A reader writes in with the following TIF referenda results, it looks like it was, or will be, very close:"I worked the polls at Stockton yesterday.
The TIF Question Was...
No: 185
Yes:180
This is with a few people handing out "vote yes" flyers outside and including about 20 "provisional ballots" that had a majority yes and may not be counted."
Update: The above numbers were not the total number of votes cast, according to the Board of Election website, a total of 3,975 votes were cast on the TIF referenda.
YES: 2,614 65.76%
NO: 1,361 34.24%
NO: 1,361 34.24%
Handpicked precincts and it still might not pass? What does that tell you about it, really?
ReplyDeleteWell, according to the board of elections web page, I believe it passed:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.chicagoelections.com/wdlevel3.asp?elec_code=40
Not close....at all.
ReplyDeleteHere are more links:
ReplyDeleteResults per precinct for affordable housing
Businesses must hire locals totals
Businesses must hire locals By precinct
It looks like the 12th precinct was the only one to vote down the Afforable Housing one. Looking at the map, I can't tell which area is the 12th. Since it is the largest precinct that voted, I am assuming that it is the one that has sunnyside mall in it. If I am mistaken, please correct me.
Not a single precinct voted down the Job TIF one; the closest it came to losing was in the 12th precinct where it passed with 71% of the vote.
If I am reading it right, it appears that more people in each precinct voted for the job referendum than the affordable housing one.
Just saw the update on the front page. Did you beat me to the punch? ;)
ReplyDeleteThanks for posting the voting breakdown WilsonAveWatcher. I just put the total votes cast for the referenda on the front page.
ReplyDeletedoes shiller seriously think the results of this referendum have any value? the cherrypicking of precincts renders it meaningless. any smart opponent will be able to get in some good zingers if she tries to use this.
ReplyDeleteProblem is, she will use it to try to pass more "pet projects" through City Council and they will buy every bit of it....
ReplyDeleteGuess we can look forward to more lawsuits until we can get her outta here.
She doesn't need to show HOW she got the results.
ReplyDeletePoliticians rarely do.
She'll just pull the numbers out of her jello-puddin' butt whenever she needs them...
poor analogy, larry. everyone like jello puddin.
ReplyDeleteI should have chosen the bargain brand as a reference...sorry...
ReplyDeleteHas anyone shaved Helen's head to see if there is a birthmark "666" underneath?
ReplyDeleteI am outraged that as a property owner who has an actual stake in this community that I am unable to vote on an issue that directly affects myself and my neighbors while those who have no financial stake in the community whatsoever have been cherry picked to vote. I had no doubt that this was going to pass.
When I voted yesterday I did it next to a gangbanger. Not only did he use the N word quite often, he was cussing up a storm. He then needed a second ballot because he screwed up his first one. He also had in his hands one of the flyers that a guy outside of Truman was passing out to certain people, I was not given one. I shed a tear realizing that this gangbanger was probably given the right to vote on this referenda while I was not, and I live a couple of blocks away from Truman.
so Helen gives gangbangers the right to add more income to their businesses but I, whose property taxes were just raised to pay for these projects, have absolutely no opportunity to voice my opinion.
This is the worst it can get, Helen is using every tactic she can to get her way. What is it going to take to stop the insanity? Unbelievable!
thanks for posting the results by precinct wilson ave watcher.
ReplyDeleteregardless of Shiller (she and her office had nothing to do with getting the referenda on the ballot or the campaign at all), it shows that a lot of people in Uptown feel that the issues of affordable housing and jobs are very important.
the fact that the questions were on the ballot in 11 precincts does not negate the support that these measures received. the results are impressive considering the limited resources that went into outreach. clearly, the majority of low and moderate income people (and a lot of higher income people) in these areas support the creation or preservation of more affordable housing and quality jobs for local residents.
thanks to everyone who supported these measures.
Ron - did you really expect some other results given the precints surveyed are saturated with low income housing? A true referendum would have surveyed the whole ward. This referenda was poorly worded and crooked to say the least.
ReplyDeleteWhat a good idea! Add more low income housing to the area. That will help everyone out - NOT.
You don't have a clue.
Given that the deck was stacked to include overwhelmingly high percentage of people who would benefit from the TIFs, it is amazing that there were this many NO votes. It's kind of like asking a kid if she would like candy. How many kids are going to say no?
ReplyDelete"miss kitty"
ReplyDelete"A true referendum would have surveyed the whole ward."
like i said, the fact that the questions were on the ballot in 11 precincts does not negate the support that these measures received. the results are impressive considering the limited resources that went into outreach. clearly, the majority of low and moderate income people (and a lot of higher income people) in these areas support the creation or preservation of more affordable housing and quality jobs for local residents.
"shillgangs"
"It's kind of like asking a kid if she would like candy. How many kids are going to say no?"
i hope you can understand the wider economic, social and political context that these questions were asked in. the fact is that it's harder and harder for people in Chicago to find affordable housing, and it is extremely difficult for people all over the u.s. to find quality jobs. You may not be experiencing these problems yourself, but many people are.
We're talking about HOUSING and JOBS, two things that are very important for HUMANS in order to survive in our world. comparing this situation to kids and candy is extremely insulting.
we're all in serious trouble if we continue to prioritize our wants, desires and ideologies (whatever they be) over the basic needs of people to survive and their rights as human beings.
Ron - duh. You ask 11 predominantly low income precincts if they want more low income housing - you really think they will say no? Your little hate group is too afraid to ask the whole ward what we think because you're afraid of the results.
ReplyDeleteNo one has ever said these people don't need housing. That is a fact we can agree on. To stick it all in one ward and continue to send a big "F" you to property owners is not the way to do it.
You, COURAJ and your tactics are extremely insulting.
ron wrote: "the fact that the questions were on the ballot in 11 precincts does not negate the support that these measures received."
ReplyDeleteYes it does. How would you feel if there were a referendum on banning abortion and the only people who could vote on it were members of Moody Church?
Hey Ron,
ReplyDeleteWhy don't we put a referendum on the ballot for the same 11 precincts next election asking if they want everyone else to pay for their groceries?
How about having the rest of us pay for their clothes? Their cars? Their TVs?
When you give the voice to only the people that want, you of course will get the same response. Maybe some of us feel that we already give enough through our taxes and selected charities and feel enough is enough. In these hard economic times we are all watching our budgets and not being able to voice your opposition to having more money pulled out of our pockets is unethical and giving power to only some of the people, not all of them.
Forcing me to give money to house someone else against my will without giving me an equal voice is not freedom, equality, or ethical.
Public housing is not supposed to be a permanent solution. It is supposed to be temporary until the person figures out how to be a contributing member of society. Put in more than you take out. Sadly, there are too many people that think having it made are getting section 8 and a LINK card.
The poor need affordable housing, but in Uptown, that means 100% low-income housing in areas of high poverty and with poor management. How shameful that the poor are used as pawns in other people's agendas.
ReplyDelete"she and her office had nothing to do with getting the referenda on the ballot or the campaign at all"
ReplyDeleteHow do you know this? Doesn't the alderman have to place these nonbinding survey questions on the ballot when it selectively polls only handpicked precincts?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis is what you were asked about yesterday.
ReplyDelete1. a) The purpose of an advisory referendum is to solicit the opinion of voters on a question of public
policy (e.g. “Shall smoking be banned in all public buildings in the City of Chicago?” YES/NO
1. b) No legally binding effects result from the approval or rejection of an advisory question.
If you'd like to, we can place 3 questions on every ballot very early before any of these political survey questions can be put there. There is a limit of 3 questions. Get there first and no other questions can be asked.
Yesterday the people handing out "yes" flyers were on the SEIU payroll. This is the largest union that backed Obama early and often.
The SEIU is in your neighborhood. They found enough signatures in these precincts to make up 8% of the total votes cast in the last Illinois gubernatorial election in 2007 for these precincts. That's all you need.
We're carrying snow globes to a battleground where the other side is brandishing machetes.
You can organize a respectable opposition in this town. For the SEIU paid staff, every day is a political day. I mean every single day.
These people are good at what they do, but only because they treat every day the same way. It's 'bring a machete to work day' every day.
Ron - your logic frightens me, because there's probably dozens of little Ronnies that share your socialistic point of view living around me - leeching off my tax dollars. The worst component is that your flawed logic is supported by our alderbiznitch.
ReplyDeleteOrganize! Is there a need to educate local residents about market oriented improvements? There is a large education gap here. Where are residents to turn right now to learn about market oriented approaches to good government?
Nine in ten organizations around them are devoted to Marxism. One in ten comes close to Capitalism.
If you build it, they will come. But the first people to come will be brown shirts trying to run you out of town. See, they do adhere to certain market conditions.
Ron, you cannot possibly believe your own rhetoric. Oh wait...is this the part where I'm supposed to admit that you know a lot more than me and that my opinion is based upon mere ignorance?
ReplyDeleteDon't try to use vague references to Chicago as a whole or the U.S. as a whole when discussing an issue voted upon by a very limited portion of Uptown. You can dispute my contention, but you cannot disprove it.
You have no idea what my background is and whether I have had difficulty finding a "quality" job or affordable housing. Unfortunately, people often have to work hard for the things they get. There are gaps in the system, but that does not mean that Uptown should have more TIFs to further increase the high concentration of low income housing. If we can spread out the low income housing and programs for the needy throughout the city, it will better enable businesses throughout the city to employ the needy who are able to work. Forcing the needy to come to a precious few areas of Chicago for food and beds puts a tremendous burden on them to commute to and from potential employers and merely continues the cycle of unemployment and poverty.
Ron, is it your intention to promote continued poverty by trying to keep high concentrations of the homeless in Uptown? It appears to be.
Ron, is it your intention to promote continued poverty by trying to keep high concentrations of the homeless in Uptown? It appears to be.
ReplyDeleteIsn't it more simple than that?
A condo owner supportive of the social justice groups is OK. A condo owner opposed to the social justice groups is a problem.
A higher concentration of homeless in Uptown is good for the social justice groups. More people, more votes, more attention from the authorities = more funding.
It's a simple plan. It's working.
shillsgangs said...
ReplyDelete"Ron, is it your intention to promote continued poverty by trying to keep high concentrations of the homeless in Uptown?"
That is exactly his intention. No Victims, no Ron. No Shiller, no Ron. No $99 dollar camcorder at Target, no Ron. No Uptown Update, no voice for Ron (But we'll keep it anyway).
So Im voting yesterday, and this strung out woman comes in to exercise her right to vote. She goes up to the booth and after a few minutes complexed shouts "How does this thing mark on the ballot?"
The two woman working the election shout back.."You have to take the cap off it, it's a pen!!"
God Bless the USA!
Wow Ron... are you a rocket scientist? Poor people want cheap or free housing paid for by someone else? No!!! REALLY? And considering they were the only ones ALLOWED to vote for whether or not we should have more of it... you think it's 'impressive' that the referendum numbers were favorably high?
ReplyDeleteI guess in your world, 2 + 2 = 5.
In the spirit of Barack Obama, how about Uptown spreads our wealth of low income residents around. When we spread things around its good for everyone right?..... RIGHT?
ReplyDeleteI agree with many of the posts regarding the referendum of course it was stated in a way to gather the desired response. Do doubt about it and it will be used to support some future agenda without any specifics given. There will be no public meetings about it and anyone who writes to the media will be labeled as a disgruntled minority in the ward.
ReplyDeleteI also agree that it at times appears that the struggle for a safer and more productive neighborhood seems to take a few steps back just after a step forward. However, thanks to more people getting active in the community and paying attention to the actions of the 46th ward office it is getting more and more difficult for Helen to make decisions and then sink into the background for 4 to 5 weeks. People are calling the office, asking questions, writing to the media and asking for other public servants to get active in this community and they are agreeing to do so. Two lawsuits have demanded Helen take more responsibility for actions when it comes up in the media. I have to say a few years ago that would have not have taken place. But maybe these unethical actions by Helen will continue to keep many of us motivated to stay active to find more productive solutions to keep our neighborhood safe for everyone.
I guess there is a "real" Uptown and a non pro Uptown, Uptown. Helen Shiller gets to pick it by precinct.
ReplyDeleteI live in the non pro unpatriotic Uptown.
Too bad McCain couldn't have picked which voters he wanted for his election.
That's the America and Uptown I want to live in. Where elected officials get to decide who gets to vote based on opinion.
Northside Action for Justice doesn't even live in the precincts that were asked about these two questions.
ReplyDeleteFrancis Tobin, creator of NAJ, lives in Rogers Park.
I cannot repeat this enough. Person(s) that do not even live in these precincts are taking time to organize the people that do live in the precincts to support the causes of people that do not live in the precincts.
Tobin lives 4.5 miles from Wilson Yard.
Here is what happened..EARLY VOTING. While it may seem convienent, it is not to be trusted.
ReplyDeleteI would venture to say most "yes" votes were passed during early voting.
Also there is to many people "helping" seniors and handicap vote, to few judges to monitor the results.
Why was it the woman who helped the people vote on Monday at Brightview Care Center was hand picked by Helen and Denise? Hmmm I don't know.
An interesting read...
ReplyDeleteTry a Google search on the words: lawsuit affordable housing
It is very interesting to read the legal precidents and judgements awarded to other communities that have had far smaller issues than Uptown has with Shiller, couraj, etc.
Not only does it appear that equal justice under the law is on the side of homeowners in these other communities, but it may help Uptown homeowners understand better the illegal nature of some of these activities and how others have handled those illegal activities.
I never thought I would ever hear myself saying this, but come spring, I will be happy to move out of the city and into the suburbs because my family situation is changing and we cannot afford a house with a backyard here (maybe Ron Durham will organize some people to buy us a house, or will the fact that I'm gainfully employed and a property owner who pays taxes disqualify me?)...
ReplyDeleteI've lived in the Chicago area my entire life, and the last thirteen years in a number of different neighborhoods on the Northside. Having recently purchased my FIRST condo near Montrose and Clark (I'm one year shy of forty, so believe me, I've paid my dues) a couple of years ago in what is technically Uptown, but on the border of Ravenswood, I can honestly say that this is the biggest shithole of a neighborhood in which I have ever resided. I had the pleasure of using the Wilson Red Line station for the first year while the Montrose station was being renovated, and the winos, drug dealers, gangbangers and every other manner of scum I encountered on a daily basis are not worthy of our help. As others have pointed out, Section 8 housing and Link cards are supposed to be a temporary solution, yet too many of these recipients feel they are ENTITLED to it PERMANENTLY and have no desire to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and better themselves...
There's a word for people like you, Ron. It's spelled E-N-A-B-L-E-R. But I'm sure it allows you to sleep well each night with a glib feeling of self-righteousness and self-satisfaction. Never mind those of us that are footing the bill and trying to build a safe and vibrant community where children can feel safe playing outside and one need not worried about getting rolled or caught in the crossfire of your beloved downtrodden.