Urbana citizens voted overwhelmingly last Tuesday against a referendum that would have added two at-large seats to the city council, but supporters of the bill still believe a change is necessary.

The bill would have made the city council a nine-member body, with seven members elected from wards and two elected citywide.

Tod Satterthwaite, the Urbana mayor and a proponent of the at-large referendum, said he was disappointed that the referendum failed. He said the current ward system gives those voters who live in wards with rapid population growth a smaller voice than those in other wards.

“This isn’t something you want to have in a democratic system,” Satterthwaite said. “People’s voting rights are being compromised.”

Alderwoman Esther Patt disagreed, saying Satterthwaite intended to dilute the council with more members.

“They were just making up data to engage people in ignoring the U.S. Constitution,” Patt said. “They were attempting to super-size the council to outnumber the liberals.”

The city council drew the ward map this spring based on data from the 2000 U.S. Census. Satterthwaite vetoed the map, but was overridden by a 5-2 vote by the council.

Diane Marlin, treasurer of Plus 2 For Urbana, a group that supported the referendum, said the campaign was successful in raising awareness of problems with the ward map.

“By the end, even people who opposed adding seats thought the map was unfair,” Marlin said. “People just weren’t ready to make that kind of change in the city government.”

City council seats will be up for re-election this spring. Marlin said she hopes the new council will address the problem of population differences between wards.

Ben Grosser, chairman of Vote No At-Large, a group that opposed the referendum, said the problem of growing wards was exaggerated.

“I don’t agree with the claims,” Grosser said. “There is growth all over the city, and (Plus 2 For Urbana’s) estimations of the population differences grew weekly.”

Grosser said he thought there was not enough research on the at-large issue before it was put on the ballot.

“There was no study at all to see if it was a good thing or a bad thing,” Grosser said. “There is a lot of literature on the issue, and what it finds is that at-large has a lot of problems.”

Before the election, Vote No At-Large struck a chord with students living in Urbana by saying the bill would hurt students because citywide campaigns were too expensive and rigorous for students to run.

Marlin disagreed, saying the election’s result contradicted the claim.

“I think students demonstrated their voting power in this citywide election,” Marlin said. “So to say students wouldn’t have a voice (under at-large) is wrong.”

Satterthwaite said the issue of at-large would not resurface in the near future.

“I just want to move forward on issues together with members of the council,” Satterthwaite said. “The voters have spoken and it’s time to move on.”