Jul 282012
 

Imagine going to a movie and leaving 15 minutes before the movie ends, or attending a baseball game and leaving in the 8th inning, or reading a book and stopping before the last chapter. Seems a bit goofy doesn’t it. I mean why do any of those things if you don’t finish what you started; what’s the purpose.Well that’s similar to what Naperville city councilman Fieseler chose to do again during the July 17 city council meeting.

During the June 19 Naperville city council meeting, Hank Stillwell, an attorney working for McDonald’s made a presentation seeking council approval for a proposed McDonald’s restaurant on the southeast corner of Washington and Hillside just south of downtown Naperville. After considerable grand-standing by the entire city council, the vote to deny the request was unanimous. You would think that a unanimous vote would require far less time to discuss, but it doesn’t work that way with the Naperville city council.

Now comes the July 17 city council meeting and attorney Stillwell asked the council to shelve the issue until McDonald’s had time to address council concerns, and then, at a later date, present a more acceptable and palatable option to the council for consideration and approval. Sounds reasonable doesn’t it. Well not so with Naperville councilman Bob Fieseler. Watch and listen to Fieseler’s declaration saying in essence that reconsideration of the issue isn’t worth the time, and his mind is closed towards reaching an agreement.

What makes his close-minded position even more egregious is his comment during this video clip at the 0:50 mark when Fieseler states, “Unless they’re gonna like put in a little kiosk and work in a nice improvement into the river walk. I just don’t, I I can’t imagine and I and I , I don’t know what we’re doing here so I’m not gonna support it” Is it just me, or does it sound like Naperville councilman Bob Fieseler is only willing to open his mind and ears if McDonald’s throws in some dollars totally unrelated to the issue. Sounds a bit like Chicago politics doesn’t it. Some, possibly including former Govenors Blagoivich and Ryan, would say that Fieseler’s comment was bold, while many others would would say his comment was foolish, doltish, oafish, imbecilic, buffoonish, and Fieseler-like.

As it stands now, councilman Fieseler is ‘Not lovin’ it’ but if McDonald’s throws in some ‘Gold’in McNuggets, his ears might perk up.

Jul 232012
 

If you think I’m referring to Smart Meters, that would be incorrect, since the Naperville city council would not allow the vote to occur. However the informal vote still stands at 4,199 against the installation of Smart Meters and 9 in favor. The 4,199 refers to the number of petition signatures, and the 8 refers to eight of nine council members plus one lone objector to the petitions.

What I am referring to is the November 2010 referendums for term limits and district representation which Naperville voters approved by a landslide. We are not talking about a simple majority; we are talking about nearly 75% favoring term limits and nearly 70% demanding district representation versus the current ‘at large’ representation which the Naperville city council would prefer.

The current at-large representation allows for council members to get lost in the crowd, and it makes it more difficult for voters to single out and expel incompetent council members. It would be like the running-of-the-bulls in Pamplona, Spain. If a bunch of fools, let’s say council members, are running down the street, it’s easier for one fool to avoid the bulls, whereas one fool running down the street allows the bulls to focus and achieve their goal of neutralizing one specific fool.

An example of Naperville city council incompetence is the fact that the council approved the referendums for term limits and districts to be placed on the ballot for voters to choose. What was the council thinking. They could have squashed the idea just as they did for voting on Smart Meters. The council made the same two mistakes that most politicians make; 1) thinking that voters don’t care, and 2) thinking they can’t lose. Well the voters do care, and the council did lose.

The Naperville city council did succeed in delaying the voter’s wishes by postponing the implementation until 2015, that’s five years after the voters spoke. So if we wait another three years, then the voters get what they wanted, right? Not so. Five years is a long time to allow the Naperville city council to pull a stunt. And here is the stunt….let’s have another vote on whether or not the citizens of Naperville really want term limits and district representation.

Think about it. Isn’t it strange that the Naperville city council didn’t hire a consulting firm for big bucks to design a district map for Naperville, just as they hired a public relations firm in Chicago to bamboozle residents about Smart Meters. The answer is, why hire a company to create a district map if the city anticipates different results in a next vote. Instead, use those tax dollars to hire another PR firm to bamboozle residents into thinking what we currently have is better than term limits and district representation.

Mayor Pradel said that many people have expressed their views that our current at-large system works well for the community as a whole, and that he is not sure that the community had enough discussion on this new district system before it was voted on. Sounds like the mayor is laying some groundwork for another vote.

Watch and listen as council member Hinterlong sounds as enthusiastic for districts, as a funeral director at a health and fitness convention. Then watch and listen to council member Brodhead when she states the vote was fair and square but not that many people voted and hence the margin (landslide) was not that big of a deal. If that’s the case, than council member Brodhead’s election to the council was far less of a big deal, and another vote on her might be order.