The political sign ordinance is a prime example of how the city council functions. Never in a million years did the people who violated the ordinance a few weeks ago think that they would ever have to be concerned. They made sure the numbers and sizes were exactly as should be because they had to keep someone else in check, you know watch your opponents and forget that maybe it might affect you. The attorney drew up the ordinance and we paid him and evidently he thought everything was ok as it had been discussed for numerous meetings. Ald. Potthoff and Ald. Waldorf by their yes vote agreed that this ordinance was just what they wanted and all the others on the council agreed. In keeping their eye on everyone else and not their future plans for re election, I guess they thought that the ordinance did not apply to currently elected officials seeking re election.
Ald. Perez was initially in violation because his early sign was too big, he was told immediately by the zoning inspector and the size was changed right there and then.
My question is did Ald. P and Ald W deliberately ignore the ordinance and did the zoning officer give them a free pass?
What happened to personal responsibility? I do expect the people I vote for to take personal responsiblity for their actions because that is why we elect them and when they don't, it most certainly shows The last 2 Potthoff signs were actually removed by Zoning Inspector King just yesterday, not Ald. Potthoff.
Does it feel like we need to start fresh in this city?
Beginning of correspondence re: illegal political signage to the zoning inspector.
To: Dave Bartley
Subject: Political sign ordinance violation FOIA
Hi Dave and Stephanie,
I'd like any and all correspondence from any city official to any Peru political candidate about political sign ordinance violations beginning January 1, 2015.
Thank you!
Sherry
Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2015 10:21 AM
To: Dave Bartley; Stephanie Piscia
Subject: Fwd: Political sign ordinance violation FOIA
Hi Dave & Stephanie,
I just want to clarify that I want all correspondence about political sign violations from or to elected or appointed officials. I wasn't sure that was clear after I sent the first email.
Thanks!
> Subject: RE: Political sign ordinance violation FOIA
>
> Hi Sherry,
>
>
> Here is the information you requested.
>
>
>
> Stephanie
On Mar 25, 2015, at 10:37 PM, Sherry wrote:
> Jeff,
>
> I received the emails I requested thru a FOIA regarding the political sign violations. You emailed Dave Potthoff on Monday, March 16 and I'm wondering if you got a response from him? There is no email response from him. Is the city just going to let this violation from one of our city leaders slide?
>
> I would also like to know why Alderman Waldorf was not sent an email saying he was in violation of the ordinance by having two signs in at least 3 yards.
>
> Thank you,
On Mar 25, 2015, at 10:57 PM, Jeff King
> Sherry as it is right now all the candidates are in violation of some parts of the ordinance. Whether it is a sign to big, to many signs or most of all public right of way violations. Dave has not responded to me plus no one has filed a compliant against Mr. Waldorf to date with me.
> Jeff
> Subject: Re: Political sign ordinance violation FOIA
>
> Jeff,
>
> Saying everybody is in violation is ridiculous and I'm very disappointed in how this city shows favoritism to some aldermen.
>
> Consider this a complaint about Waldorf's signs and please notify him that he is in violation.
>
> Blatant disregard of the ordinance is wrong on so many levels. I cannot believe this is being allowed to continue.
>
> Sherry
To: psm@peru.il.us, admin@peru.il.us, Scott Harl
> Subject: Signs
>
> Jeff,
>
> I'd like the home owners who have 2 Waldorf signs, 2 Potthoff signs and Potthoff signs that are oversized notified that they are in violation of the city ordinance regarding campaign signs.
>
> I distinctly remember before this ordinance was approved discussing how right of ways would be hard to enforce because in some areas of town, the right of way is in the middle of people's front yards.
>
> But blatant violations need to be addressed and acted on.
>
> Thank you,
Jeff,
If you are not engaging in selective enforcement, then why did Rodney get orders to remove his sign at SPR & 251, and the email you sent Potthoff asked for his thoughts? He should have been told to come into compliance just like Rodney was.
Sherry
> Sherry:
>
> I will forward your email complaint to Dave Waldorf informing him of your
> complaint. This is how I have handled other complaints regarding campaign
> signs. I will point out it appears that every single candidate in a
> contested race within the city appears to have some violation taking place
> with their campaign signs. This appears to be the case not only here in Peru
> but also every single community I have recently visited.
> The most common widespread violation is signs on the public right of way. As
> you can imagine enforcing this would be time intensive and cost prohibitive
> to verify exact locations of right of way as that varies throughout the city
> based on the age of the subdivision and many other factors. We only have
> taken action if I determine that the sign is obstructing a view and poses a
> public safety risk. Otherwise, it is to each candidate to do their best to
> comply with ordinances and regulations.
> I do forward on specific complaints received and have done so on right of
> way, size, and number complaints. I will not however engage in selective
> enforcement, i.e. I will not enforce only certain violations against certain
> candidates, which is what it appears, you are suggesting. To do so would
> open up myself and the city to allegations of selective prosecution, which
> is something I simply will not do.
> I wish to also remind you that the ordinance, like many across the country
> is a fluid document and subject to change based on decisions of both state
> and federal courts with certainly constitutional issues. For that reason, it
> is especially incumbent on me to insure equal enforcement and to apply
> common sense and judgment.
> While you may disagree with this approach, I nonetheless reiterate that I
> will not engage in something that arguably could be selective enforcement of
> a personal nature, which in itself could be a constitutional violation.
>
> Jeff
> -----
> From: Sherry
> Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 6:13 AM
> To: psm@peru.il.us; admin@peru.il.us; Scott Harl; Rodney Perez
> Subject: Signs
>
> Jeff,
>
> I'd like the home owners who have 2 Waldorf signs, 2 Potthoff signs and
> Potthoff signs that are oversized notified that they are in violation of the
> city ordinance regarding campaign signs.
>
> I distinctly remember before this ordinance was approved discussing how
> right of ways would be hard to enforce because in some areas of town, the
> right of way is in the middle of people's front yards.
>
> But blatant violations need to be addressed and acted on.
>
> Thank you,
> Sherry M
Thursday, March 26, 2015 2:01 PM
To: Rodney Perez; psm@peru.il.us; Scott Harl; admin@peru.il.us
Subject: Fwd: Signs
Jeff,
I expect you to take the same action with Potthoff and Waldorf that you took with Perez. If you re-read your email about the Perez and Payton signs, at the end of that email it states in bold "the city is requesting Perez to remove it from the right of way and reduce its size". To be sure you're not engaging in selective enforcement, I would think you'd want to make sure you fairly gave notice to all concerned. My next step will be contacting the Attorney General for unfair enforcement of codes and favoritism.
Sherry M
Begin forwarded message:
From: Sherry M
Date: March 26, 2015 at 1:14:12 PM CDT
To: Scott Harl
Subject: Fwd: Signs
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: Sherry M
Date: March 26, 2015 at 1:11:35 PM CDT
To: Jeff King
Subject: Re: Signs
Jeff,
If you are not engaging in selective enforcement, then why did Rodney get orders to remove his sign at SPR & 251, and the email you sent Potthoff asked for his thoughts? He should have been told to come into compliance just like Rodney was.
Sherry
On Mar 26, 2015, at 8:45 AM, Jeff King
Sherry:
I will forward your email complaint to Dave Waldorf informing him of your
complaint. This is how I have handled other complaints regarding campaign
signs. I will point out it appears that every single candidate in a
contested race within the city appears to have some violation taking place
with their campaign signs. This appears to be the case not only here in Peru
but also every single community I have recently visited.
The most common widespread violation is signs on the public right of way. As
you can imagine enforcing this would be time intensive and cost prohibitive
to verify exact locations of right of way as that varies throughout the city
based on the age of the subdivision and many other factors. We only have
taken action if I determine that the sign is obstructing a view and poses a
public safety risk. Otherwise, it is to each candidate to do their best to
comply with ordinances and regulations.
I do forward on specific complaints received and have done so on right of
way, size, and number complaints. I will not however engage in selective
enforcement, i.e. I will not enforce only certain violations against certain
candidates, which is what it appears, you are suggesting. To do so would
open up myself and the city to allegations of selective prosecution, which
is something I simply will not do.
I wish to also remind you that the ordinance, like many across the country
is a fluid document and subject to change based on decisions of both state
and federal courts with certainly constitutional issues. For that reason, it
is especially incumbent on me to insure equal enforcement and to apply
common sense and judgment.
While you may disagree with this approach, I nonetheless reiterate that I
will not engage in something that arguably could be selective enforcement of
a personal nature, which in itself could be a constitutional violation.
Jeff
-----Original Message-----
From: Sherry M
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 6:13 AM
To: psm@peru.il.us; admin@peru.il.us; Scott Harl; Rodney Perez
Subject: Signs
Jeff,
I'd like the home owners who have 2 Waldorf signs, 2 Potthoff signs and
Potthoff signs that are oversized notified that they are in violation of the
city ordinance regarding campaign signs.
I distinctly remember before this ordinance was approved discussing how
right of ways would be hard to enforce because in some areas of town, the
right of way is in the middle of people's front yards.
But blatant violations need to be addressed and acted on.
Thank you,
Sherry M
> Date: March 30, 2015 at 7:54:36 AM CDT
> To: Jeff King
> Subject: Potthoff's illegal campaign signs
>
> Hi Jeff,
>
> Thank you for addressing the campaign sign ordinance violations. It appears all have complied except for 2 places that still have 2 Potthoff signs in one yard. They are located at the corner of 4th and Harrison and the corner of 5th and Herbert. I think it's now time for you to remove one sign from each of those properties since Potthoff has not.
>
> Thank you,
> Sherry M
> Date: March 30, 2015 at 7:54:36 AM CDT
> To: Jeff King
> Subject: Potthoff's illegal campaign signs
>
> Hi Jeff,
>
> Thank you for addressing the campaign sign ordinance violations. It appears all have complied except for 2 places that still have 2 Potthoff signs in one yard. They are located at the corner of 4th and Harrison and the corner of 5th and Herbert. I think it's now time for you to remove one sign from each of those properties since Potthoff has not.
>
> Thank you,
> Sherry M
> To: Jeff King
> Cc: "
> Subject: Re: Signs
>
> Jeff,
>
> Thank you for making sure Alderman's Potthoff's signs are in compliance. My point about the 3 signs at SPR and Peoria Street is the maximum square footage allowed at any residence is 32 sq feet. When Alderman Potthoff added his sign there, it exceeded the limit.
>
> The right of way should be enforced. I'm not suggesting that you not enforce it, but I don't know where right of ways extend. You are the one who said that would be time prohibitive.
>
> I pleaded with you to correct it, twice. I could have just posted it on Facebook and the blog and not given you a chance to correct it.
>
> Unfortunately I had to plead and threaten in order to get a few aldermen to comply with an ordinance.
>
> Sherry M
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Mar 31, 2015, at 10:02 AM, Jeff King
>>
>> Dear Ms. Mayszak, I have personally measured Mr. Potthoffs sign at Peoria
>> and SPR and it is exactly 16 square feet. This is not in violation of the
>> current sign ordinance. I'm not sure why you continue to say that is it is.
>> As for the other properties with 2 signs they are currently in compliance.
>> Again I will repeat what I have currently responded to you, all candidates
>> are in violation of the current sign ordinance and you now you are telling
>> me to ignore any right away violation but enforce only what you want out of
>> the ordinance. What is the difference between a right of way violation vs. 2
>> signs in a yard, or 16 square feet. This is called select enforcement in
>> which you yourself are accusing me of. Everything you have asked has been
>> addressed if you choose to continue to threaten me then so be it.
>>
>>
>> Jeff King
>> Public services Manager
>> City of Peru
>> 1-815-223-1148
>> 1-815-712-2165 cell
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Sherry M
>> Sent: Monday, March 30, 2015 8:53 PM
>> To: Jeff King
>> Cc: admin@peru.il.us
>> Subject: Signs
>>
>> Jeff,
>>
>> I drove past the illegal signs after I got off work at 8:00 tonight. I'm sad
>> to see them still in place. Please remove one from each property and replace
>> the one at Peoria & SPR with a smaller one. I'm begging you to do this
>> because if they aren't corrected, I told Lois she could post those emails on
>> the blog and on the blog's Facebook page. In my opinion those emails look
>> like you are favoring Potthoff over Rodney, and the blog will have a field
>> day. I honestly do not want that to happen. I'm copying Doug on this so
>> hopefully he will persuade you to either make Potthoff comply or do it
>> yourself.
>>
>> I told her today was the deadline, but I'm extending it until 1:00 tomorrow
>> afternoon.
>>
>> You can hate me all you want, but what's fair is fair and Potthoff isn't
>> playing fair.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Sherry
>
>
48 comments:
Sherry, you sound like a spoiled little girl not getting her way because your watching out for your candidate. I think Jeff stated it very well as far as give or take on the sign issue. You want to have some skin in the game without being a player anymore, you pulled a petition and didn't follow through, let it go, at least Jeff kept you informed. Like this would be posted by Lois!
I would bet my last dollar that somebody wrote or helped write the email correspondences in which Jeff King sent. He is playing favoritism. And for he to mention time consuming in an email is unacceptable. What does he get paid to perform his job? $96,000 a year plus benefits.
I can't believe it 2 weeks to bring signs down but the city could respond to an open forum in less than 24 hrs
This city is a joke and we have become a joke to other cities
Someone save us from self destruction
"then so be it" said in a email by Jeff King. Very unprofessional Mr. King. Also, for you to mention in a email about being threatened Mr. King, please explain? In no way were you being threatened Mr. King. You were being told the truth and it must not have sat well with you. Lastly, we don't care what other cities have regards to their signs and ordinances as you mentioned in an email Mr. King.
@8:13, some peeps don't like it when others take a stand. Nothing inappropriate regarding Sherry ' s emails that she sent. Doesn't sound like a spoiled little girl in my opinion. I'll give you an A+ for trying 8:13.
@8:13, some peeps don't like it when others take a stand. Nothing inappropriate regarding Sherry ' s emails that she sent. Doesn't sound like a spoiled little girl in my opinion. I'll give you an A+ for trying 8:13.
After reading this correspondence, it is so clear how ridiculous this issue truly is. Mr. King could not have responded with any more common sense. These messages from Sherry are absolutely crazy and perfectly illustrate how stupid this has become. Signs are too big? Ummmmm NOPE!
Thanks for clarifying what so many people believe. Threatening to post on the blog? What the heck? Who cares?
Somewhere Rodney Perez has to be saying......."Please shut up and let this go."
I read these emails and I noticed Jeff King said something like, this is how I handled other complaints. Where are those emails?? Wondering if Sherry only received a few emails and not all of them.
We have a appointed city employee through emails being cocky to a taxpayer who has every right to question methods used to enforce an ordinance. Referring to the last sentence in the email sent that has the word " threaten," " and so be it." A professional person would not have put that in a sent e-mail.
The city responded in 24 hours about an open forum. Lol. Took two weeks for this. Lol. They had to get their ducks in a row. And wanted to wait until the last possible moment to do something. Very humorous how Jeff King had to ask Pothoff for his thoughts. Shouldn't Jeff King know? Why would he ask for Pothoff's thoughts?
I'm impressed! Ms. Mayszak way to go! Ms. Mayszak stuck her ground and got the job done. I would imagine city hall is pissed. Way to hold their feet to the fire. Shame on those elected officials for attempting to play such a stupid game. And they lost.
Thank you 813 for finally saying that
If King showed up at my house and removed a sign, I would have him arrested and charged with trespassing and theft.
I thought this was the US of A?!
Freedom of Speech!
It protected Rodney when he put his signs up to early.
10:07 I am also impressed with the way Ms. Mayszak handled the situation, and the way she handled herself when she was on the council. That is the type of person that I would want representing me! Please Sherry,consider running again for office.
Some believe that Mr. King has responded to Mrs. Mayszak with common sense but as a appointed official of the city his occupation calls for him to enforce the ordinances of the city.
If the ordinance is impossible to enforce has Mr. King brought the fact forward to the city council which has approved it.
Why is it that Peru city officials wait for someone to complain before they will enforce ordinances which are being broken that they drive by a dozen times a day. For example by the sign ordinance the union rat which is appearing in front of the future Dunkin Donuts is a violation of the sign ordinance and should be removed from Peru.
Potthoff signs were remove last week and Ms. Maysazak still made a threat to Mr. King. And Mr. Perez had signs that were too big and altered to comply with the 16 square after Potthoff signs were removed. Sheery didn't mention the Perez signs.
So, should Mr. King go and remove the rat? I think so. How can the rat be missed?
It is obvious according to reading these e-mails nothing was going to be enforced until brought to light. Why is it someone needs to complain before he sends notice? So I can burn garbage and he would just drive by and wave and wouldn't site me unless someone complains?
That's insane! If I get pulled over I will ask the cop who complained. I'd bet the cop would tell me he complained now here's your ticket or warning. So why doesn't Mr.King do the same. He can't drive through town and turn his back on violations.
I guess that's what happens when we have a fireman playing cop.
Sherry in no way threatened King. As a matter of fact she was upfront and honest. She could have foied the emails and posted them on social media. She actually did him a favor by informing him what her intensions were. We need more people like Sherry.
9:02 Peru city officials have been and always will be reactive...not proactive. They prove it time and time again, with everything that happens in the city becomes a bigger issue than it needs to be. If they would take care of business in the right way and not the I do not like so and so way, so lets go after him, they would see how easier their life would be. Lets face it, they started this sign debacle, by telling Rodney to take his sign down. Which by the way, he did.
I remember burning leaves on the street / curb gutter about ten years ago. Man or man about 3 cops showed up along with the fire chief.
9:27 You are wrong. The final Potthoff signs that violated the ordinance were not removed until yesterday and not even by the alderman. Mr. King (who we pay highly) had to remove them himself. What you people don't realize is that this whole situation began quite some time ago and took this long to get corrected because of "selective enforcement" as Mr. King calls it. And, I think it's a shame that current city officials are openly supporting certain candidates. This will make for a very split (even more than it is now) council should those individuals lose and their opponents win. And one final thought: Did anyone else hear Rod Thorsen on the radio the other day talk about what's going on here in Peru with the election? Needless to say, it was not complimentary to our town or our representatives. They, and we, should be ashamed.
Peru had a zoning inspector a few years ago who was a retired Sargent of the PPD at the pay of $10/hour. I understand that the administration would not pay him or employ him in the winter months and the Building Code enforcer was to pick up the slack until he was rehired in the summer.
Upon returning to work after winter he found nothing had been done since he left so he had all of winter to catch up on plus his own summer job.
I know he was paid $10.00 per hour and was doing a good job. What is Mr. Kings pay?
Like the slogan for cell phone packages. We can bundle your services.
Why didn't the sign lady get involved when Perez signs were put up last year? The ordinance states 60 days prior to the election.
10:58 Using the $96,000 salary figure that I have seen thrown around on here. (I might be wrong Please correct) As a simple baseline calculation, let's say you take 2 weeks off each year as unpaid vacation time. Then you would be working 50 weeks of the year, and if you work a typical 40 hours a week, you have a total of 2,000 hours of work each year. In this case, you can quickly compute the hourly wage by dividing the annual salary by 2000. Your yearly salary of $96,000 is then equivalent to an average hourly wage of $48 per hour. Plus whatever benefits ?? And there are two of them making that, supposedly. Like you say, for what they do, WHAT A JOKE.
11:49 First of all, there is no limit on placing signs. If there was, this is Peru, and there is no need to enforce anything. Especially if you are in the "in" group.
10:07 & 7:43, it's nice to see you two gushing over Sherry as a great alderperson, she got smoked in her election to retain a seat Harl gave her, in other words not as many constituents in the second ward feels the same way.
Thank you for posting the email trail. You just confirmed that king was professional in his response and mayszak seemed to be the threatening individual. This issue is a non-issue in the real world of big boy jobs. Please, enough already.
1:54 PM
I did not have the information several years ago when there were contests in the 2nd & 4th wards but I am now aware that if the mayor does not want you to be elected, he and most of the aldermen act to prevent that from happening.
By this I know that they write letters then and are doing it now to voters in the affected wards. So I say with confidence that voters in the second and third wards who are possible yes voters for their choice may see aldermen other than the ones running at their door or "in their mailbox".
So they are always saying if you don't like it run for office but I say be prepared to run against the whole council if you don't have their approval.
I am the eternal optimist at election time and hope our voters are smarter and wiser than the people who enourage them to vote for the electeds choice people who will always be on board with everyone else.
Sherry did not run only against Radtke, she ran against a lot more as directed from City Hall.
1:58 PM
In your nastiness toward Sherry, I did notice you said "big boys job".
Your sexist attitude is out of tune with most people in 2015. But I get your drift, in your narrow mind, this is a job for men and not women is what you really mean. With that attitude, it is not wonder Peru has so many issues.
Kind of like the one token woman on the Task Force. She is a very good choice but is only one where I believe women are over 50% of the population in this country and in Peru it may be more.
1:58 It is time for you to put on your big boy pants and realize that women are able to very good government officials. By your comment you are definitely part of the current administration, and that is why the city is in turmoil. Please take your diaper off.
Lois, no matter how you spin it, it takes work to be elected, Radtke out worked her by a long shot, that why he won by a good margin. Harl and the boys do not put people in office the people do, Sherry is probably a real good person, she wasn't a fireball on the council, and her constituents recognized that.
3:13 PM
People do vote for their choice, that is true BUT, I always say that it depends upon employees and families, neighbors, relatives, friends and friends of all of the above. If you make enough people indebted to the city and now we will include the long time city contractors and repeat the same scenerio of families, neighbors etc., along with aldermen and appointed officials who want to retain their jobs.
This is what they mean when they say you can't beat City Hall.
It can be done and Scott Harl is a good example of that.
Former alder woman mayszak turned over some stones and let the thugs out from under the rocks this past week. From reading comments above it sure looks like she spoiled some Cheerios at city hall. Peru needs more women like her.
Go Getm Sherry!! She reminds of that guy from the old movie Walking Tall where he kicked all corruption out of town. Kind of like what she's doing now.
Keep going Sherry and blow that city hall down
Does the administrative assistant type these and write these emails that Jeff sent? Or did any Alderman possibly give him a hand in the emails?
I have to wonder why Sherry didn't share the emails when she received them? Why would she wait? Nobody at city hall deserves to be given an inch.
9:44 PM
She was giving them time to comply with the ordinance and hoped she would not have to keep pushing the subject is my opinion.
It is also my opinion is that the mayor has put 2 people into position and added job description upon job description onto their original BUT it is now apparent that Mayor Harl is not doing what he was hired to do and is looking for an out by the city possibly hiring an Administrator to do his job and both would get paid a salary.
There is no way Jeff King wrote that long email. That came from Doug Bernabei. Jeff could never come up with something as coherent and well written as that.
The title of this post should be "Personal Irresponsibility in City of Peru Government."
Nobody in Peru Government is held to any standard and they all just do as they will. Enforcement of any rules is based purely on politics. If you are part of the "in crowd" you can do as you please. If you are a "Geek" or a "Stoner" they bully you. I'm using high school terms because that is what Peru has become - A High School Drama. Harl and his buddies are the kids with the Alligator on their polo shirt and "Members Only" Jackets.
Yes, the City of Peru Government has become nothing more than little high school drama queens.
selective enforcement had to come from the chief 10:47
I know this is off topic but it fits nowhere else on here right now. During a conversation with a police officer today I'm told a city employee who also owns a side business gets city contracts for an electronic service? I'm curious if that is factual. City employees should not be awarded municipal contracts. Not that its illegal but it's un-ethical as there are too many possibilities for corruption and public scrutiny which leads to mistrust in your government.
12:15, yes and yes. But this is Peru.
I believe it is a garage business for installing all the electronics in public safety vehicles. Radios, lights, etc. It has been discussed on this blog before. But, like I said, this is Peru. And in Peru, the purpose of tax dollars is to enrich your friends and cronies.
That is a bad practice. An employee should have to make a choice to be employed by the city or accept the contract. More and more municipalities are moving away from this practice due to accusations of padding friends/relatives pockets. It's one thing to hire a friend or relative but giving that individual service contracts opens a can of worms.
The most efficient method of stopping accusations of padding friends/relatives pockets would be open competitive bidding on all service contracts, especially in a situation where a individual is employed by the city and accepting a contract which has not been offered to all to bid upon. This is not a problem if handled correctly.
3:07 I don't think it should be the employees choice, rather it should be the cities call. He is just supplementing his income, if it came my way I or anyone else wouldn't say no, see what Bernabie and King has to say, their in charge.
Anon 4:39 You nor I or anyone else has to see what Bernabie and King have to say. You are correct they are in charge and since a fellow officer is doing the work in their department they are giving it the OK.
Post a Comment