Winfield is a small village of about 10,000 residents. A quaint, happy community, one would think. However, Winfield is a study in contrasts and resulting conflicts.
Since 1980, Winfield has more than doubled in population. The village now stretches over four miles in distance from end to end, sits within two different townships and four different school districts, and has different representatives at the county and state levels as well as Congress on account of this distance. The growth of the hospital is seen both as an asset and a burden.
This creates challenges in understanding distinct needs and perspectives. While I have reservations about the notion of dividing the Village government into districts, the current structure of the Village board is not working. There were concerns about development interests from the newer parts of town controlling the agenda. A political organization of residents in the area near Roosevelt Road, collaborated with others in the unincorporated areas south and west of the village to raise money and elect their slate of candidates.
The 2011 election brought two new trustees with opposing viewpoints and resulting conflict, but without full representation. Fredricksburg Farm, Winfield Square, and areas north of Geneva Road – the northern third of the village – are not represented at the table. The riverwalk and preservation of open space on the southern edge of town are priorities, rather than broader issues such as road repair, tax shortfalls, flooding and water rates.
Yes, there is more disagreement in districted communities, but remember that in those cases, the districting came after the disagreement. Districting shows a need for balanced representation, so that everyone’s needs and priorities are represented. That’s why I am supporting districting for Winfield, and encourage my neighbors to support balanced representation by voting “YES” on March 20.
Tom Blackburn
The most persuasive argument against districting is that it steals your vote.
According to The Winfield Post, If the referendum passes you can vote for a trustee once every four years. With the current system you can vote for a trustee six times in four years.
I’d rather have six chances to throw the rascals out than one chance.
It’s not the system that sets the agenda in this town, it’s the people we elect. With districting we’ll have less control over who’s elected. Districting takes power away from the people and gives it to you-know-who.
That’s why I oppose districting.
Isn’t that a little like arguing that you should be able to vote for every senator and every congressman/representative? Pretty weak argument. But, if that’s all you’ve got, I guess you have to go with it and hope people don’t notice. –Right Field
I was having a similar discussion last night. I think I’m going to have to get off of the fence pretty soon. But if districting takes power away from the people, and gives it to those-who-will-not-be-named, why on earth are they so crazy angry AGAINST it?
And so crazy angry against it NOW, when just 5 years ago, districting Winfield was THEIR idea?? They’ve done a 180 degree flip flop on it. The only reason I can think of is that they didn’t have the power base that they do now, and they thought that districting would give it to them. Now that they have that power base, districting would take it away.
See why I’m rather on the fence?
I too am on the fence. Having a “good” Trustee working for you would be a great thing for four years, but what if the opposite is true? Fours years could seem like forever! Under current system, I can lobby all of my elected officials to discuss something the affects me, but under the districting system, if my rep is at odds with my choice, I have no voice at all! The other five don’t need to worry about my vote and so they will be busy working deals so that my rep will then vote for something they want. Sounds like we are therefore putting much more power,and possibly way too much power, in the hands of six people. I would be much more comfortable with this idea if we were large enough to be able to elect three at-large trustees in addition to the district trustees but we are way too small for that. Anyone else have similar concerns?
ah, but I did have a former trustee who lived 2 doors away. Except I didn’t have that for 4 years, I had it for over 8 years because it was a WU-supported person. And I was completely ignored, disregarded and even shouted at in the street on more than one occassion.
So that’s the flip side of the same argument.
Toxic has a valid point. However, I feel that most, if not all, village trustees will give equal importance to the interests of the village as they will give to the interests of their individual district. I feel that I can still “lobby” a trustee from outside my district and they will listen to my opinion respectfully.
-Ken
This is a better choice for ALL the people not just some people. Have we all forgotten that we are ALL of Winfield, just not the Southside not just the Northside not just CDH. We are ONE town, one team, and really way behind every other town surrounding us. We have to act like one, but EGO’s and Agendas are killin us slowly. Fresh start coming, spread the word. Nice Job Tom, I second the motion, the people are speaking loud and clear.
Ok, then, help me out here. I want to see change as much as anyone. This is the part I haven’t quite gotten; I see this as breaking us into six different little towns within the town, each their own little kingdom, each worrying about its own sidewalks or sign or what have you. Rather than making us one town, one team – I worry about further fragmentation, my district against yours. If your district gets some resource, it is a resource no longer available to my district. So doesnt it become yours against mine? What am I missing?
and that’s why I’m still on the fence!
It seems that I just keep refuting both sides of the argument, or keep agreeing with both sides, and I can’t tip the scales quite one way or the other…
Who has got a counter argument to toxic’s fragmentation point here?
It is very misleading to state that the community will be splintered into 6 separate ‘kingdoms.” Districting does not create fragmentation, in fact Districting promotes working together and harmony. Let us explain, while the town is districted into 6 different and separate areas all the Trustees have to work together to accomplish their goals and the board’s goals for the village. Do not lose sight of the fact it still takes a majority of the board to pass initiatives. One Trustee, one district is only one vote and without the consent of at least 3 other Trustees anything brought forward by one Trustee or District fails just as it would today.
The beauty of districting is each area has their own representative. It is representation based on issues and needs facing their district. Look what has happened to Winfield since 2005 – we have been represented by one group, one faction and the town has suffered. Since 2005 the boards have not approved one significant project, protected our fund balances, maintained our community, looked for ways to generate sustainable revenues, while fees have skyrocketed and services have been cut. What’s worse is, whole segments of town have under-represented or not represented at all. In fact if you want to talk about a “kingdoms” or division that’s what we have had for the last 7 years and the outcome has been devastating to our community.
Districting does make it very important for the voters in the district to make sure they have a qualified candidate that can negotiate and build bridges not only on the board but also within the community. Coalitions can and should be built on the village board and within the community. This is another positive of Districting that engages the community and promotes teamwork.
Trustees not willing to work together or for the good of the community run the risk of alienating the other Trustees and community members which would put that District at a significant disadvantage. That’s why it is very important to get the right person representing you.
There will be individuals in town who will be against Districting simply because they don’t like change, they won’t take the time to understand the benefits of Districting, and a particular political action committee will promote fear to maintain their grip over the direction of the town.
Districting will be good for Winfield and balanced representation is exactly what we need. Our town is already Districted in so many ways: different schools districts, different park districts, different churches, different needs – It’s time the people are offered the political representation that represents their needs.
Very well said. Now we have to spread the word!
Excellent explanation!!!
First, Tom did a great post.
Second, districting is a problematic decision. However, if we lose, then we get to run more candidates to flip the scenario without restriction.
Being President’s day weekend, one might consider why we separated from England? Although there were many reasons, often cited as core is the issue of representation. Districting provides the opportunity to have specific representation.
I still don’t see how districting will help Winfield…it is unwise to assume that people living in the same geographic portion of Winfield have similar views and priorities. Districting makes that assumption.