless of the hospitality they've engaged in along the way. Some will toe the line guided by their campaign promises, conscience, and ethics. As for others, well, perhaps not. There's no escaping that perception is as key of a factor as it is reality.
Lois – I put campaign contributions in the same category. The Mayor has the largest campaign war chest out of any Mayor in the county. Over $15,000 and he has been collecting from local businesses and national labor organizations since before he was elected. He is the only local Mayor that regularly collects contributions in non-election years.
Megan - I understand the business practice of soliciting and entertaining clients and prospective clients. I strongly disagree that the standards of ethical behavior for public and private business should be the same. I agree that elected officials must be capable of maintaining objsctivity in situations of where they are subjected to influence peddling. My point is that public officials should be held to a much higher standard and never allow themselves to be in a position that erodes public confidence in the ability of elected officials to remain objective. In my profession I am subjected to "kind gestures" from representatives of companies who want very much to sell me a product or do business with my company. I may or may not decide to accept these gestures and I may or may not be influenced by them so long as it benefits my company.
I also understand that public officials are exposed to the very same type of kind gestures on occasion from those that have a financial interest. I want to be absolutely certain that my elected officials are interseted exclusively in "my" best interests when these gestures are made. The best possible way for the general public to establish and maintain "confidence" in their public officials is for those officials to respond with three simple words. "No thank you".
I support you and wish you the best of luck "wining and dining" any prospective clients in your private business as that is free enterprise as it should be in the "private" sector. However, I will not support, and I do not accept any attempt to influence my elected officials with gratuities as business as usual.
Steve you are so right. Keep up the good work. We need more people like you, watching our tax dollar. Thank you
I think we can go even once step further. It's not just necessarily votes that are bought it's also favors. You know the saying - "if you scratch my back I'll scratch yours". That scares me more than a vote because that's my tax dollar that's being played with.
I agree with you 9:49 but shouldn't that be the job of our elected officials from the mayor on down? Didn't we elect them to watch over our town and spend our money wisely?
Steve,
If you are the Steve who is my neighbor you are being a hypocrite when you support one of the biggest "peddlers" around! Take off the sheeps clothing honey because I am ready to battle the big bad wolf!
You have a sign supporting Frank Mautino in your yard! Frank Mautino received a $1000.00 campaign contribution in November 2011 from Exxon Mobil. In fact Exxon has been very generous to Mautino's campaign since the DePue issue has been brought back to light and the Village is fighting back! But what exactly has be done for the Village beyond photo opts and media rhetoric?
Kristy
Kristy - You know where I live and if you want to change the subject to campaign finance I will consider writing a post along those lines in the future. In the meantime, stick to topic at hand. We're not talking about Frank Mautino or the Village of DePue. For your information I have a Mautino sign in my yard because I support Frank. I support variuos elected officials on all levels of government. I even send campaign contributions to some individuals. I'm active in politics and I try to stay informed on every level.
Unlike yourself Kristy, I make a point of knowing what I'm talking about before I talk. Also, unlike yourself, I'm actually trying and succeeding in making a difference by supporting reform in Peru by helping elect reformers.
I give you credit for being consistent though. You don't discriminate. You seem to hate everybody equally.
Steve I agree, she can't seem to keep track who she likes and dislikes - when Harl was running she nailed the former administration and his backers and now she hates the current administration and his backers
To Brian - Are you advocating campaign finance reform on the municipal level? Count me in on that idea Brian. Because if we are successful in limiting or eliminating campaign contributions you will have to remind your mentor and Steering Committee Chairman Don Baker that he will not be allowed to "bankroll" the entire campaigns of those aldermanic and mayoral candidates that Don intends to keep in his pocket, "like so many nickels and dimes", after the next municipal election.
If you deny "The Don" the opportunity to pay the freight needed to install his puppet council you will only ensure the ongoing success of the current reform movement. Let me know how I can help you achieve campaign finance reform. By the way, have you cleared that idea with Don yet?
Steve i apologize if I touched a nerve; I suppose Once again I could be wrong wink wink ;).
My goal is for transparency and to keep people "honest" regardless of which political party they are associated with. Again the difference between fighting for a cause and
fighting for party votes.
To clarify I hate nobody but I strongly dislike those who can not be accountable for their actions. Unlike some individuals I say what I mean and I mean what say.
Kristy
I don't think we as citizens solve anything by attacking each other. Each individual is entitled to their opinion and each has the right to voice that opinion. What I would hope is that we would all work together to fix the problems that still exist in our government. We need to address the trouble spots, formulate a plan of attack, and work to solve these issues. If we work together we can succeed much quicker than if we are divided.
Sorry to disappoint you Steve – but my ideas are all mine.
Kristy,
I think you lose validity when you switch from one side to another! You ramble and ramble and never really come to a conclusion or solution! We as the citizens know what has been taking place all these years and for you to suddenly switch sides for whatever your reasoning is doesn't hold any weight! Fact is change is in order and you nor anyone else can change our minds! Change = evolvelment and you need to accept that! Accept that and embrace it, could mean a better Peru for you!!
Why doesn' city clean up eyesore om Shooting Park road, West of Burger King, East of Ford garage?
The old Aldi building lot that also burnt down?
Post a Comment