Last Tuesday, residents turned out to vote in relatively large numbers for a primary election, which included a ballot referendum on electrical aggregation. Preliminary numbers show that over 900 residents did vote on the question and the majority said “No,” in three out of four counties that make up Barrington Hills.
By comparison, our neighboring communities of Barrington and South Barrington received strong support from their constituents regarding the same question posed by their elected officials. Both communities approved electrical aggregation, with around seventy-five percent of residents approving their referendums. This begs a question: Why did Barrington Hills residents resoundingly reject the opportunity to allow their Village leaders to negotiate electrical rates on their behalf? We have an idea.
Let’s first eliminate some possibilities. Voter awareness and education on the referendum question could not have been a factor. One could read explanations of the electrical aggregation question in any one of hundreds of publications, including The Observer, in the last few months. Indeed, over 300 other Illinois communities voted on the very same question earlier this week. Our Village appears to have put forth at least a moderate effort to inform residents with postcards, a web page, an open house and a lengthy newsletter article (albeit released after voting was over). Ignorance on the part of residents surely wasn’t an issue.
Could it have been simple voter apathy? We have seen this phenomenon in prior elections, with many residents out of town or choosing simply not to vote. But the relatively high voter turnout in Barrington Hills on Tuesday for a primary election suggests that voter apathy was not the cause.
Then why was the referendum rejected? We must conclude that Barrington Hills residents simply do not trust Village officials to act on their behalf, particularly as it relates to financial matters that can affect residents’ pocketbooks very directly. Our current administration’s financial bungling has been well documented in these pages and elsewhere. So at the end of the day, we must conclude that the resounding “No” from residents on the aggregation referendum was a vote of no confidence in our current Village leadership.
If history under our current administration has proven anything, we can look forward to some “spin” on why our residents refused to “permit” our elected officials to help us save money on our electric bills. We look forward to that and on the ability to comment if it occurs.
President Abboud has always encouraged residents to get involved in Village affairs during his (long) seven years in office through newsletters and other mailings. On Tuesday, residents finally heeded that call–although clearly not with the message he wanted.
We hope this is a sign of things to come. The tide may be turning. Now let’s start thinking about the profile of the new leaders and ideas for restoring the peace that Barrington Hills deserves.
– The Observer
Bravo to the last paragraph!
Thank you, Observer, for a very comprehensive response to the Aggregation vote. Not only must we think about new leaders, but, also, how to get more than the pathetic 20+% voter turnout in this election. Our residents should be motivated by 7 years of abuse and rid the Village of this tyrant and his obedient servants. As to the budget, one quick swipe eliminating most of the Legal Services, BACOG, and the Newsletter would be a start..
My sentiments exactly! Why else such a negative vote, when residents can opt out anyway. Overheard at a Board meeting last year, Village officials unhappy about NICOR customers switching, and Village losing the tax on Gas. Perhaps that is on the horizon.
“We’re from the Government, and we are here to help” is a comedy skit; unfortunately, its not a comedy, but a scary reality in our Village – the people who brought us the famous Lighting Ordinance – the people who promoted an ugly cell phone tower – and the people who spend almost a million of our dollars on legal fees and then don’t heed their own lawyers. (not to mention the disgrace surrounding the Oakwood Farms reversal following the (violative) donations to our presidents picks for Trustees in our last election.
Definitely time for a change! Kudo’s to the Observer for their factual reporting and their opinions, giving the residents the straight story, not the ‘spin’ of our current president.
James T. O’Donnell (not the former Plan Commissioner)
Bravo! Interesting supposition. And I think your summary is well worth thinking about as well!
Sadly, our Village Board is a collection of omnipotent, arrogant and headstrong individuals who finally had to confront the fact that they can’t dominate all the votes and decisions cast outside the confines of the Village Hall! They sit on their monthly thrones and call themselves devoted public servants, while these same people refuse to videotape meetings and push the public comment portion to the end so that there will be no dissenters left at the end of the night to oppose them or their agendas. So much for full disclosure and transparency in government!
The failure of the electrical aggregation referendum had nothing at all to do with apathy or an inability of voters to understand the proposition. In fact, the anti-referendum vote was a clearly pointed vote against our current board and its President!! This village government operates like a socialist state. I salute the Barrington Hills Observer for having the courage to report the facts, and not the tired spin from Abboud and his Village Board. In the meantime, the phrase “what goes around, comes around” seems appropriate.
I voted no because we have already researched and selected a program to save on electric and gas fees. Once one lives in an area with an aggregate contract, you no longer have the option to select your own. It really didn’t have anything to do with village officials.