Board of Aldermen 03-12-2019 Page 14
No.
Alderman Lopez
So first I’d like to thank Attorney Bolton for coming on his death bed.
Attorney Bolton
You're welcome.
Alderman Lopez
Everybody is working at the polls, like Mr. Sennett, they are doing it because they care about our City and
because it is not a career position, they are paid barely enough to apologize for being there all day. So |
want to recognize that happens and it is important for us to make a decision that doesn’t cost the City
unnecessary money and also acknowledges the position the position that people who are running the polls
are in. | also want to recognize the roll that the public plays in this; it is not, getting to the polls is not an
even race for everybody. Some people are walking from a distance, some people are taking buses, some
people are taking time off of work, they are juggling children.
So it is a challenge, so we’ve talked at length about poor voter turnout but at the end of the day there are
like 2 people to vote for on one position so it is difficult for the individual voter to show up for a special
election. So I’m in favor of changing this system. | don’t have a problem with the amendment that we have
at the moment because it is as fair as you can get given the circumstances, | can’t agree with the logic of
just picking the next runner up, because those situations vary wildly. | believe this special election we just
had, the next runner up would have been Chris Williams, regardless of whether he was still interested in the
position, regardless of how the community felt, we can’t just default to the next runner up. As Alderman
Klee referenced, if we have right now many uncontested elections, someone just has to put their name in a
hat and regardless of whether they are actually knocking on doors or really making a go of it, all efforts are
not equal. Therefore, they shouldn’t be treated equal.
So I’m not in favor of entertaining the next runner up just as an auto choice. | do appreciate the effort that
Mr. Lisle put into considering an amendment of his own. | think we should review it, because while it seems
problematic from what Alderman Klee and our City Clerk said, we have to be careful that we don’t
accidentally offset the balance of elections. There may be some opportunity there. But finally and | think
this is most important, we just heard a lot of public comment about it tonight so the larger public hasn’t had
a chance to review what is going on in the hearing, consider it and then give their feedback too. So to
Alderman Laws’ point, | think we can’t speed past this, we need to do our jobs and our due diligence.
Alderman O’Brien is right, we’ve gone over this over and over again, but that doesn’t mean that new
information wasn’t presented tonight that we could be reviewing.
President Wilshire
| just want to ask the City Clerk if we re-refer this, what is the time frame for this getting where it needs to
be on the ballot.
Patricia Piecuch, City Clerk
Thank you Madam President, | would need it probably back, no later sometime in June because it needs 45
days in order to be sent — the Secretary of State Department of Revenue Administration Attorney General’s
Office has 45 days to respond back to it. When their response comes back, then the Board will have 7 days
after that response in order to decide whether they order it to the ballot or not
President Wilshire
