Most of the Peru residents did get the message, at least those who actually took an interest in the campaign. Most residents turned a blind eye and deaf ear to all that was taking place.
I do not want to want to hear about the Peru haters, harpies or whatever you like to call those who actually watch Peru government. And contrary to what the current electeds like to tell people, we are an intelligent, well educated, well researched and up to date on all aspects of government group of people who have been proven right most of the time and few times not.
The At Large Election ia few years ago s a case in point where we had the most feared aspect of that in that all the elected would be from one area or ward of town. Currently by law we can have only 2 alderpeople per ward but wards abut one another and technically you could have 2 alderpeople on one side of the road and 2 on the other side and it would all be legal NOW, And as it is now Alderman Payton lives just east of Marquette and Alderman Radtke lives maybe 10 blocks away and Alderman Mueller of the First is just to the east on the other side of Marquette. All are east of 251 and north of Shooting Park Rd.
IMO, the odds of this happening with an at large group are remote because you would have a larger group of people to choose from because you would not be limited to 2 from a specific boundaried area.
Back to my original intent about what I learned from this election in which I participated in no way.
The message is "If you are honest, intelligent and interested in government and in the city as a whole and most importantly are an independent thinker who is sometimes willing to go against the stream, you are not welcome. You can do all the paper work and walk the streets but we will find a way to defeat you. And this year opposition candidates that were not pre approved by the council and mayor found out that they were not only running against the alderman whose term was up but were campaigned against by many of the current seated aldermen and a few others at city hall who were going door to door working for the current alderman and/or sending literature through the mail encouraging them to vote against the new candidate for the third ward aldermanic seat..
Although activity was not illegal it certainly sent a bad message to the community and surrounding area. So if being a part of city government is a goal for you and you live in Peru, make sure you are pre approved or find a different community to live in.
38 comments:
I don't think running for election and going against the stream is what it is about. It's about what you are offering to the voters. What are your issues? Let's take a Chuy Garcia Mayor candidate from Chicago. His election was about how Rahm Emmanual closed schools, he offered no alternative plan to any issue. A few of the candidates in Peru chose to run on the platform we needed change and this guys election signs are big, he spent too much money in infrastructure, he told somebody he didn't what to answer his loaded question. All three campaigns Perez-Perez-Nelson had the same people behind them and the same message. If any of those would have run alone without the others running for office, they may have much different results. Nelson may have won without the other 2 running for office and Rodney would have won without the other campaigns.
Axelroid
12:41 PM
The sign issue was forced on the public by the 2 offending aldermen and perhaps they were trying to set the agenda and it was actually initiated by the wining candidate in the second and whomever was pushing the issue with him.
The way in which the campaigns were "managed" in the second and fourth may be setting this up for more of the same next election and that is BAD news for the city.
Stuff like this does not stop at the city boundaries or the county boundaries.
The sign issue was not FORCED on the public. A VERY small group of individuals ruined the campaign platform of others by making such a huge issue out of a small topic. And the fake bully threat story was the last straw. That is why all 3 lost! Do you honestly believe that a few alderman can honestly sway 600 voters? Please stop the whining and moaning. The election is over and your offensive signs are gone. Go back on your one man radio station and discuss your issues all you want. If my comment angers you, by all means, please listen to the deeper truth in it if you want to succeed in the future. The sneaky back door approach has not worked how many times now? Be a team player! Don't complain about every single decision made by the city. Honestly, i believe in some of the same issues as the candidates that lost, but I, like many, just couldn't handle the anger and threats and child like comments any more. True leaders don't behave like that. I feel bad for perez. I know he means well. But his team lost it for him this time.
Anonymous Peru Town Forum said...
1:29 PM
You comment is a so much hogwash. Was the sign issue FORCED on the public? Well let me tell you this the public did not put up the signs the offending current aldermen and did it in spite of the fact that they approved the very ordinance they disobeyed.
It was not a fake bully event, it happened and it was again forced to become a public issue by a sitting alderman who behaved in a disgusting manner. If it had happened to me I would have filed a police report because his behavior was disgusting and actually in my opinion, it was sexual harassment and he did it because he is a bully and his behavior is condoned by the rest of the council. Did any one of them speak up and make an effort to get in touch with this lady? Did the Ald. W. apoligize.
. NO.
No one complains about every issue the council makes but I have to admit we have questions to ask but no one allows the public to do so and that includes the mayor.
This ultimately set the stage for future events of ignoring ordinances because the general public on the wholes does not care as evidenced by the election.
Some people are dumb as a box of rocks. If you think the sign issue was not a big deal, think again. If the two offending aldermen think they don't have to follow the rules, they are wrong. They know they were wrong because they had to take down their illegal signs. Too bad it took possible action from the Attorney General to make it happen, but so be it!
The people who support the current administration, and the alderman that legally and rightfully won the election, are also intelligent. They have different opinions than most of those expressed by this forum, and for that they are ostracized for their comments. You claim,
"If you are honest, intelligent and interested in government and in the city as a whole and most importantly are an independent thinker who is sometimes willing to go against the stream, you are not welcome."
The same could be said about your blog. So instead of taking all the time that you spend attacking the administration, why don't you look in the mirror and see that you treat others the same way you claim to be treated.
There is one thing missing from your post and I can be accepting of your comment.
If this administration either at the request of the mayor or of their volition has chosen to not be answerable to the public.
Get someone at city hall to welcome comments and QUESTIONS and all be well. That big sticking point is the problem that is always in the way of intelligent discussion done publicly. If someone is willing to stick their neck out and ask a question it should be answered and not like Ald. Lukosus the other night when he said you need to go to the committee mtg to get an answer. That was a bogus reply.
All the information I get has to be asked for after the fact through a foia. This is wrong.
The sign issue began in December when one incumbent candidate put up the 20 plus signs and despite the ordinance he claimed it was his 1st amendment right to put up sings whenever he wanted to, he was right. That proved that the ordinance was flawed. Others followed suit with 2 signs in yards and larger signs, that outraged a number of opponents. I wonder why they didn't claim that their 1st amendment rights were violated? The signs were taken down and the one who placed his signs up in December did alter a few of his campaign signs to be within the square footage requirement. A basement radio station made a big deal, a post was made by a former alderwomen with her discussion from the building inspector and the Attorney General, and the whole discussion for weeks was about signs. 2:04 your comment about signs should be to all of the candidates, they all posted signs in right of ways, some up before a reasonable time frame, bigger signs and signs with lights, more than 1 sign in a yard. etc.
And the comment about Alderman Waldorf speaking to a lady in a unprofessional manner, that was a set up and the only one who knows the real story is Waldorf and the lady. The problem is that those people who set out to get those running for office made a big deal about those issues, they were not.
I know a few on the city council that are called and will answer any question including the city clerk. The tough part is the question. Don't expect a immediate answer to things that are difficult to answer. Like why do you pay ##### for answering the phone or how much is in the budget for rock in the 14th street alley. You would gain much more if you actually called a representative for a point of view. If your a audience member and attempt to discredit them, go on a rampage about something or want to argue, I don't blame them for giving you 3 minutes and then the hook to sit down. You can avoid foias by asking those reps, reviewing the minutes on line. If you call the office 120 times a week then that is why government has a foia process.
Signs signs everywhere signs too bad all of the candidates weren't under the same rules -politics at its best that is why no one voted
3:16 and anyone else who doesn't know or understand the sign ordinance - READ IT!! The fact of the matter is that it is not written in the ordinance that you cannot put up a sign in December. Therefore, if you do you have not violated the ordinance. However, if you took the time to READ the ordinance 3:16 (and others like you) you would realize that the size is specifically spelled out and 1 per yard is specifically spelled out. Therefore, the 2 aldermen that chose to ignore that part of the ordinance did violate it. And, as you yourself stated, only Mr. Waldorf and the lady know the truth of what actually happened between them so how can you say it was a set-up? And, let's not forget that alderman Perez was told by Mr. King to remove his over sized sign (which he did immediately) while Mr. Potthoff was asked by Mr. King for "his thoughts". Remember, these are facts that are documented by foia's.
Anon 4:44 PM
"All of the candidates weren't under the same rules - politics at its best that is why no one voted."
If this is the reason that you did not vote you are doing things backwards. What you have stated is all the reason more to vote. I guarantee you that the often criticized group of bloggers expressed their political beliefs by voting not running away.
Tuesday evening while driving by the Peru Township office I observed a group of Peru city officials and Tom Payton gathered on the sidewalk. They included Harl, Sapienza, King, and Lukosus. For anyone who thinks that Harl and his hand maidens were not in league together to elect a hand picked replacement for Rodney Perez you need to take off the blinders. Also, for any of you that continue to support a mayor and administration that joined forces to actively campaign and defeat an alderman because that alderman's beliefs include honesty, integrity, and speaking his mind, you should be ashamed. Any administration that works to eliminate dissent amongst its own members is totally corrupt and in violation of true American ideals. Shameful behavior.
Anon 9:03
The Township office (a polling location) and/or city hall would be logical sites for a group of city representatives to gather on election evening. Gatherings such as this on election evenings have taken place forever and there is absolutely nothing wrong with it. It would be of high concern if candidates and incumbents lacked the interest to continue this traditional practice.
Social mores will always segment groups into majorities and minorities of numbers. This segmentation naturally develops in political life as well as social life (i.e. the gatherings which took place election evening in homes, bars and garages) and good leadership works to eliminate dissent amongst its own members. This trait of leadership does does not qualify it to be defined as totally corrupt and in violation of true American ideas or shameful behavior. It is time now to work "together" for the betterment of the people of Peru. Anyone can run for an elected office - win or lose Peru needs to go on.
8:39 AM, Pretty sure you missed the point of the 9:03 comment.
BTW, your comment leaves me with the impression that you are a bit naive to the secret back-room agreements that are orchestrated by the ethically challenged power brokers who dominate Peru politics. If you think that people like Mayor Harl, most aldermen and the other insiders have any intention of promoting "togetherness" or "inclusiveness" as a governing strategy you really need to take a closer look at the reality of Peru.
Anon 7:19AM I am in reference to a group of American citizens who are also Peru city officials gathered in front of the Peru Township Office sidewalk. You are referring to secret back-room agreements.
I have stated a fact as to where these gentlemen were seen by someone. That someone may be you but now you have moved your observation from the sidewalk to the fantasy location of a secret Al Capone back room.
Anon. 9:03
I have to agree that a group of American citizens standing on the side walk does not constitute a conspiracy.
As for seeing Mr. Payton there he was at Liberty Village checking the results for his election. Please get you facts correct.
Why was the mayor so interested in who would be elected as aldermen? Was he afraid he would loose his control over his council and loose some of his "yes" men? I don't think he should have been openly involved in this election.
The Mayor is the CEO of the city and similar to all CEO's has his preference to whom fills the positions that he is required to work with. A aldermen would not necessarily be a "yes man" to have a successful working relationship with Mayor Harl but I would emphasize that he cannot be a continuous "no Man" to work with the Mayor and council to achieve progressive goals. Teamwork has been a accepted philosophy of management for a long time.
If a Mayor was not openly involved in any election, was not transparent in his general feelings and viewpoints, would refrain from presenting his preferences in a leadership role I would not want nor think of him as being much of a Mayor.
In conclusion I believe that you do not know what you personally want as a Mayor nor what you want a Mayor to be.
Maybe a understanding can be reached by a simple thought that because you at times disagree with the Mayor he is not the one who is always wrong and when you agree with each other he is not always right.
To 12:19 pm and 7:27 PM,
Conspiracy is a word that you used, not me. You can call it a conspiracy, or a secret effort, or a concerted effort, or an evil and diabolical plan. Call it what you want but the fact remains that Harl and the hand maidens concieved and conducted a "plan" to eliminate the only alderman on Peru's council with the courage and committment to speak his mind in representation of his constituents. As far as teamwork is concerned, I will take an alderman with a strong sense of right and wrong over a spineless rubber-stamp yes-man any day.
Peru voters are apathetic and easily manipulated by the establishment who control the message of who is good and who is bad. Only those of us who know the true character of the insiders are able to see the injustice of the Peru political system. There are far too few folks who take the time to learn the truth about their city and the people pulling the strings. I don't use words like "conspiracy" to describe Peru's elected officials. I use other words to describe them that Lois would certainly censor so I will leave it at that.
In a effective city all members of the group must work together to find solutions, thoughts are exchanged and ideas are discussed. Some members get the process, others are tied to their personal thoughts without the skills to except that democracy sometimes works. A Mayor cannot elect or defeat a candidate, that is up to those that they represent. I find it hard pressed to think that the Mayor had any role in this election. And it is hard to believe that any current city alderman had any effective role in the election.
7:27 Nobody said that the mayor is always wrong and that that they are always right. Why do people twist and turn everything into something ugly.
To 8:44 AM, OMG! You are the Poster-Child for the Peru voters that 7:27 AM just described.
The current establishment politicians in Peru have ypou exactly where they want you. It's spring-time. The birds are chirping. The flowers are blooming. The frost has melted away and your head is planted firmly in the sand. OMG!
You are all naive if you think Boss Harl is the actual Boss. Boss Harl implements the orders that are given to him. These orders come from connected individuals and organizations. Some of them have a long history in Peru. Some of them are new to our area. The Boss's only function is to react to their needs. Sometimes their needs coincide with the needs of the people. Often they do not. That is the "Peru" way, that is the "Illinois Way." Don't count on anything the People want or need getting done unless it also feeds the need of connected cronies and aristocracy.
11:44 Your giving me a creepy feeling that we are living in another dimension. Some have been here for a long time and others just arrived.......chills. Orders are given and the Boss is programmed to carry out those orders.....cold breeze. And it feeds those connected.....spaceships leaving Peru.
The aliens won't free the people?
Maybe you should be writing fiction. Just recently the old black and white classic with Rod Sterling had that same episode on. Are these people giants and have a space ship? Oh, I support medical marijuana. Just make sure you have script.
2:45, no space aliens. Just cronies. The ones that have been here for a long time are the owners of TEST, Chamlins, and others. The recent players on the scene include Operating Engineers Local 150.
What I was trying to say in a round about way is that Harl has bee bought and paid for. At a mighty low price I might add. He is 100% political. I honestly hope that he moves on to some higher position - just so he can not continue to infect Peru. If he moves on to Springfield it will be many years before he has any impact. I think that is a good place to send him. So if he decides to run for higher office - I will support him just to get rid of him.
3:38
Thanks for your explanation. We all feel better that those space monsters are not real. I feel better that you have endorsed a unqualified mayor for a higher office. I would rather have the aliens. On another subject, what is the price paid?
4:21, It is a joke, get over it. Actually, what needs to happen is to change the government to Council-Manager and make the Mayor's Office irrelevant.
6:33
at large was defeated and the council-manager was not supported by City officials. Nobody liked the idea of city manager. The change you wanted didn't happen at the polls. Get over it.
we don't need city officials to force the change to council manager.
9:13 Your statement is false "nobody liked the idea of city manager". If you attended city council meetings you would know that even some of your aldermen have been in favor of a city manager.
The issue is city administrator.
That is because the people that employ Boss Harl like the fact that they can control anyone hired by the Boss. A City Manager has power under the law and is not merely an at will employee.
What make you believe that a city manager is not a at will employee?
9:35, because the duties and responsibilities of an actual City Manager are written in to the Municipal Code. Under the Council Manager form of government, the manager can only be fired by the council and only under certain conditions - such as violating the law. Under that form of government, the City Council and Mayor have very little say in the day to day operations and all employees report to and hare hired by the manager, not the Mayor or the Council. Please read up on the subject - the Illinois City and County Managers Association has a good web page.
ALDERMEN AT LARGE IS WHAT PERU NEEDS!
Anon 11:59 AM
The alderman at large concept was recently voted upon and the beaten badly. Although advantageous at large alderman is similar to one government for LaSalle-Peru which has a slim opportunity of ever happening.
Sadly there are strong anti groups which have enough power to Lock in outdated ideas. The only opportunity will develop will be when the roll out of Chicago reaches Peru and that is a long ways off,
Post a Comment