Lauzen's hypocrisy on Longmeadow

Campaigning in 2013, Chris Lauzen called for a referendum on the Longmeadow toll bridge. Quote: "I've been told by people that if this project would go to referendum there would be overwhelming support for it. Well, prove it."

Once elected, he pulled his support for a referendum. Asked why, the career politician stated "rookie mistake." Fair hearing indeed. It appears to us that Lauzen and the county board have chosen a path to deliberately avoid taking this issue directly to the voters. Why? Because they feared the outcome.

Now they have that outcome: overwhelming opposition. So how is it "democratic" to dismiss the March 15 Dundee Township Longmeadow referendum, when almost 9,000 taxpayers, 72 percent of those who voted, disagreed with County policy on Longmeadow?

So now these public officials have decided to ignore the results of a legal election with phony disparagement of its wording, and to simply strong-arm this roadway through our township that shows little enthusiasm for it.

Is it fair that my fellow neighbors will have a 45/50 mph roadway about 60 feet from their homes? Is it fair to crush the small and powerless just because you can?

Is it "democratic" for Lauzen to threaten a libel lawsuit against a citizen who publicly criticizes the brand of leadership our Kane Board Chairman displays?

Is it fair for the county to work out back-room political deals like the Longmeadow / Brunner Forest Preserve land swap that voters find out about only afterward?

Is it fair that Kane County taxpayers are in the 1 percent bracket for highest property taxes in the United States? How is it fair to put us taxpayers at risk for even higher taxes with an incredibly shaky bond debt issue, while suppressing our voice on the matter?

Laura Brehmer

Algonquin