This Tuesday, voters will again be asked, via referendum, whether or not they want council members elected with district representation, or at-large. This question was asked in the last election (2010) and it resulted in a landslide victory in favor of district representation. The vote was 28,236 for districts and 14,593 for at-large. That’s a huge margin of victory ( 66% to 34%). After 42,829 voters ‘voiced’ their choice, it was clear the residents of Naperville wanted to ‘Reclaim Naperville’ by setting the table for ineffective incumbents to be defeated in future elections. Naperville city officials were stunned by the results of the vote and the Naperville political machine began the process of voiding the will of the people. The first thing they did was delay the implementation of district representation for five full years. The city of Naperville through the city council and city manager (Doug Krieger) began to whine and cry that it would take them five years to accomplish what other cities could accomplish in a few months. Absolute proof of the absolute lack of leadership and incompetency of Naperville city officials.
The second thing the Naperville political machine did was to set the table for a do-over vote for the same thing. They basically said that the 28,236 people who voted to ‘Reclaim Naperville’ by voting for district representation were too “stupid” to know what they were voting for. Naperville city officials wanted to save the voters from themselves, when in fact it was the Naperville city officials who wanted to save their own jobs. With district representation, it would be much easier for voters to defeat councilmen such as Bob Fieseler and Grant Wehrli, or any of the other seven who are not providing Naperville with sound, effective, respectful leadership.
The third thing they did was to “muddy up” the issue and confuse the voters with referendum wording that can make a voter dizzy. There is an old saying, “If you can’t convince them with facts, the dazzle them with B.S”, and that’s exactly what Naperville officials have done to the voters with tomorrow’s referendum.
Let’s look at the 2010 referendum wording; “Shall the city of Naperville elect part of the council members at large and part of the councilmen from districts with staggered four-year terms and biennial elections?” The staggering landslide ‘yes’ vote meant the voters wanted change.
This time the 2012 referendum wording is, “Shall the city of Naperville elect the city council at large instead of part of the councilmen at large and part of the councilmen from districts?” So now a ‘yes’ vote means keep it the same……’the same’ before the 2010 referendum or after the 2010 referendum?
So you have the same issue, but with different meanings for the same ‘yes’ vote. In essence the referendum question this time will have an opposite outcome if the voters vote ‘yes’. It’s almost an Abbott and Costello “Who’s on first” question. Naperville city officials couldn’t convince the voters with facts, so they are attempting to dazzle them ‘confusion’.
There is a simple answer for a clear choice, and that answer is a resounding “NO”. By voting ‘No’ on the referendum, Naperville residents can continue to ‘Reclaim Naperville’ by removing council members who are not getting the job done. That leads to the dismantling the Naperville political machine, and replacing the city manager with effective leadership.
Occam’s Razor (a scientific and philosophic rule) states, “The simplest of competing theories be preferred to the more complex”. When dealing with the current Naperville city council, and city officials, the simplest, safest, and wisest answer to the referendum is “NO”.
Good luck friends from BC . Hope you can retake your rights.
Been following from the smart meter story and sad to say your people in charge sound as dishonest and crooked as our lieberal government in BC.
We have to wait for a month to change it.
One of the yes people told me that they were worried that wards would turn Naperville into Chicago. Ironic that they used Chicago tricks to get it overturned. I’m talking about delaying the implementation and using a little local election to lower the number of votes.
I was worried that a City Council backed proposition might beat a grass roots effort.
Failure on all fronts. How embarrasing for you. Next time you intend to setup ‘anonymous grass-roots’ websites in my backyard make sure you don’t register them with your real name just days after you maxed out donations to candidates. I’m looking at you brian snodgrass. Yeah, I doxed you. I hope you enjoyed it.