I left the meeting last night thinking it was rather boring and no one had even made a public comment and now I am finding out why.
First let me tell you that last week after the Pledge of Allegiance Mayor Harl called on Greg Vaccaro to make a comment. Now you have to know that there was nothing on the agenda regarding the BB gun club and he had not filled out his 3 x 5 card but he was allowed to comment. Why? I guess because he is the mayors friend.
Last night before the council meeting started and some of us were still in the community room a conversation was taking place in the council room that deserves some attention and briefly this is what happened. Some individuals from another Environmental company doing the same thing as TEST had decided to make the trip and present some information to our officials. I understand the mayor came to them and asked why they were at the mtg and they told him they wanted to make a few comments on the water treatment issue. He then went and got Bartley, Lukosus and Waldorf and came back to the people and they were told by Bartley doing the mayors job that they could not speak because the topic was not on the agenda.
You now see that it is fine when Mayor Harl wants his friends to speak against the council rules but when someone else wishes to speak the answer is NO. Add to this that the ladies had traveled some distance and were welcomed into Peru with rudeness by our elected city officials. Perhaps again another violation, it seems. Peru doesn't only have one black eye, they have 2 now.
55 comments:
Lois if what you say is true then they should have said something during public comment at the end.
These people were not familiar with our council structure and after all they just had been told that they would not be allowed to speak. I do believe they did not know and were not told that they could speak at the end of the meeting. Maybe in their city there is only one time for public comment. I do believe you will be hearing more about this from others who may give you more exact wording.
This is a clear violation of the Open Meetings Act. Public Bodies cannot create rules to limit the comment period to only agenda topics. The clerk, mayor and aldermen involved lied and misrepresented the law. This is disgraceful.
The Peru officials who violated the civil rights of these folks should be prosecuted and sued for damages.
Well in any case, they should come to the next meeting and fill out a card and speak at the beginning.
Mr Vaccaro was not only allowed to speak during public comment although not being on the agenda he was introduced by the Mayor as having other things to do so he got to speak right away and than leave.
No 3x5 card and allowed to present himself for well over 3 minutes (the maximum time allowed to speak) which has been enforced upon others.
Also the Mayor, council and Mr.Vaccaro turned this into a question and answer session rather than being limited to public comment as has been the strict rule for all others.
Do you know who these people were and what Company they represent? I think it would be a good idea to speak with them and have them say what happened instead of projecting and supposing what they thought, felt, etc?
There is a difference between public comment and an actual sales presentation. Only the smallest cities would consider allowing a sales presentation , unscheduled, at a council meeting. That in itself would be a violation, since it is not on the agenda.
A copy of the agenda is readily available, and if this competitor is professional in any way they would read it before traveling a long way, and see public comments are allowed at the end of the meeting.
This city does a bunch of things wrong and in a shady fashion, but this time I am having trouble feeling sorry for any business professionals who travel a long way unprepared and uninvited to a council meeting.
If there is any alderman against this no bid, they should get the fees charged by TEST, get the name of this competitor, send the fee list to them FEDEX, and get their estimated counter proposal fees immediately in the hands of all other alderman, the News Trib, and the PJS if there is significant market price difference.
Or send them to Weberski. He can put them in the forum if the crack news Trib staff prefers to tweet about what obscure new bill passed in Springfield or how this heat is just making them feel icky.
We don't need council meeting dramatics, we need facts. And a public forum outside this blog.
Didn't quite understand two black eyes now. ?? Please explain.
Taxpayers , seeing that we(peru) may need a different city clerk also. . Seems to be in the club too. Wake up! Don't understand why the big clerk seems to be perus spokesperson, what's up with that? Any body agree?
I can't stand this administration and their snake tactics. Crap will hit the fan eventually, it always does. Next election flyers need to be taken door to door of residents to inform and re-inform them of how this administration conducts themselves to taxpayers and in this case businesses that could possibly save our city thousands of dollars.
I don't think it is appropriate to have a sales presentation or for somebody to pitch their business at a council meeting. Schedule the community room across the hall for stuff like that.
There is a difference between being rude and breaking the law. There is a difference between being honest and above board and breaking the law. There is a difference between being a good custodian of the public trust and public funds and breaking the law. Bottom line... it is not against the law to be an A$$ hole.
That being said, why do we keep voting for the A$$ holes?
7:36 I agree completely with the PJS.
7/07 Know what the hell you are talking about. Cities have the right to limit time and subject matter with reasonable discretion during public comment periods.
It is questionable that a commercial presentation would qualify as public comment and noone has heard from the people whose alleged civil rights were violated.
Suing for damages? Really? Its this kind of knee jerk commentary that would make an attorney question the sanity of any client who wants ro sue the city. There are cases against Peru out there with some teeth , but cmon.
Sppose you want to sell some new trucks to the city? Show up at the next meeting and say you want to show a video of your lot and introduce your maintenance crew , during public comment, and see how quick your civil rights get violated.
This woman wanted to simply state her name, the name of her company, and her company's desire to bid on this contract. It would have taken less than the allotted 3 minutes.
7:36. That would eliminate the whole idea of competitive bidding. All bids would need to be sealed and opened at a council meeting. If this other company knew in advance what TEST would bid, I would guess they would come in a few dollars less.
The welcome wagon lady organization has left the house. Now we have a clerk and a minister welcoming people to the city of peru. Evidently there was no donation plate being passed around. Did the clerk and minister have the hospitality to at least offer the out of towners a bottle of water on this hot Monday evening?
No donation plate on Monday but I do believe the best phrase about now should be "follow the money". I think donations are posted quarterly online for political donations so probably too soon to publicly find out what the July golf outing produced beside a TEST (no bid) contract.
Lois you can bet it is follow the money, why else would the mayor and council not want the contract to go out for fair and competitive bidding.They do not want what is best for the city, they want whats test, oh i mean best for them.
9:48 - Get a damn clue! Don't try to tell me that a public body has the right to screen the subject matter of a public comment. That is censorship and blatantly in violation of the OMA. I know they can limit the time but they cannot screen you to avoid hearing what you have to say. C'MON!!!!!
10:08 NO it would NOT eliminate competitive bidding to know what the city is currently paying for TEST services. Any company could request it, any citizen could request it . Knowing exactly what we are paying now has nothing to do with the market price for said services.
That is why there is a MARKET PRICE. God, get a clue about business! It is precisely because no one knows the market for this that we are assuming TEST is ripping us off. The alderman can FIND THAT OUT. It is called research. Research is NOT saying how much more it used to cost us to screw it up on our own.
You people approach this like you are getting siding done for your house. Peru, the vaunted leader of the valley, does not establish the market for NPDES analytical procedures or contract Labor for WW techs. It is out there, readily available from other companies and cities that do business with TEST or others like them.
But no. We will sit back in our secret hole and wait for the magic company to come in save us from the evil TEST with their magical bid. I hope they come soon, don't you?
Save yourselves! Tell TEST what you are going to pay, not the other way around!
1:31 PM
I sincerely hope your reference to "they" refers to our elected officials because they are he ones that should be doing the research and they are not. What was Ald. Waldorf's comment as to how they came to the conclusion that TEST was the best...something like we went out checked some statistics somewhere...this is down right scarey for us to be represented as a bunch of hicks. Oh by the way, the mayor said not one word, I believe he was busy doing his paper work.
Lois
It would be nice if our elected officials did that, but it really is not rocket science. This is purchasing agent 101 stuff. A city engineer, or even a college intern could put together a pre bid analysis.
It is not a 5000 dollar Chamlin job or or a massive undertaking. In a week , a few hours a day, with a phone and a spreadsheet you can find out what you SHOULD be paying for this stuff.
1:07 Yes they CAN limit the subject matter. Look it up. In particular, commercial advertising is not allowed, nor hate speech, nor completely irrelevant ranting.
True , the individual COULD take it to court and fight the fight. They would lose. Period.
The city could make it completely closed forum I believe and not allow public comment at all. You have the right to observe, even record, but the public comment CAN be limited in many ways. Justin, can you weigh in on this?
I think the requirement of name and address and for the record on a card might be challenged, but little else.
OMA does require that the public be given opportunity to speak. It is only in researching the case histories that you see the types of rules/regulation that have been upheld in opinion of the AG office.
Many restrictions are allowed and have been supported. In particular time, commercial subject matter, hate speech and commonly agreed irrelevancy (crazy people just ranting basically).
The BB gun incident seems to have been a clear violation, and could be used by the "injured " parties to take legal action against the city for not having a consistent standard and in fact using the rules to suppress the public speech requirement. It is not a slam dunk that the city would win this argument, but damages would likely not be awarded to the competitor for the water treatment contract.
You may not like the restrictions in place, but they are not illegal if enforced consistently.
Does anyone know if the city engineer has been placed in a active role in the water treatment upcoming contract?
Hmmmm... I bet if we push Hurl hard enough, he will just let out 158 $19,000 contracts to TEST and avoid the discussion all together. That's what he does with everything else. Keep it below
$20K and everything is good to go.
Presently Peru government is very confusing. A few weeks ago the city conducted a council meeting without a agenda. Monday individuals were not allowed to speak because they were not on the agenda.
The best thing that could happen to Peru is to have 15 to 20 or more water treatment firms become interested in entering a bid to obtain the contract.
An open, honest, and fair government is what our mayor campaigned on. Apparently now that he got elected that qualities no longer exist in his world. It's becoming more and more transparent to the average citizen that in this town and under this administration it depends upon who you are and what you can do for me.
1:07 - what planet do you live on? The public body does NOT have to allow ANY public comment. Many ban the practice all together or require the individual to submit the statement days in advance. Don't confuse a council or board meeting with at Town Hall meeting. They are different. The purpose of the council meeting is to officially get the business done and take the official vote. See what happens if you walk into the well of the US Senate and try to talk without being invited. Same goes for US House, State House, County Board, or even the school board.
All that being said - I think it is funny that Mr. Hurl no longer holds Town Hall meetings.
7:36. I couldn't agree more! Public comment was allowed at the end and the individuals representing their company should have said something. It didn't need to be a sales tactic directed towards the council, but an attempt to reach the unelected citizens in the room. If an outreach was presented with facts and figures and did not make it to the NewsTribune by the next day I would be making phone calls. I personally have nothing against TEST. If it was bid out I hope they would receive it, but handing over a $3,000,000 contract goes against my beliefs with free markets.
What planet do you live on 629???? Straight from the municipal code: "any person shall be permitted under the rules established and recorded by the public body." All public bodies must develop a procedural rule which allows the public to have the ability to address the public body.
6:29 I think you are wrong. Under the OMA there must be a procedure for public comment. It's pretty clear. But there can be practical restrictions.
In this case, it is the uneven application of those restrictions that open the body up for OMA violation.
Scott - you are an embarrassment to this city! You are a coward to order Bartley to do your dirty work. You and your family should be so proud!!!
We all know what your pathetic legacy will be and what everyone thinks of you. You owe this city an apology for all shameful things you have done. You make me sick. You are a huge disappointment and we all know it. I would be so ashamed and disgraced if I was only remembered for scandal after scandal.
You could never follow the TEST campaign contributions they simply cut a company check made out to cash and then donate cash as they've done in the past
I do know Alderman Waldorf reads this blog. I'm sure we will be seeing him and his partner deciding to go out for bids after all. Come on Mr. Waldorf and Lukosis Do what's right for once. We know you are hearing us. Now do what we are asking. You work for us.
8/28 @ 9:14 PM -- You can follow TEST's contributions. Just go to the state board of elections web page and search for all contributions from them. You will see that Harl is the only one that TEST has given money to. It totals $1,350 in three "donations" starting in 2011.
$400 - 5/5/2011
$400 - 7/20/2012
$550 - 6/12/2013
Anon 9:15 Do you mean? " Now do what we are asking. You work for us."
Or do you mean? Now do what we are asking. You are supposed to work for us.
It is a sad situation when city officials are the best representatives of a private corporation that the same city does business within a contract time frame.
It sounds to me like TEST is turning out to be a good supporter of the Democrat and Mayor Harl. Since they donate to the cause, they should be given a chance. As long as they continue to contribute, they should get the conntract. If not, the City should finde another contractor that will contribute.
I was in attendance at the Public Works Meeting held Aug. 19, 2013. Ald. Waldorf and Lukosus both recommended the rehiring of TEST based upon info received from Hylla. He stated using info: 6 people would be needed to do the job: Water and Waste Water testing @ $315,000 and testing would cost $289,000 for a total of $604,000 per year. Thus rehiring of Test @ $574,000 is the way to go. Does TEST use 6 people? Who knows! Also does TEST get summer help to maintain the 2 plants which they are to do. Also who are the 7 individuals involved with the startup of TEST as a company. I know 4 and they were and presently are doing business with the city. Is this not a conflict of interest! Citizens contact your aldermen put the word out your not behind them on this. Also just curious is the Airport now under the control of Public Works as I have heard. It is Public Property nothing to do with Public Works, mayor.
9:15 I don't believe for one minute that this administration is capable of doing what is right. They have proved it over and over again, they do not work for the people, well maybe they work for certain people, but not for the average Joe.
9:15 I will be totally and utterly surprised if indeed aldermen Waldorf and/or Lukosis change their minds. It would be the right thing to do for Peru and its' citizens but I just don't feel that this current administration cares about us. Who knows, Test may still win the contract if they provide the best bid for the best services. It just seems as though we are afraid to find out which leads one to believe that maybe, just maybe, something smells rotten in Denmark.
If you only knew!
10:15. That is a wide open statement. Or blog so to speak.
Anon 7:29
Why would the city have to hire anyone for the two plants the new company would employ their own just like TEST does
Anon 7:29
TEST has always gotten summer help
I sat in on a lot of council meetings before this dictatorship and I don't think Baker ever not let anyone speak at a formal or in formal meeting. He most of the time would allow it when council was discussing a current topic that the person wanted to talk about, worst case he would have them wait until the end of meeting but most of the time if it was new or off topic he would let them go before council did regular bussines. but then Baker didn't have to bow to local 150, I think he genuinely tried to do what he thought was best for the city and it's people most of the time. But then again we got the dictator you (Lois) help elect
11:38 do you want months and years or by parameter
1:40 PM
My apologies to all I encouraged to vote for Scott Harl. I believed him and his promises but he has not fulfilled any of them and in fact made excuses and turned about did everything he promised to correct.
Both my husband and I spoke during the Baker administration and what you needed to do was call your alderman with your desire to speak and he took care of it and you were able to present your concerns. I believe that was generally how it was done.
Recent experience has also showed me that emails to Mayor Harl are sent to all the aldermen and other elected officials as Treasurer bt him or those he appoints to do it for him. Good luck trying to reach him with your concerns unless you are in the inner circle.
Lois, I commend you for apologizing when you feel you made a mistake. Now, that shows character. Of course those who make a mistake/mistakes and know it who don't apologize or acknowledge it , are the ones who cannot be trusted whatsoever . And I'd say, that a rather large circle or group of people in government/political arena in peru.
Anon 1:40PM If you fully understood the election of 2009 you would not be accusing anyone for the problems that the present Mayor has created for Peru but the Mayor himself, his appointments (which have been due in most cases to heavy political arm twisting), and the city council.
Lois as many others truthfully prayed for CHANGE and the city has had a CHANGE in names and faces but thought CHANGE was for the better. Sadly the CHANGE has been for the worse. Presently one appointment which is the 2d longest tenured individual in the citys government besides the past Mayor still holds position and appears to be manipulating all strings to sway a legal escape for some suspected reason.
Many have questioned the timeing and ethics of revealing for the first time the "Majority Vote" after years of discussion of open bidding on all $20K contracts and above.
When has "Majority Vote" been used, why and where? Does it apply to Peru and the potential water contract? Why would it even be considered as advantageous rather than open competitive bidding? It may be that all answers lie within a silent co-operative effort of a few who stand to gain big time rather than the 10,300 losers.
Lois,
We all fell for Harl's lies. Everyone one of us that supported him the first go around made a huge mistake. The only reason he got the few votes that he did between 4 candidates, is because some voters had nowhere else to go!
Anon 10:51 Why would some voters have nowhere else to go? Once the cloth is pulled shut on that voting booth you are on your own.
Yes 11:53 you are right however you should know that most who campaigned for Harl his first go around and his second did not vote for him his 3rd time around. The lst time he lost, the 2nd time he fooled his, the 3rd time we wizened up.
There are too many brainwashed union people behind His Reverend Majesty. That is what put him back in office.
12:38 I call it, kissing butt(aka:kissing a_ _! Not brainwashing.
these city official are scary
Post a Comment