Debating voter turnout, etc.

One thing to note is almost 25 percent of those 53,187 people aren’t of legal voting age (per Wikipedia). Still, not a stunning turn-out, but it becomes a little less grim. Yes, more people need to get involved. I blame the candidates. Every word is carefully calculated, and then refuted by the other candidate(s). Who are people to believe?

Second, why all the fuss over new buildings which aren’t “Prairie Style”? Does Oak Park have no creativity? Must all new buildings look like old buildings? Cities in Europe mix modern in with old all the time, and do it very well. Tourists are coming to see our historic buildings, not new buildings made to look old. I don’t see how anyone is “disrespected.”

Last, no one really knows what this “hotel” – if it happens – will bring to the village. I applaud someone for doing something, and not making it another Colt fiasco (which, by the way, was a completely full parking lot a few Sundays ago, used by people going out and patronizing establishments open past 6 p.m.)

Jay Auskalnis

More voters? Still same outcome

You and Gary have a flawed argument. You may not like that only X number of people voted, but the percents would hold. Statistics bare that out. If more people voted, the percent would have been the same. Do you both really believe that if more people voted the results wouldn’t be the same? I guess you wouldn’t have anything to complain about then if so.

In 2007 when more people voted in the horrible slate that saddled us with the Colt Building debt because of personal dislikes of a developer, more people voted and look where it got us? Two left in disgrace without finishing their terms.

Get off this argument. You guys lost. No one liked your slate. It was apparent that night of the elections where it was a ghost town at your campaign HQ. You can try to use this to prop up your slate for next year, but it will still end in the same result because on the whole, not enough people agree with you and I’m sorry if that rubs you the wrong way.

James Thompson

Thompson misrepresents the truth

James Thompson certainly deserves the title of “Mister Misinformation.” The trustees he slandered in his posting did not resign in disgrace. One left because board obligations resulted in having to spend too much time away from his young family. Serious health issues were cited in the other case. Readers of this forum should take Thompson’s rants with a truckload of salt.

Thompson also ignores the fact that the VMA slate had significantly more campaign funds than their opposition. The most powerful political organization in Oak Park simply can call on the movers and shakers in our community to deliver all the money they need to maintain their 60-plus year stranglehold on local government. Anyone who attends board meetings or watches on TV6 knows there is no real debate of the issues. Every trustee simply nods in agreement with the village president as he rams through his agenda.

James Thompson may indeed be mystery to some in the community, but I suspect he is merely an attack dog for the VMA and some of the top brass at village hall. His antics seem drawn from the Fox News/Karl Rove playbook. Ignore the facts and distort the truth. Shameful!

D. T. Crowe

Opposing party in power an uphill struggle

I know, like and respect Christine Vernon. She is a stand up person. However, I must agree with the fictional James Thompson (who ever you are) that the VMA won. Our group lost. The winning group has the connections, the savvy, the group think and the jobs.

It’s always difficult to change habits. As the population turns over, the new residents gravitate to those in power. Those opposed to those in power are painted as complainers and wingnuts.

The truth is, to be an opponent to those in power, we need to be very clear, very active, inspirational and squeaky clean. We failed on all parts but the cleanness.

If the VMA did not do stupid acts like running the budget into the ground, making parking tickets a funding mechanism and proposing hideous/ridiculous building projects, there would be no opposition at all.

The public dismisses some corruption. Corruption is normal. Look at Peoplesoft. Look at Oak Park outside lawyers payments.

Let’s see if anyone becomes upset with the coming reductions in police and fire positions.

Greg J. Kuenster

Join the discussion on social media!