[Peace-discuss] Legislature is suppressing advisory referenda
C. G. Estabrook
galliher at uiuc.edu
Sat Apr 12 23:12:37 CDT 2008
Yes, it does force us to get the approval of the elected officials -- and they
are thus the judges of what is "relevant to powers granted to electors under the
Township Code." I can't imagine any board will determine that an anti-war
referendum -- or advice on that subject to our federal representatives -- is
"relevant to powers granted to electors under the Township Code."
It seems clear that the bill removes the judgment of the content of any proposed
advisory referendum from those present at the annual town meeting and gives it
instead to the town board.
I agree that "much of the actions by the Democratic elected officials
[Republicans too] was to show us who was in control: it's their township, city,
county, not ours." This bill is more of the same. --CGE
Tom Abram wrote:
> The part that changed my interpretation is:
> "The agenda published by the township board *shall* include any such
> request made by voters..."
> I think we have to make sure that advisory referenda are indeed
> "relevant to powers granted to electors under the Township Code" and
> that the township board can't just decide that they're not relevant
> because they don't like them.
>
> Regardless, it does force us to get the approval of the elected
> officials (even if we do determine it's required) rather than from the
> people. I believe much of the actions by the Democratic elected
> officials was to show us who was in control. It's their township, city,
> county, not ours.
>
> Tom
>
> On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 10:32 PM, C. G. Estabrook <galliher at uiuc.edu
> <mailto:galliher at uiuc.edu>> wrote:
>
> Tom--
>
> I think you're wrong about this, but I agree that we should make
> sure that we have the correct interpretation of this legislation.
>
> It seems clear that the legislation will make it impossible -- not
> easier -- for us to do what we've been doing, in form or content.
>
> Even on advance written request, no item may be added to the agenda
> without the agreement of the township board -- and even then "only
> objects relevant to powers granted to electors may be set forth" (as
> the bill repeats obsessively): electors do not determine relevance.
>
> The following is from the text of the bill as passed by the House:
>
> ....(b) Agenda. Not less than 10 days before the annual
> meeting, the township board shall adopt an agenda for the
> annual meeting. Any 15 or more registered voters in the
> township may request an agenda item for consideration by the
> electors at the annual meeting by giving written notice of a
> specific request to the township clerk no later than March 1
> prior to the annual meeting. The agenda published by the
> township board shall include any such request made by voters if
> the request is relevant to powers granted to electors under the
> Township Code.
> (c) Additional agenda items. Any matter or proposal not set
> forth in the published agenda shall not be considered at the
> annual meeting other than advising that the matter may be
> considered at a special meeting of the electors at a later
> date...
>
> Sec. 35-5. Special township meeting. Special township
> meetings shall be held when the township board (or at least 15
> voters of the township) file in the office of the township
> clerk a written statement that a special meeting is necessary
> for the interests of the township. The statement also shall set
> forth the objects of the meeting, which must be relevant to
> powers granted to electors under this Code...
>
> Sec. 35-10. Notice of special meeting; business at meeting.
> (a) Notice of a special township meeting shall be given in
> the same manner and for the same length of time as for regular
> township meetings.
> (b) The notice shall set forth the object of the meeting as
> contained in the statement filed with the township clerk, which
> must be relevant to powers granted to electors under this Code.
> No business shall be done at a special meeting except the
> business that is embraced in the statement and notice...
>
>
> Tom Abram wrote:
>
> I was very outraged when I first read about this legislation.
> After contacting Frerichs about this and several other
> anti-democracy measures (the return of straight-ticket voting
> and the effective elimination of slating, which would hurt the
> Greens and help incumbents), I re-examined it and came to a
> different conclusion. As I now read it, it would take 15
> signatures to get an agenda item added, and they would be
> required to place that item on the agenda. I believe adding
> referendum measures is part of the powers granted to the
> electors, regardless of their "relevance". If this is the
> correct interpretation and it was in place last week, it may
> have been easier to at least place our proposals on the agenda.
> We should make sure that we have the correct interpretation of
> this legislation.
>
> Tom Abram
>
> On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 9:46 PM, C. G. Estabrook
> <galliher at uiuc.edu <mailto:galliher at uiuc.edu>
> <mailto:galliher at uiuc.edu <mailto:galliher at uiuc.edu>>> wrote:
>
> Apparently our use of the township advisory referenda has
> attracted
> the attention of the Illinois General Assembly, and they have
> decided that this embarrassing expression of popular opinion
> has to
> be put down.
>
> The bill described below has been passed by the House (our local
> representatives voting in favor) and sent to the Senate, where it
> has been referred to the Rules committee. Its purpose is to make
> advisory referenda on national issues impossible.
>
> Note inter alia that the "procedure for voters to add an agenda
> item" is by written petition, well before the annual meeting: we
> could not add referenda to the agenda as we have. Moreover,
> "only
> objects relevant to powers granted to electors may be set
> forth" --
> i.e, nothing on the war, impeachment, torture, etc.
>
> I suggest we publicize widely this disgusting bit of
> anti-democratic
> chicanery. Among other things, we need to get in touch with
> state
> senators and advise groups like AWARE around the state to do the
> same thing. (And a little excoriation of state reps might be in
> order, altho' it's after the fact; at least we have another
> reason
> to vote against them when they come up for re-election.) --CGE
>
> ===========
>
> Bill Status of HB5505 95th General Assembly
> Short Description: TWP CD-AGENDA/MEETINGS
>
> Synopsis As Introduced
> Amends the Township Code. Requires the township board to adopt an
> annual meeting agenda at least 10 days before the meeting.
> Provides
> a procedure for voters to add an agenda item. Items not on the
> agenda must be considered at a special meeting. In the
> statement of
> a special meeting, only objects relevant to powers granted to
> electors may be set forth. Limits special meetings to the
> business
> embraced in the statement and notice. Sets quorum
> requirements for
> special meetings. Makes other changes. Effective immediately.
>
> Links to full text, etc., at
>
> http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/BillStatus.asp?DocNum=5505&GAID=9&DocTypeID=HB&LegId=36820&SessionID=51&GA=95
> <http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/BillStatus.asp?DocNum=5505&GAID=9&DocTypeID=HB&LegId=36820&SessionID=51&GA=95>
>
> <http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/BillStatus.asp?DocNum=5505&GAID=9&DocTypeID=HB&LegId=36820&SessionID=51&GA=95
> <http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/BillStatus.asp?DocNum=5505&GAID=9&DocTypeID=HB&LegId=36820&SessionID=51&GA=95>>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> <mailto:Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
> <mailto:Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> <mailto:Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>>
>
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> <mailto:Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
More information about the Peace-discuss
mailing list