The City council didn't put districts on the ballot - they didn't want us to have our choice. the people orgainzed and put it on the ballot. I commend those people who got off their duffs and did something for us. those are the types of people we want on council. it is my understanding the question and timing is all in the state statute and nothing could be changed at a local level.

I don't care if people already pulled packeges ----- we voted and the dam* thing should be effective in April of 2011.

Krause? Come on. The Mayor needs to go. I know that some bloggers don't like Miller, I do. But, Krause? That guy is the most spineless of the bunch. He's a pal of DF. I think that Mayor McCheese will win, but this just screws up any chance for someone else. Douggie and Miller will split the "alernative" vote.

sam,

Interesting question. I was wondering the same. I don't think that the City Council wanted anything to do with this. My guess is that they probably knew it would take four years and said, whoops.

I have one question: Where was the city attorney when the council agreed to put the issue of ward representation on the ballot for 2011? No sooner does it pass than the attorney says we need over FOUR years to comply. Now, there will be court proceedings and a lot of cost incurred. Could no one see this problem before the election? I was opposed to the referendum question, but now that it's passed, the city should move expeditiously to comply. I understand they can't get it done for 2011, since candidates have already pulled packets, but professionals should have known they would need over four years to comply before the issue was put on the ballot. Really, four years?

It's been 6 days since the election. Can all the candidates go around town and remove all the signs?

Sun Editiors - looked more like what the Sun did on Thursday night was update the story they already had on the Union agreement - the one that quoted only Doug Krieger, and that story wasn't even the tip of the ice burg when it came to what truly happened.

The police press release explained in great detail how the City initiated the very agreement they were now using as an excuse to lay off employee's - and also pointed out several other City Manager had said that being proven untrue with their back track on their own agreement.

I believe people are frustrated at the softball handling of this City and City Council. Be it because no one bothers to truly investigate what the City puts out there, or because they don't want to rock the boat with the City Council - the Residents and the employee's are constantly taking it on the chin while the Sun reports on the City Manager and City Council with kid gloves.

Look beyond the surface - talk to people - find out what is REALLY happening and where our tax money is really being wasted everyday - but be prepared when you do that it won't be something the City Manager or City Council will ever release through the Community Relations Department.

Speaking of TEA parties, did the SUN completely miss the story about the City and the Police Union? It was a press release from the FOP, surely you got it. The Daiily Herald did two stories on it. This really makes me wonder. Does the SUN really protect City Hall?

Anyway, great story. After reading the two stories and the FOP press release one has to wonder...

Did the City's negotiating team jump the gun and offer something that they were not authorized to do?
Is it more of DF's and DK's rantings?
Did the CIty Manager speak, whoops, out of turn, as in should have negotiated before he told of layoffs?
Wonder what the other City employees think now that they'll have to fire them to pay for the Police raises?

The TEA party did pretty well on Tuesday.

La Cu,

Well stated! You pretty much took most of the words right out of my mouth.

At first I was against the way these clowns worded it because they grandfathered all of their prior service AND because they went with three terms instead of two AND because they left a loophole where someone could serve three terms as a city council member and then serve another three terms as mayor. They should all be ashamed of themselves IMO.

Also it isn't clear to me (and this might be fodder for one of them or their lawyers to mount a future challenge) but the way I read it someone could serve three terms, sit out for a period of time that isn't specified and then serve another three terms and so on.

In the end I voted FOR what was written even though I really don't like the details mostly because it is better than what we have, it is a step in the right direction, and we can continue to put pressure on future city councils to once again put the question to the voters until we get it right...

To me getting it right means a lifetime total of two terms. I don't care if the terms are consecutive or not. Two terms is two terms. To be practical the title of mayor is mostly ceremonial anyway plus the mayor gets to "preside" over council meetings. Other than that the mayor is effectively just another city council member who gets to vote and voice an opinion just like any other council member. I don't care if the person serves two terms as a city council member or two terms as mayor or one term as each... add it up any way you want and two terms is two terms.

I'd like to know more about the perks of office as a council member in Naperville though. Maybe the Naperville Sun can dig around and report on EVERYTHING they get. We know they get a small salary and health insurance. We know there are certain unwritten benefits like getting their street plowed first and other "wink, wink" types of kid glove treatment from various city departments... as in every city department head knows the home address of city council members as do the 911 dispatchers and none of them are about to let something they oversee slip up right in front of a council member... and "wink, wink" most of them will do "a little extra" when they have an opportunity to try to sell what a great job they or their department are doing... and anyone who thinks this type of "apple polishing" doesn't go on doesn't know where to look or what to look for.

Regardless, the important question is "what about when a city council member leaves office?" Do they keep or retain any benefits? This question is especially important as applies to those who have served for a long time? Do some ex city council members receive a pension or continue to receive health insurance based upon years of service? And if they do... who decides the rules on this and how do we get such rules changed? With new term limit rules it might be time to question the need to continue to provide such perks or benefits once a city council member leaves office and in this day and age of budget cutbacks it might even be appropriate to revisit the salary, benefits, and perks that are currently provided during an active term of service.

Enough people saw through Alexei to seal his fate. Sadly there are enough people who still vote for any candidate their party throws out so Kirk did have to work hard to get elected. Now that Alexei is out of work let's stay tuned and see where he turns up next. Maybe he will actually spend the next few years working on accomplishing something on his own. Hard to say what now that his day job didn't work out and with the mess of Broadway it isn't likely we are going to see him get hired by another bank.

The tough read in the governor's race is how or why 133,000 people consciously decided to waste... oops, I meant cast their vote for a candidate like Scott Lee Cohen? It's possible that I've optimistically over estimated the intelligence of at least 133,000 people in Illinois. God help us.

I am proud of the Naperville voters for sending a message to the City Council. Allow me to interpret. Although we have to endure some of these clowns for three more terms, what it means, Doug, is that you've worn out your welcome. You win because you're an incumbent, and Naperville is a transient community. You get nothing done. Admit it, you're there for the health insurance. Like Dick and George. I'm just amazed that you, especially DK, DF, and GP think that the City will implode without your guidance. It won't. It will be better. Please take this for what it is, leave now. Let someone else guide us.

Glad to see we all agree on Jesse White.

So, boys and girls, how much fun was THAT? Could not pull myself away from the TV last night. Nail biters, 2 cliff hangers still undecided, even a Glenn Beck moment from John Boehner! Great political theater.

And Harry Reid kept Nevada? It appears Nevadans decided that the devil they knew was better than the dingbat they didn't. In fact, most of the real controversial TP candidates lost: Angle, O'Donnell, probably Miller and Buck, Paladino, etc. I'm pleasantly surprised; it appears sanity still has a grip on most of the U.S. I've lost track, tho; aside from Bachmann, who is the nuttiest TP candidate now in office? Those will be the folks to watch over the next couple of years. It might be Rand Paul, except he sold out to the establishment Republicans as soon as he won the nomination. But his TP supporters didn't seem to care that he flipped so quickly, so everyone should still be happy. We'll see if Paul continues to fall into lockstep with establishment Reps or if he becomes a thorn in their sides. The latter would be a lot more interesting.

Meg Whitman must be having a bad morning. Wonder if she has any buyer's remorse about spending that $140 mil? Too bad she can't return anything she bought to the store.

So get to work, guys! You said you could reduce the deficit and create jobs at the same time, you've got 2 years. Actually, wasn't it Rand Paul who said he could do it in 1? Good luck with that. And remember, Americans want it now and they want it to be painless, cuts to anything anybody likes and we'll have your heads on spikes. If Reps decide to interpret this win as a referendum against all things Obama, which I've heard many already have, then we'll have just two years of gridlock, infighting, subpoenas, shutting down the government and more such dysfunction with nothing getting accomplished. After which Americans will flip back to the Dems in 2012 and we'll get to do it all over again. Ain't that America.

I can't believe the inteligence or should I say lack of inteligence in Illinois voters. Alexei????? I better wake up tomorrow to see Kirk won. And he is not the best by any stretch. But an Obama puppet???? Obama is going to go down as one of the five worst presidents ever. And to follow him up with his puppet??????? Puhhhhhhlease!!!!!!!

Glock 22 RTF wrote: "all we are doing is voting for the lesser of two evils"

I have felt like this for years, not just this year. Felt like this during the last presidential election too. Some of my votes this time were based on who offended me less or who annoyed me less with those horrid robocalls. I voted on both sides of the aisle based on who I could tolerate more.

I agree on Jesse White. He has always seemed to be a low-key, good man, who actually cares about the job he is in and isn;t just biding his time until thenext one. I think that is what makes him so refreshing as a candidate. The fact that he has concentrated on doing a good job in the position he has instead of using it as a stepping stone for higher office. He actually does his job instead of campaigning all the time.

Who did I vote for? Not one person with a (D) by his/her name. In other words, the lesser of two evils.

Voted every judge out.

What is this 168 bil bond thing for COD?

What is with these people who keep running for different positions when they didn't win their last election? There was a school board candidate running against Senger.

How many times has Harper's name been on here?

Took the day off, as I like to do on election day. Dropped the dog off at Tail Waggers for a shave and bath. The Cress Creek Country Club polling place was alive with activity and one of the judges advised it was a higher turn out than in our last presidential election. The red hoard is on the march! And Limbaugh was on fire today. Smokin hot with clips from his CEPAC speech and a smattering of Ronald "Maximus" Reagan speeches citing the virtues of eveenly spread capitalism, small government and big citizenry. Brought a tear to my eyes. I really miss him, a humble man from Illinois, Eureka College graduate and one of the top five best Presidents in the history of our nation. Almost voted straight Republican. Held my nose and voted for Biggert and Sengler, after all what were my choices? Voted no for all the other referendum questions. Sorry COD, the deffered tax scheme for $180mil or whatever doesn't work for me. But in respect for What the ? I did vote for my one and only favorite Democrate in this State in decades. Someone who does an excellet job in the administration of the office and I think is an all around heads up person. The only Democrat I can name who deserves the conservative vote. ( Hope I am never disappointed in the future but I doubt I will be) In addition, all of the conservatives in my family always vote for this candidate as well. Can you guess who it was? If you said Jesse White, move to the head fo the class. He is another Jim Edgar who sometimes we disagreed with but was also a good administrator of the office. When Jesse is ready, I will draw another dot next to his name.

Worse campaign ads by both parties in memory. The negative ads are a real turn off and leaves all of us wondering if all we are doing is voting for the lesser of two evils? Neither party ran a good clean campaign and I'm not sure if that speaks lesser of the parties or the candidates.

I voted no to the amendment because it would be nearly impossible to impeach the way it is written.

I voted no to COD because they tried to pull the wool over our eyes and like any taxing body can't actually comprehend that voters want bonds to retire and our taxes to go down.

I voted yes, with reluctance to both term limits in Naperville and the change in representation. I'd prefer to see a two term limit max and all alderman but am willing to take a step in the right direction vs maintaining the status quo. Maybe we can take the next step in a few more years?

I didn't vote a straight party ticket. Rather I voted on who I believed best deserved to serve in various offices... which also means I am no longer giving my support, as I did in the past, to some candidates like Senger and Biggert because I don't feel their performance has lived up to either my expectations or their campaign promises.

At the end of the day it will be really interesting to see how many of our voting "peers" actually vote for some of these losers... like Scott Lee Cohen... and he will be a loser alright. Unbelievable and only in America would we even have someone like this on the ballot. Got to love democracy in action. At least we can sleep at night knowing three gold balls will never hang over the front door of the Illinois Governor Mansion.

Straight down the line Republican candidates. Voted yes on the other ballot questions.

I think most of the candidates stink--Repub and Democrat. I just thought that the Repubs smelled a little less.

My guess is that Repubs win 60% of the ballots.