Election 2023: Orland Park residents vote to keep current form of government
ORLAND PARK – The people of Orland Park have spoken, and their choice is to keep the professional managerial style of government that has been in place for 40 years.
Residents retained their current form of government Tuesday, April 4, by voting 6,405 to 3,325 in a binding referendum placed on the Consolidated Election ballot, according to unofficial results from the Cook and Will county clerks’ offices. It was put to the voters after the Village of Orland Park Board of Trustees voted unanimously in January to place the question on the ballot.
“Tonight is a good night for democracy in Orland Park,” said Karie Friling, former Orland Park Assistant Village Manager, a resident of the community, and a member of the Vote Yes Orland Park group that campaigned for voters to vote yes on the referendum.
Friling said the Vote Yes group was optimistic that they held the edge in votes headed into Election Day, but they did not know just how large of a lead they had amassed until right after the polls closed and the first returns came back.
“We were thrilled tonight,” she said. “I think that [voters] saw the information we were putting out there was backed up by sources, by facts, by studies, by research, and by independent associations like [International City/County Management Association] and the [Illinois City/County Management Association].”
Friling also pointed to the grassroots effort and coalition that formed for Vote Yes, which included former Village Manager Paul Grimes, former Tribune journalist Phil Kadner, members of the late Mayor Frederick Owens’ family, and people on both sides of the political spectrum.
“I really think that is why we had such a huge spread in the vote tonight, because we were speaking as a unified group, together, saying, ‘Hey, stop, timeout,’” Friling said. “‘Orland Park is a great community. We all love Orland Park. Why is this necessary? What is not working that we need to make this huge change now?’ Mayor [Keith] Pekau could never answer that fundamental question. I think that is why we won.”
Friling said she hopes residents realize that the current form of government in Orland Park is “a good thing.”
“We recognize that village managers come and go,” she said. “I worked for the Village for 13 years. Mayors come and go, too. But having an elected board whose job is to set up policy and having a professional staff who is trained, experienced, and educated to do the day-to-day operations works.
“Both sides of the aisle need to honor each of those roles. I may not always agree with the mayor, but I honor that he is our mayor. I honor what his role is. He needs to also honor the role of the village manager and the role of professional staff. I think we need to make sure that it is happening.”
She also said that Orland Park’s elected officials need to “remember that they work for the residents.”
“They tried to slide one in on this,” Friling said. “They didn’t hold any informational meetings. They waited until the very last minute. They had no communication with the residents who vote. We stepped in and filled that void. That was a critical error on the mayor and board’s part. They should learn from this. Engage the community before you decide to make such huge changes in our town. They did not do that. We did.”
UPDATE: 3 p.m. April 5
Pekau — who spoke with Richard Free Press on Wednesday, April 5 — said he put the referendum question out to the public because he felt it was “the right thing for the Village.” Despite it failing to pass on Election Day, Pekau said he still believes that.
“At the end of the day, the vote doesn’t impact me or the current administration in any way,” Pekau said. “I do think a no vote for the people of Orland Park would have been better for the long term. Everything I’ve done since I’ve been here has been to try and rid the Village of patronage and nepotism and the things that were going on before.”
Pekau said one of the goals of changing the form of government was to make personnel hiring decisions transparent.
“Currently, we, as a board, make our village manager transparent — and he thinks it is good government, [too] — but it is not required, and in the past, it was not done,” he said. “Unfortunately, I don’t think people understood [the referendum]. People who were pushing [residents] to vote yes gave a bunch of misinformation.”
He also said he was not going to spend a lot of personal money campaigning for a change that would not greatly impact his time in office.
“We put all of the information on the Village [website], and that is factual information, because that is all the Village can do is be factual,” he said. “If people didn’t go there to learn about the issue, there is really not much we can do. Unfortunately, money and misinformation often work in elections.”