Hartford Citizens for Responsible Government

[hartford1]

First, forget about whether you agree or disagree with WalMart moving into Hartford, it's irrelevant to this issue.

When I hear that a group is attempting to recall city officials because they are not representing the wishes of their constituents, the first thing that occrus to me is that: this is not a direct democracy, but representative.

We elect officials to represent us. They are not required to vote on issues in a YES/NO based on a majority percentage of their constituents, period.

So when I hear this as the basis for the recall, I find this an absolute abuse of the what the law was intended for.

You HCRG are not responsible and I find it completely appalling that you are attempting to twist the purpose of the recall laws simply because you (a small percentage of the population) do not agree with a single decision of an alderman.

The constituents of the 3rd district find your actions inappropriate as well, since 65% of the voters decided to KEEP alderwoman Isleb.

Stop wasting our money on recalls and appeals, it is clear you will not succeed.

Sincerely,

A Hartford Resident.

[admin]

[quote="hartford1"]First, forget about whether you agree or disagree with WalMart moving into Hartford, it's irrelevant to this issue.

When I hear that a group is attempting to recall city officials because they are not representing the wishes of their constituents, the first thing that occrus to me is that: this is not a direct democracy, but representative.

We elect officials to represent us. They are not required to vote on issues in a YES/NO based on a majority percentage of their constituents, period.

So when I hear this as the basis for the recall, I find this an absolute abuse of the what the law was intended for.

You HCRG are not responsible and I find it completely appalling that you are attempting to twist the purpose of the recall laws simply because you (a small percentage of the population) do not agree with a single decision of an alderman.

The constituents of the 3rd district find your actions inappropriate as well, since 65% of the voters decided to KEEP alderwoman Isleb.

Stop wasting our money on recalls and appeals, it is clear you will not succeed.

Sincerely,

A Hartford Resident.[/quote]

Hi HF1 -

You are correct, we do not live in a true democracy by definition, but a republic - a representative form of government. But just because that representative has been elected to the position does not mean that he or she is no longer accountable to their constituents for the decisions they make.

I guess "succeeding" is in the eye of the beholder. True, we did not succeed in recalling Ms. Isleb in the 3rd District. But we did succeed in
[list]getting 500 people out to vote - more than have voted in that district in recent history.
getting people to talk about the issues - something that has not happened in this town in a long time.
getting the Common Council to actually say "no" to an issue based on the fact that their constituents would not support it.[/list:u]

Thank you for your input.

Admin

[JK]

[quote="admin"]

Hi HF1 -

You are correct, we do not live in a true democracy by definition, but a republic - a representative form of government. But just because that representative has been elected to the position does not mean that he or she is no longer accountable to their constituents for the decisions they make.

I guess "succeeding" is in the eye of the beholder. True, we did not succeed in recalling Ms. Isleb in the 3rd District. But we did succeed in
[list][b]getting 500 people out to vote - more than have voted in that district in recent history[/b].
getting people to talk about the issues - something that has not happened in this town in a long time.
getting the Common Council to actually say "no" to an issue based on the fact that their constituents would not support it.[/list:u]

Thank you for your input.

Admin[/quote]

Admin:

Hi again. I direct your attention to your reply to Hartford 1 and more specifically to your list, first item. Your group was successful in getting people out to vote -- here's my point, it was an unncessary use of time and resources. The numbers are what the numbers are, we can continue to twist them to our own liking. I am a very analytical type person by profession and work with metrics all the time. Lets look at the [color=red]FACTS[/color] represented to us since the [u]actual[/u] vs projected numbers can be proven.

499 ballots from district 3 were cast. We all know that there are more voters that live in the district, but since they did not come out; in essence they don't count or should not be for purposes of looking at the percentages.

[list]Of the 499 ballots cast, 327 were cast in favor of keeping Ms. Isleb (.6553% (372/499).

Of the 499 ballots cast, 171 were cast in opposition of keeping Ms. Isleb (.3426% (171/499)[/list:u]

So, while maybe you feel that you were successful in getting people out, some felt forced to go out and cast a vote to prove a point and that is my point. The ACTUALS (the facts) are in and the ACTUALS (the facts) are what should be cited. That's what is done in a Presidential election and any other election that I know of. More than 65% (and if I were rounding, I would have to cite 66%)of the casted ballots favored keeping Ms. Isleb in her position because the persons who cast those votes believe in Ms. Isleb and feel that she does represent them. A scant more than 34% were in disagreement with Ms. Isleb's representation of their needs and issues.

Your group was successful in getting people to talk, but the problem is they are only talking about [b]ONE[/b] issue, and one that in my opinion is an issue of minimal concern given the state of affairs in our and neighboring communities. I won't go into the specifics here because it is not pertaining to the ONE issue that is being discussed.

I feel that if the group [u]truly[/u] wants to make a difference and [u]truly[/u] wants to talk and get people to talk, then revisit your home page and look at it [u]carefully and closely[/u], it is about [b]ONE[/b] issue [b]ONLY[/b], not all the issues affecting our community. So, the group is only partially (small percent if we look at [u]all[/u] the issues and run statistics on the importance of each, etc.) successful.

Thanks again for reading.

JK

[admin]

[quote="JK"]

Admin:

Hi again. I direct your attention to your reply to Hartford 1 and more specifically to your list, first item. Your group was successful in getting people out to vote -- here's my point, it was an unncessary use of time and resources. The numbers are what the numbers are, we can continue to twist them to our own liking. I am a very analytical type person by profession and work with metrics all the time. Lets look at the [color=red]FACTS[/color] represented to us since the [u]actual[/u] vs projected numbers can be proven.

499 ballots from district 3 were cast. We all know that there are more voters that live in the district, but since they did not come out; in essence they don't count or should not be for purposes of looking at the percentages.

[list]Of the 499 ballots cast, 327 were cast in favor of keeping Ms. Isleb (.6553% (372/499).

Of the 499 ballots cast, 171 were cast in opposition of keeping Ms. Isleb (.3426% (171/499)[/list:u]

So, while maybe you feel that you were successful in getting people out, some felt forced to go out and cast a vote to prove a point and that is my point. The ACTUALS (the facts) are in and the ACTUALS (the facts) are what should be cited. That's what is done in a Presidential election and any other election that I know of. More than 65% (and if I were rounding, I would have to cite 66%)of the casted ballots favored keeping Ms. Isleb in her position because the persons who cast those votes believe in Ms. Isleb and feel that she does represent them. A scant more than 34% were in disagreement with Ms. Isleb's representation of their needs and issues.

Your group was successful in getting people to talk, but the problem is they are only talking about [b]ONE[/b] issue, and one that in my opinion is an issue of minimal concern given the state of affairs in our and neighboring communities. I won't go into the specifics here because it is not pertaining to the ONE issue that is being discussed.

I feel that if the group [u]truly[/u] wants to make a difference and [u]truly[/u] wants to talk and get people to talk, then revisit your home page and look at it [u]carefully and closely[/u], it is about [b]ONE[/b] issue [b]ONLY[/b], not all the issues affecting our community. So, the group is only partially (small percent if we look at [u]all[/u] the issues and run statistics on the importance of each, etc.) successful.

Thanks again for reading.

JK[/quote]

Hi JK -

We are trying as often as we can to get away from the one issue, but the Common Council (as well as many of the people posting on this site) keep going back to that ONE ISSUE.

Unfortunately, so many of the things we are trying to point to culminated in the annexation of land for Wal-Mart, so that, by default, ends up as the issue.

ISSUE: Too much growth, too fast growth. Slow down, eat up some of the inventory of vacant housing and land. Let the schools catch up to the growth. Make sure that the employment rate remains reasonable.

ISSUE: Traffic. Residents don't support a by-pass. The county doesn't support a by-pass. The state doesn't support a by-pass. Solution according to the common council: send more traffic through the city by putting a major shopping complex on the west side. The solution according to the HCRG is to expand commercial development on the east side of town where the roadways are already built to handle the traffic.

ISSUE: Environment. Putting up a massive parking lot along a navigible waterway is never a good idea. Yes, the DNR and Army Corps of Engineers say its okay. They also okayed Milwaukee's deep tunnel project.

ISSUE: Communication with the citizens. It's finally happening. Alderperson's, business leaders, and government officials are actually writing editorials to get their position known. Most still refuse to use e-mail.

ISSUE: Projects that will drasitically change the face of Hartford forever (like a Wal-Mart Supercenter on the west side) should be taken to the people for their opinion / approval. If they had done so, this site wouldn't be here.

What are they afraid of?

Thanks for your input.

Admin