Unfortunately there has not been a debate over the City of Peru’s Modified Ward System (Alderman at Large) referendum. The recent opposition that I have heard and read was from a local news personality, a few people at the local eating places, and the open forum letters by Greg Maze and Jack O’Beirne and the political add by the current Peru alderman and past alderman.
The opposition urge Peru Voters to become Educated, I totally agree. I ask the opposition to become Educated as well on this referendum.
Peru voters should know there are many Illinois cities that have a Modified Ward System (Alderman at Large) form of city government. Cities like Peoria, Champaign, Freeport, Sterling, Macomb, and Galena use a Modified Ward System (Alderman at Large) government.
Bloomington, IL voters like Peru voters will cast their vote for their Modified Ward System (Alderman at Large) referendum on this year’s primary election.
In January of 2014 the McLean County of Women’s League of Voters decided to do an Emergency study. The study was on a Modified Ward System (Alderman-at-Large) Referendum. The League of Women has not reached a consensus on this proposed referendum but they gathered as much information on the issue.
The study was published on Feb 13, 2014. In this article it stated, Champaign, IL has had a Modified Ward System (Alderman at Large) structure in place for twenty years and feels it provides a good balance of input and responsiveness. Also, Peoria moved to a Modified Ward system in 1987.
The McLean County of Women League of Voters study group compiled a list of Pro Arguments for a Modified Ward System (Alderman-at-Large) city government. The Pro arguments for this system were provided by the individuals they interviewed.
1. Ensures less conflict among council members by balancing out members whose primary focus may be “my own ward” only.
2. Provides balance between specialized and city wide councilmen. They can educate each other. A good alderman finds balance between what is good for the ward and what is good for the city.
3. Provides citizens more options of contracts – their Ward representative, the at large councilmen, and the mayor.
4. Expands the pool of qualified candidates who wish to serve on the City Council.
5. Addresses extremes and may alleviate East side/West side rivalry.
6. Eliminates the need for each alderman to be involved in all issues, i.e. the Ward Boss Attitude.
7. Provides a good balance of representatives, a higher level of accountability, and a more balanced approach.
8. At-large councilmen are more likely to pass on citizen concerns that are brought to them.
I agree with Dorothy David, City Manager of Champaign, if there is a transition to this system…..it is important to educate the citizens in the process. I will vote “yes” for Peru’s Alderman at large referendum.
Voters can make all government better. Our government, Township, City, County, State, and Federal Government sometimes needs a tune-up. To keep government accountable to the people sometimes change is needed.
Peru Township Trustee
Eddie Mitchell
34 comments:
Could you see Waldorf in a debate he barely can name the streets right at a council meeting along debate anyone! Unless Chaplin prepares the script he doesn't know a thing
Chaplin?
@4:33 My Friend, Charlie Chaplin does not prepare his comedy script, a employee of Chamlin Consulting Engineers prepares the script and Waldorf recites it. Even than he doesn't know anything.
Such a shame that the election is taking place just before the councils busiest time of the year, directing traffic at the airport concert. A little weekend practice at Venture Drive would sharpen them up.
As someone who considers herself a "Free Thinker" with an "Open Mind", I cannot really see any particular downside to this referendum. It appears to me that the 8 aldermen currently in office are not utilized efficiently at all. With the unbalanced committee duties and reduced meeting schedule, I do not see the need for a total of 8 aldermen. Reducing the total number of aldermen to 6 does not seem to me to be anything to be afraid of. What is appealing to me is that I will be able to vote for 3 aldermen in a single election.
I like that idea very much!
than? you mean then.
Didn't we just have a modified Ward system call REDISRICTING? That must have not worked well for some and now we want to Change again. Didn't we recently elected a ne Mayor? And that has not worked well for some. Didn't we recently have 8/11 newly elected officials? And that didn't work well for some.
10:28 AM
Yes we were mandated to change districts which was not something anybody was in favor of and I always thought the choices were poor and the decision was as well.
Have you never voted for someone who disappointed you?
Maybe we should consider putting term limits in the future.
The referendum is the only positive idea that we could vote upon that I have ever seen be put forth in this city. The first time you were given a choice as to how the government should be structured. Take advantage of this opportunity and vote yes and be a part of helping us move this city forward.
Have you ever seen a map of how neighborhoods are cut apart? I don't think the residents would have ever picked this choice and would have refused all that were presented to them. At large aldermen will help bring all together.
To 10:26 am, Yes, Yes, Yes and Yes.
What you don't seem to understand is the old saying, "If at first you don't succeed, try-try again".
If you elect the wrong people, don't just get rid of them, GET RID OF THEM AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
The At-Large Referendum makes that a real possibility and if you don't like competition then you don't deserve the right to vote.
Lets look at downsizin township govt too mr mitchell
I was a yes vote until today. The add and letters in the news tribune nailed it. Me my husband a adult children are voting no.
People in certain positions or have a title in front of their names get all the credit but the dirty work is done by someone else. FACT!
"if you don't like competition then you don't deserve the right to vote."
Really. Because I elected my aldermen and you people have hijacked our town's governance structure and I would rather not lessen my representation with a person representing 10,000 people, I don't deserve the right to vote.
The hatred and downright disgusting and vile comments on here tell me where this is coming from. No one will answer who is funding it or behind it, but we should just trust that it will be better somehow.
NEVER change the structure and representation you have for CURRENT people. Vote them out if you want. This change you are trying to make is PERMANENT and could absolutely backfire on what even YOU are trying to do.
Run competent people against the incumbents, but think for yourself and VOTE NO on this issue.
12:42 what about those ads and letters said anything you didn't know before? If you were a Yes vote... Why?
There was nothing in those letters that would sway any opinion, unless you get excited by a list of ex big names? They don't say why is a bad idea. They try to appeal to the parochial roots in this town, and a conservatism that is rooted in blind loyalties.
I think you possibly were always a no vote, just saying that something changed your mid. If not say what exactly made you swing from yes to no?
But if you ask for less alderman and the same people get elected, just a few less of them, the argument of quality vs. quant. is not really valid. I just want the city to run well by whomever and/or how many we have. I just hope the people that say rude and crass comments are running for office. I am not saying everyting is just perfect and we should not hold people accountable but the rude and crass comments people make on here do not make things better.
Lois- I do not think you should publish comments that call names or say childish things about the alderman or mayor. Now I know that many have stated the mayor is rude to them or they have been treated badly by the mayor/alderman. Ok if that is the case then they are just as bad the mayor alderman they are calling out.
I would just like to see people use this blog for a better use than calling names behind cyber mussels and work together.
Also Charlie Chaplin would be great for Peru! I am kidding !!
1:37 PM
Your comment is incorrect. The referendum when passed will change the structure of this city only until someone or several people decide they don't like it and get a petition against it and the required signatures and submit to the city clerk who will send to the county clerk who will then allow a referendum with that idea to take place.
Learn a little bit of civics before you spout off.
Every election we see referendums on the ballot and that is because someone is asking for something to be changed, it is called a government by the people for a reason and the reason you and everyone else can vote on this issues.
Many of the people who continue to associate themselves with the past don't seem to understand government and how it works and sometimes doesn't work.
Very well said 3:03. You will get nowhere. This blog is the home of nastiness and name calling, all justified because supposedly everyone is treated rudely at council meetings. Any chance of credibility is shot by the rumors and ugliness.
Lois why is it when someone disagrees with you do you assume they are attached to the past? More than any other topic, I've read some very good arguments both ways on here, but you always make these assumptions about people and either you or some ugly people attack the person posting.
I know some people who really like their aldermen and they find them to be responsive.; The comments on here are not necessarily reflective of our community or each person's experience. Also, our council is not an "old guard". If you don't like what is there then vote them out.
I will be voting no on this issue.
3:45 PM
Mr/Mrs ANONYMOUS
What comments are you referring to?
Signed Lois Carroll
To 3:45 pm, You were a no vote before so it's not news to anyone.
If you could be influenced by anything in the paper tonight it only shows how little you know about the facts of the referendum.
For instance, it's not a change in the form of government for Pete's sakes. It's a simple reduction of two aldermen with two at-large.
My goodness, you would think these people with their heads buried in the sand were being subjected to communism. They have no ability to consider anything other than the way it has always been. I swear most of them are indoctrinated to believe, "if Don Baker or my long-time alderman don't approve then it must be something terrible and I should be frightened". Snap out of it people, there is a big world out there with different ideas and people who are enlightened and able to accept something different.
5:37 PM
AMEN to your comment. You have said so well what I believe.
Today in the middle of some issues, I had to reach out to someone out of state and believe me it was a breath of fresh air. This is a big world and we cannot be afraid to look around because Peru is not the center of the universe. It is a nice small community that just needs a transfusion of new ideas and problem solving to stay alive and WELL.
I just read the N.T. op eds and one in particular caught my eye. The individual related a litany of events at which the aldermen take their time to assist including the CSO beer booth (most aldermen are members)at the July 4 event on Water St and the concerts for a cause at the airport.
I know that the aldermen did not attend either of the Winter Fun Days at McKinley Park and did not offer to help either.
I don't believe they assisted at the events for the Friends of the Peru Pool except Ald. Ferrari who is a very good volunteer.
Last year volunteers planted flowers in Peru and not one except Ald. Perez was present to help.
Again at the Maude Powell festival it was Ald. Ferrari.
Please help me find some other community event days excluding Little League or Central States. They don't exist and neither does the extreme efforts put forth as activities the Peru alderman do for the city.
Lois at 7:04 please revamp your rage on the Alderman. Many assisted with both the last friends of pool...ask Debbie Noonan. And many helped with the Maude Powell festival...ask the organizers. Many have been involved in the past with Little League, Central States, Concerts, Clean up days, 4th of July Celebration, CSO events and many others. The difference is that most don't utilize their public service for photo ops, new releases and self serving interest to promote themselves individually.
4:56 PM
The first Friends of the Pool summer event at Washington Park, I didn't see aldermen except Perez. The second at Centennial I was told after I wrote that Radtke and few others came and set up the booths and left because I came later and saw only the fire department with the water fights.
I have always acknowledged Ald. Ferrari and his dedication to volunteering.
I did ask for other events than the ones that you named because those do not attract the community as a whole, only a very select group of people. Definitely I make no reference to the concerts at the airport or July 4 as they attract more people from out of the area than people that actually live in Peru.
Whoever is at those concerts it should not matter. The city should not have anything to do with them in the first place.! So wrong. Christmas parade? Who attended? Who didn't? Two people who should have been there weren't. Guess who those two were?
On the subject of Peru aldermen volunteering in the community. While there is certainly no skill involved in showing your face at an event, it provides the public with the impression that you care. That is all fine and well.
However, there is a distinct difference when one shows his/her face at an event and when one is actually involved in the planning and execution of an event which is consumes much more time and effort.
Kudos to Aldermen Ferrari for understanding the importance of showing up at such events and putting in some face time.
With that said, as a resident of Peru I expect more from all of the aldermen. MUCH MORE!
I want ideas. I want intelligent discussion about the things that successful cities are doing that we might try to implement in Peru. I want elected officials who understand the importance of bringing citizens "into" the process of governing in order to create a comprehensive plan for the future. I want my alderman to have a vision of the future and some ideas to get us there.
Do you opponents of the referendum understand where I'm coming from here? I'm not being unreasonable in what I want from my aldermen and mayor. Now, am I getting any of those things I just menetioned from Tony Ferrari? Am I getting any of that from Waldorf and Lukosus and the Public Worst Committee? Am I getting any of that from the permenent fixture from the 4th ward who has been sitting up there for 23 years and counting? I have been attending meetings and observing these guys for a long time and the answer to those questions is an emphatic and resounding NO, I'm not getting it!
I want more and I want it before I qualify for Medicare and Social Security. I also know there is only one way to achieve what I want and that is by electing people capable of achieving those things. Therefore, the more aldermen seats up for grabs the better. That is what is so appealing to me about this at-large referendum. Like it or not, it will at the very least provide the opportunity for more competition from new candidates with the qualities and drive we are lacking in the crew currently sitting up there. We have nothing to lose and everything to gain by supporting this referendum.
7:58 You have no idea what you want. You speak about generalizations, ideology. You sit in the corners and want to be heard but have nothing to say.
You want high quality low cost water, you got it. Please compare with other areas-all other areas.
You want a top notch public safety services, you got the most modern and well trained force with low crime rates. Please compare! You want low real-estate taxes, you got it compare with all others. You want want low cost and reliable electrity, please review--you got it. You want quality and massive infrastructure improvements, please compare--you got it. You want quality modern schools, please compare--you got it. You want nice parks, please compare--you got those everywhere. You want a city with a balanced budget---you got it, and please compare. You want a city with affordable housing for seniors--you got it, please compare. You want a shopping area that provides ample sales tax for the city--compare, you got it.
Lets acknowledge this new referendum and the right that all have the opportunity to change course. The item that concerns me most is that those in favor have not spoke about new ideas or positive ideas for Peru's future. Instead many have gone back to the old playbook of name calling like the Public Worst Committee, throwing darts at former Mayor Baker and many other current and former office holders for the sheer nastiness that has been the only weapon they hold.
1:28 And what new ideas or positive ideas for Peru's future have those who oppose the referendum offered?
Anon 1:28 PM In all aspects that you say we have, comparisons have been made and we are not comparing to other updated, progressive cities.
Presently the issue is a reduction in the number of representatives and a increase from 2 to 3 representatives per ward accomplished by creating two at large alderman. As JFK in his inaugural speech said 'we must take the 1st step to walk a mile".
With your Yes vote the first step will be taken and from there with your participation we will reach that mile in Peru together.
To 1:28 pm, You went on and on with your impression of positive aspects of Peru. Problem is you did not address the factual descriptions of the poor quality of leadership that 7:58 am laid out. Many of the benefits you decribe are due to the one thing Peru has over other local cities. Sales Tax. Some of the benefits you describe have nothing to do with Peru's city council one way or another. Please respond to what 7:58 am is saying. Please tell him\her why he/she is mistaken saying the quality of leadership in Peru lacks vision. Please tell us all why our current aldermen and mayor are in fact quality leaders who are always searching for cutting edge eays to improve our city. Please just address what 7:58 am said. Are these elected officials doing anything to move Peru forward? Are they leading us or are being led by others?
Sorry,it has everything to do with past and current city councils. Its called Vision in the fact that they in the past have planned and supported those same ideas that 1:28 described.
I remember at one crowd filled city meeting one of those same naysayers yelled, screamed and the crowd cheered, "You are the reason why our property taxes are so low". His response was "Thank You".
to 8:57 am - If you credit any of the current sitting aldermen as having played an "active" or "pro-active" role in anything other than casting a vote the way they were instructed to then you have never really paid attention to Peru politics and the way things are done.
To those who hang their hat upon the fact that Peru has a outstanding retail section which in turn creates a considerable Sales Tax revenue.
Remember that retail does not create near the wages of a manufacturing area. When driving into a town I loved the sight of smokestacks because they indicated high wages. A proper mix of retail and industrial although hard to obtain is worth the effort. If Peru is in such a progressive mode why is it that the city employees are considered to be holding the white collar positions in the city? At one time Peru had more jobs, which incidentally were considered good paying, than they had people. Incidentally the best jobs in the city, county, state and nationally are currently government in pay and absolutely in benefits and conditions.
9:40 WHERE do you see smokestacks in America? Did you ever go up Route 251 and see a corridor of manufacturing plants that were brought in by those old non functioning city council members?
8:58 AMEN! The current administration brings on a less-than recognizable sporting goods store for the KMart building and we're all supposed to tip our hat. Like we need another sporting goods store to offer minimum wage jobs. For crying out loud, if you're going to do that, then at least bring in Dick's Sporting Goods. Dunham's? Give me a break.
Maybe Dunham's will bring in shoppers who will shop and then head on down to BEAUTIFUL WATERSTREET TO FISH! WHAT A JOKE! As far as CVS, people who shop there shop there. A new building will look better, however. might provide a couple more part-time minimum wage jobs. Is this progress? Absolutely not. Another joke!
Post a Comment