Did you miss us?
We took a break to unwind and relax. We also took the time off to discuss some future plans for the blog.
We will be adding at least one regular feature: A bi-weekly, freewheeling and reader-driven post that will be open to subjects on the minds of PRU readers. It's an idea that the Crew had been considering for some time since we get a ton of email questions, and the idea was also suggested by a couple of our faithful readers. We are hoping that the questions people in the community have about whatever topics they are interested in will be asked openly and answered by other people in the community who may have knowledge or an opinion on a subject.
As always our PRUle about "no libel -- no bullshit" applies.
We have also been catching up with the goings on about town. We see the subject of the St. Mary's PADS shelter has been heating up over at the Pub-dog's site. We have to laugh. Did you think we were kidding when we told you back in early December about the Christie's Carousel of Learning move to the Presbyterian Church and then said, "We wonder if the newly available space at St. Mary's Episcopal Church is being readied for a PADS Program?" There must not be any "knowledgeable" St. Mary's Episcopalians among our PRU readers! Or, they would have spoken up, right?
We hear Mayor Frimark is telling residents he only knows what he's been reading in the papers.
More on that tomorrow.
March 31, 2008
Goooooooood Morning, Park Ridge!
March 20, 2008
March 19, 2008
Those Mangy Mutts!
The Pub-dogs scooped us again!
Interested PRU readers may view the exhibits Schmidtzkrieg included with his response to the Mayor's and the Frimark Five's condemnation here.
March 18, 2008
Speaking Up and Out!
Under the council agenda for 'New Business' at last night's city council meeting, Alderman Schmidtzkrieg (1st ward) rose to face the Mayor and City Council and delivered the following address:
TO THE MAYOR’S “STATEMENT OF CONDEMNATION”
I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY AND LACK OF DUE PROCESS
On March 3, 2008, Mayor Frimark read a statement condemning my actions for disclosing to the public contents of two confidential memos authored by then-City Manager, Tim Schuenke, dealing with the Park Ridge City Council’s closed session discussion of issues related to a police station and an investigation of the City’s Police Department. The condemnation was joined by Aldermen DiPetro, Bach, Allegretti, Ryan, and Carey.
According to Black’s Law Dictionary, to “condemn” an individual means to “[t]o find or adjudge guilty.” The civil law definition of the term “condemnation” is “[a] sentence or judgment . . . which declares that [the individual’s] claim or pretensions are unfounded.” (Exhibit 1)
In other words, the mayor and the Frimark Five adjudged me of guilt by secret ballot, without giving me any opportunity to respond and defend myself.
Since the mayor and the Frimark Five have deemed it appropriate to adjudge me of being guilty of wrongdoing, I will take this opportunity to present my defense and then let the Court of Public Opinion decide who is guilty.
II. I CANNOT BE CONDEMNED FOR TAKING ACTION WHICH WAS LEGAL
First, and most importantly, I received an e-mail from Mr. Schuenke sent shortly after my disclosure of his memos confirming that he had no knowledge of any statute, ordinance or rule that prohibited the disclosure of closed session materials and discussions. (Exhibit 2) I also received an e-mail from the City Attorney confirming that my actions were legal. (Exhibit 3) Therefore, the mayor and the Frimark Five took the absurd action of condemning me for doing something which the City Manager and City Attorney conceded was perfectly legal.
I am not alone in finding such an act to be absurd. In fact, the Illinois Attorney General has stated in an official opinion letter that “the possibility of imposing sanctions against a member of a public body for disclosing what has occurred at a closed meeting would only serve as an obstacle to the effective enforcement of the Act, and a shield behind which opponents of open government could hide. Such an absurd construction of the law, which would render ineffective the public policy of this State favoring openness in government, must be avoided.” (Exhibit 4, page 3) (emphasis added).
To summarize, the mayor ran around behind-the-scenes and consulted privately with individual aldermen who gave their consent to what amounted to an adjudication of guilt against me without giving me any notice of the charges to be brought against me, without giving me any chance to respond and for doing something which the City Manager and City Attorney said was legal and which the Attorney General says is protected conduct. Now, that is truly absurd.
III. THE MAYOR’S “STATEMENT” WAS AN ILLEGAL RESOLUTION
Black’s Law Dictionary defines a “resolution” as “[a] formal expression of the opinion or will of an official body or a public assembly, adopted by vote.” (Exhibit 5)
According to the City Attorney, the mayor asked him to draft a resolution, which he said reflected the will of the majority of the aldermen. (Exhibit 6) The document that the mayor circulated to the aldermen and sought their support for was labeled as a “resolution.” (Exhibit 7)
At some time after the mayor circulated the resolution but before the City Council meeting, the mayor was advised that a resolution would require open discussion and an open vote. To circumvent that requirement, the mayor had the audacity to simply change the heading of the document to “STATEMENT” and remove some verbiage which clearly identified the document as a resolution. (Exhibit 8) However, Alderman DiPetro wrote to me, “A majority of the Council enacted a Statement condemning the release of Confidential Closed Session matters.” (emphasis added). That is the definition of a resolution. (Exhibit 9)
I hereby condemn the mayor and the aldermen who joined him in adopting such a resolution in secret, without any due process and in violation of the law.
IV. MY ACTIONS IN RELEASING CLOSED SESSION INFORMATION WERE PROPER AND IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CITIZENS
Finally, let’s examine the substance of the meaningless condemnation/resolution itself. I was accused of compromising the City’s position on the purchase of real estate for a police station without any evidence supporting the accusation. In fact, before the mayor delivered his statement at the City Council meeting, he knew, and had told others, that the negotiations with the potential seller were still very much alive. Moreover, I make no apology for disclosing to the public the fact that the City was attempting to purchase property for a police station before having public discussions as to whether we should put a police station there or anywhere and, if so, how we were going to pay for it.
The second transgression I was accused of was compromising the integrity of police officers and the police department in general. However, not a single active police officer was named in Mr. Schuenke’s memo. (See the memo attached as Exhibit 10). The mayor simply made it up. Moreover, I again reiterate that I have no qualms at all about my disclosure to the public. The citizens had every right to know about the Council’s discussions concerning the scope of the police department investigation.
So, in short, the mayor ignored the Open Meetings Act, circumvented proper procedure for a resolution and fabricated grounds for a condemnation, and the Five joined in without discussion. Why? The answer seems pretty clear. I have stood up to the agenda of the mayor and the Five which has rewarded the mayor’s political contributors at the expense of the residents and the taxpayers. I will let the residents decide who is right and who is guilty.
The defense rests.
We've been told that copies of Schmidtzkrieg's response with exhibits were placed on the document table at the back of the council chamber for members of the public, but a city staffer removed them. We will try to get copies of those exhibits, then post them here.
March 17, 2008
The Beat(ing a hasty retreat) Goes On!
Director of Human Resources, Mr. Mike Crotty, announced his resignation last Friday, March 14, 2008. Mr. Crotty has been the Director of Human Resources for the City of Park Ridge for about two years and is considerably less than 50 years of age, which means he isn't eligible for the Early Retirement Incentive program (.pdf) that he helped usher into being for the City of Park Ridge. Mr. Crotty is leaving to take a position in Wheeling, which we understand will not mean a shorter commute to work for Mr. Crotty.
Also out the door is the relatively newly hired Administrative Assistant, Reluca Bruce, who recently gave notice of her intention to leave the City's employment. Her resignation was announced last Friday, along with Mr. Crotty's. Ms. Bruce is also not eligible for the Early Retirement Incentive program.
Let's review the recent departures:
Joe Saccomanno, public works director
Brian Emanuel, enviro. health coordinator and asst. dir. of community development
Randall Derifield, community development director
Tim Schuenke, city manager
Barbara Van Diggelen, graphic artist, library
Vivian Mortensen, reader services mgr, library
Eleanor Pierce, information coordinator, library
Larry Kleckner, access services mgr, library
John Watson, maintenance
Joe Levatino, maintenance
Pat McDonald, mechanic
Barbara Kasan, fiscal tech.
Jerry Holub, community services mgr
Don Zimmer, plan inspector
Carl Nielsen, plan inspector
Jeff Caudill, chief of police
Mike Crotty, human resources director
Reluca Bruce, administrative assistant
18 and counting...6 at the department head/director level. The City of Park Ridge employs roughly 255 full time employees, give or take.
The (questionable) benefits of the ERI are predicated upon either leaving positions open and/or hiring replacements at a lower salary level. The PRU Crew does not believe much of a savings, if any, will be achieved with this program. We also believe the hidden cost of employee turnover -- the brain drain on institutional memory -- was not accounted for in the original plan.
With the exception of the last three, all these dearly departed city employees are said to have taken the opportunity to participate in the ERI.
We certainly are not going to call them "rats", but we do get that sinking feeling.
March 14, 2008
We Have A Winner!
Congratulations, Alderman David Schmidt!
17th Winner of the STOTW!
(Sunshine Troublemaker of the Week - click above link to read)
Carry on and enjoy a rewarding weekend!
"Here Comes The Sun" - performed by Nina Simone
Images provided by deviantART.com
March 13, 2008
Do As I Say...
Mayor won't investigate alleged leak
Park Ridge Mayor Howard Frimark said he is not investigating 1st Ward Alderman David Schmidt's charge that details of a separation agreement with Police Chief Jeff Caudill were leaked to a member of the public before the City Council received a copy of the agreement.
"I'm personally not looking into it," Frimark said. "I only do requests that are made by the City Council and this is a request by Alderman Schmidt."
Schmidt claims a former police officer knew details of the agreement and was sharing them even though aldermen had been told the agreement was confidential. Schmidt said Frimark later told him that terms of the agreement were leaked by a member of the Police Pension Fund Board, but the mayor denies knowing who, if anyone, had shared the information. He said he has not spoken with any members of the Police Pension Board. Acting City Manager Juliana Maller said she provided the mayor with a list of individuals who had access to the separation agreement.
In a March 5 e-mail sent to Maller, Schmidt wrote, "It is apparently the position of the current mayor and council that disclosure of confidential information is a serious matter which needs to be forcefully addressed. In the spirit of that recently-demonstrated position, I expect that this matter will be thoroughly investigated."
Frimark said that if Schmidt wants the alleged leak investigated, it would "behoove him to find out where the accusation is coming from."
So there you have it folks. Your Mayor is more concerned about who ratted out his toady than he is with the fact that his toady was croaking his fool head off!
At one point, Mayor Howard was so concerned about the disclosure of confidential information that he pressed for a condemnation of an elected official and lobbied individual aldermen to lend their names to that condemnation. And he did that without a "request from the City Council".
March 12, 2008
Fortune Telling in the 21st Century.
Not too long ago, travelling carnivals would pass through small towns providing all manner of amusements designed to separate townsfolk from their money. Among the many hucksters, there could usually be found one who would offer folks the chance to gaze into the crystal ball and see the future, for a fee. Almost everybody understood that the fortune teller was an amusing diversion not to be taken seriously, no matter how uncannily he or she may present certain tidbits of information.
We are now living in the 21st century. The travelling carnivals have all but disappeared and, as with most lines of work, today's fortune tellers have gone high-tech. The fortune tellers of the past are now known as consultants. Their methods are arguably more fact-based than in the past. Nevertheless, they are still attempting to gaze into the future and make predictions, for a fee.
Some modern-day fortune tellers were plying their trade last Monday night at City Hall.
March 11, 2008
Goodmorning, Sunshine!
As we told you last week, Mayor Hammer Time Howard and his council lapdogs were busy putting the screws to Alderman Schmidtzkrieg (1st Ward) for daring to disclose public business to the public.
We wanted to do something to try to make Schmidtzkrieg feel better about his terrible behavior. After all, what's this world coming to when a representative actually goes around representing?! Can't have that. Surely Schmidtzkrieg is chastened.
Still, as all seasoned mid-westerners know, February can be one very dreary month. But March is now here and the calendar is progressing as expected toward Spring. We are looking forward to some nice warm sunshine!
So one of the Crew was given the task to look for warm sunny online images of warm sunny sunshine. And that tasky, surfing Crew member found something even better.
Nominations for Sunshine Trouble Maker of the Week!
Schmidtzkrieg, consider yourself nominated! But rest assured, we didn't call you "Schmidtzkrieg" in the glowing email we sent.
The Sunshine Trouble Maker of the Week awards are part of the “State Sunshine and Open Records” blog which is associated with the WikiFoia, a project of the Lucy Burns Institute. It's all about open and transparent government.
We're not kidding.
March 10, 2008
The Mighty Pen!
Artist, Stephen Hansen - zenithgallery.com
Almost two weeks ago, the Herald-Advocate published an editorial on the potential drawbacks of televising city council meetings; likening the endeavor to network reality television which, during the writer's strike, supplanted shows dependent upon professionally scripted plots.
'Reality' TV for public meetings?
February 28, 2008
Part of the editorial says, "So, given how quickly these staged "realities" paled in the public's patience, it is reasonable to ask, would local municipal meetings pull in any better ratings than, say, "Law and Order" or "Lost?"
The information we are about to reveal may come as a shock to the Herald-Advocate editor, but... "Law and Order" and "Lost" are fictional television dramas, not reality tv shows. And just so we're all clear, the "Flintstones" is not an historical documentary.
The PRU Crew now understands why so many of the stories that appear in the Herald-Advocate simply don't resemble the reality of what happened at municipal meetings -- the Herald-Advocate editor appears to confuse fiction with reality and must subsequently be encouraging the "professional writers" to "script" the stories they are telling! And that usually means providing a happy ending for local government.
The Herald-Advocate editorial goes on to say, "We certainly encourage residents to get interested and involved in knowing what their government is doing.
For Park Ridge, however, it means spending close to $130,000 to get the system up and running the first year -- except the city is facing an unexpectedly high budget deficit for 2008-09 and can't really afford it from a purely financial basis. To make it worth the effort, aldermen will have to convince themselves -- and their constituents -- that what happens in their meetings is worth the expense to transmit, and that the city's residents are significantly underserved without access to such coverage. We'd like to seem them consider a less ambitious, less expensive system, that might address the same needs."
Like.....maybe.....suggesting more constituents buy a subscription to the Herald-Advocate?
The PRU Crew does not recall this same level of concern for the fiscal well-being of Park Ridge when Mayor Howard and his goons were giving away $2.4 million dollars to Napleton Cadillac; $400,000 for environmental clean-up for their private property prior to a private sales transaction and $2,000,000 in sales tax benefits for their new location in town.
The fact that the Herald-Advocate takes a position that thinly veils its' own self-interest in being the preeminent source of reported information on city meetings tells us that the residents of Park Ridge are, and we quote, "significantly underserved."
Still we would even support the idea of the Herald-Advocate/Sun Times News Group charging municipal governments a flat yearly fee for taping and then hosting web-casts of municipal meetings, free to web viewers. But we are still ticked off about the archiving of print articles after only 30 days, so our "support" is rather unenthusiastic about any involvement of the Sun Times News Group.
The editorial also posed the question, "What happens when newer aldermen or board members ask, frequently, for explanations of issues which have been on the table for years -- which all the loyal listeners already may understand?"
Answer = "Loyal listeners" learn their new alderman or board member is a dumbass who hasn't been paying attention, or watching broadcasts of municipal meetings! That may be embarrassing for the new dumbass, but at least it will alert the "loyal listeners" to lower their expectations. After all, aldermen and board members are well-intended volunteers, and just because somebody promised to do a good job for you doesn't mean you should actually expect them to!
The Herald-Advocate editorial concludes with, "And those who have sat through many a City Council meeting also know that questions asked do not always have a tidy answer by the end of the program -- the "Law and Order" model, where everything is resolved -- nor is there any guarantee that there will be an answer given to the public, even if the aldermen are answered in private later -- the "Lost" model where every answer raises new questions."
And people having access to that reality would make it harder to write those happy endings, wouldn't it?
March 7, 2008
March 6, 2008
Suckers-R-Us!
Last week we linked to the Burbcopschicago post, $afety Fir$t. The piece was about Red Light Cameras. But we also wanted PRU readers to become aware of the many officers who seem to feel they, themselves, are also being used as revenue generating machines for over-spent municipal budgets.
The Burbcops' post noted the cynicism of politicians who tell the public they are concerned for traffic safety matters, while behind the scenes the issue seems to be all about revenue generation.
So PRU readers, let's play a game -- The PRU Crew calls this game, "Suckers-R-Us."
Start...If you were an alderman, and you were on a city council that had to find a way to generate revenue to help reduce an unexpected city budget general fund deficit of $600,000...
Question #1...Would you vote to increase taxes?
Question #2...Would you vote to increase the parking tax by $1 per car at one of your largest local employers, say...a local hospital?
Question #3...Would you then think about that increase for a few days?
Question #4...Would you remember the amount of revenue that local hospital contributed to the city budget through the recent construction and permit fees the city collected -- the contribution that local hospital made to the new paint job on your town's water tower -- the money that local hospital gave to your constituents for repaving one of your ward's streets?
Question #5...Would you feel regret for having to increase the parking tax on that local hospital's employees and visitors?
If you answered "Yes" to question #5, go back to Start and begin the game again...
If you answered "No", proceed to the next question...
Question #6...After thinking about the increased parking tax, would you hit upon the idea that employees and visitors may try to avoid paying that extra dollar by trying to find parking in the residential area surrounding that local hospital?
Question #7...What would you do then?
Question #8...Would you send an email to the Public Safety committee chairman suggesting that the police department patrol the area to make sure no traffic safety issues arise from the possibility of more cars being parked throughout the neighborhood?
If you answered "Yes" to question #8, go back to Start and begin the game again...
If you answered "No", proceed to the next question...
Question #9...Would you send an email to the Public Safety committee chairman suggesting that the police department patrol the area to make sure your constituents aren't being inconvenienced by people parking too close to, or blocking, driveways?
If you answered "Yes" to question #9, go back to Start and begin the game again...
If you answered "No", proceed to the next question...
Question #10...Would you send an email to the Public Safety committee chairman suggesting that the police department be aware of a "revenue generating opportunity" surrounding the local hospital, because the hospital's employees and visitors may be looking to avoid paying the increased parking tax?
If you've gotten to question #10 and you answered "Yes", congratulations!
You could be a Second Ward Alderman.
Hey! Mr. Milissis! How'd you score?
March 5, 2008
Waiting to Exhale.
We first told you about the problems of air quality at the Public Works Service Center back in early January in our post Thar She Blows. At that time the Public Works employees were engaged in discussions with the City of Park Ridge for a new contract.
We hate to admit it, but the Crews' cynical selves thought that the efforts by IUOE Local 150 to address the air quality issue with the city were, at some level, part of their negotiating tactics. We believe the air quality issue is a serious matter for our city employees, but we thought that once the workers agreed to a contract, the matter would die and their union reps would go have a beer. So we weren't surprised when we read an article in the Herald-Advocate headlined, Budget constraints may delay fixing emissions fumes at Public Works.
In that article we read, "Availability of funds will determine if any projects are completed." And the PRU Crew thought...
If the Mayor, City Council, and then City Manager Tim Schuenke could find $400,000 dollars to give to Napleton for the environmental clean-up of their private property, then they can damn well find half that amount to clean up the environmental air quality at the Public Works Service Center to ensure the health and welfare of our own city employees.
The PRU Crew had planned to rip the union, Director of Public Works, Wayne Zingsheim, and our elected officials for their callous disregard for the health and welfare of the men and women they work with.
So now it is with great satisfaction that we report to you that at Monday night's City Council meeting the Local 150 representative, Steve Karpowitz, again raised the issue under the council's agenda section, "new business".
Mr. Karpowitz disseminated study material to the City Council members and, as detailed in an article in today's Journal & Topics, concluded his remarks by saying, "Local 150 is here to stand beside these employees...and make sure we have a good resolution."
And that, people, is exactly what a union is supposed to do -- stand beside their members and seek good resolutions to problems. Especially when those problems may pose short and long term risks to the physical health of union members.
We were disappointed in reports about Public Works Director Zingsheim's tepid efforts to offer a modest solution to the issue, and that he only did so after the union rep. raised the matter before the council.
Zing, you are now the guy in charge. This is your facility. These are your people. You work with them every day. You should be fighting harder on their behalf.
But today the PRU Crew offers PRUdos to the 5th Ward's Benedict Alderman Ryan. After discussion of the issue among City Council members at Monday night's meeting, it was Ald. Ryan who captured the bottom line by saying, "I don't think we can compromise the health of our employees."
Good thinking, Alderman Ryan.
March 4, 2008
Hammer Time Howard!
Our sources have reported back to us the entertaining show Hammer Time Howard put on for all to see at last night's City Council meeting.
As some of you may have noticed, last night's City Council agenda was nearly devoid of any actual city business. But that doesn't mean that our fine Mayor didn't have his own political business to attend to and, as many of you know, Mayor Howard never misses an opportunity to use city resources for his own political purposes.
After the City Council recognized three brave citizens for helping to save the life of a local woman whose home had been engulfed by fire, then anticlimactically voted to name Ms. Julianna Maller City Manager pro-tempore, Hammer Time Howard's song and dance routine began!
First came the approval of the "separation agreement" with Chief of Police, Jeff Caudill. Alderman Wsooooolman (7th Ward) asked the City Attorney for clarification of any potential conflict regarding the agreement's language concerning the mutual "non-disparagement" clause and the requirement that Caudill cooperate fully with the police department audit.
The City Attorney assured all present that, if the city chooses to disclose the results of the audit to the public, the information could be "managed" in a way that doesn't violate the mutually agreed to terms that the city and Caudill not talk bad about each other.
Alderman Schmidtzkrieg (1st Ward) then asked if the Mayor would be seeking input from the members of the public who were present for the meeting. Not surprisingly, the Mayor said he would not be asking members of the public to participate in the discussion.
Then Alderman Schmidtzkrieg took the opportunity to express his "grave concerns" about the disclosure of the terms of the separation agreement. Schmidtzkrieg noted that a close friend of the Mayor, someone to whom Frimark had given a substantial campaign contribution, had been revealing information to members of the public prior to the City Council's having been informed of the agreement. Alderman Schmidtzkrieg noted that retired police officer, Robert Kristie had been discussing the agreement in public. Schmidtzkrieg then said that the leak of this information was a very serious matter and that since Mayor Howard is a close friend of Robert Kristie, who we reported to you yesterday was overheard discussing the terms of the agreement at a Maine South event, would the Mayor please investigate the source of the leak and ask his friend where he received the information? Schmidtzkrieg indicated that the Mayor should investigate who leaked this information to Mr. Kristie and report back to the council at their next meeting. The Mayor made no comment.
The PRU Crew predicts the Mayor's "investigation" of who leaked the information to Robert Kristie will be as fruitful as O.J. Simpson's efforts to track down his ex-wife's murderer.
The City Council then voted unanimously to accept the separation agreement between Chief of Police, Jeff Caudill, and the city.
Next on the agenda was Mayor Howard's prepared statement on "council decorum". Frimark began by accusing "an elected official" of disclosing confidential information to the press and public that may place the taxpayers of Park Ridge at a disadvantage. He went on to accuse the "elected official" of "laying waste" to the trust of the public. Mayor Howard concluded his rambling and repetitive remarks by saying that he, Mayor Howard Frimark, City Clerk Betty Henneman, Aldermen DiPietro, Bach, Allegretti, Ryan and Carey have all attached their names to the condemnation of the "elected official's" actions.
That Wsooooolman, what a trouble maker!
Alderman Schmidtzkrieg then asked City Attorney, Everett "Buzz" Hill, if the Mayor's remarks and the attachment of the names of 7 of the city's elected officials to the "condemnation" constitutes a violation of the Illinois Open Meetings Act (IOMA), since the matter had not been discussed and decided upon at a public meeting prior to the final offering of the public "condemnation".
The City Attorney is reported to have swallowed his tongue. The only response the City Attorney could provide at that moment was to offer that "it depends upon how it was done". Alderman Schmidtzkrieg offered that the City Attorney could look into the details of IOMA and get back to the Council on the issue at a later date.
With Hammer Time Howard's song and dance routine having come to an end, the City Council moved rapidly through the rest of the empty agenda.
A few issues came up under "new business", and in a future PRU posting we will have PRUdos to give to IUOE Local 150 and, believe it or not, Benedict Alderman Ryan.
Break it down!
March 3, 2008
Kissing and Telling!
For those of you who don't know, there's a guy in town who is not so affectionately referred to as "The Frog". That guy is retired Park Ridge police officer and unsuccessful 7th Ward aldermanic candidate, Robert Kristie; one of Mayor Howard's favorite pets and another name we've heard tentatively floated as a potential replacement for "retiring" Police Chief Caudill.
The PRU Crew does not believe for a minute that even Mayor Howard would be dumb enough to try to name Kristie The Frog as the new Chief. Mayor Howard needs and wants the cooperation of the police department rank and file for use in carrying out his petty personal vendettas. And Mayor Howard knows that it's a toss-up between The Frog and "Hoopty Lou" Jogmen for who is more despised by the majority of officers in the department. But that doesn't mean that Kristie isn't useful to Mayor Howard, or that Mayor Howard doesn't engage in a kiss and tell relationship with The Frog.
So it came as no surprise that The Frog was overheard last week at a Maine South event telling everyone within earshot all the astoundingly accurate details of the "separation agreement" with Chief Caudill. That agreement, according to the now departed city manager, Tim Schuenke, contains language that mandates confidentiality. According to a report in last week's Herald-Advocate, "The entire separation agreement has not been released to the City Council or the public because the document includes a clause stipulating it remain confidential, Schuenke said. Both Schuenke and Caudill have signed the agreement." Also according to Tim Schuenke, the city council agreed to a general framework for the terms of the separation agreement in closed session; for the first time, Chief Caudill's separation agreement will be the subject of discussion in open session at tonight's council meeting.
The PRU Crew does believe that the terms of the agreement should be subject to public discussion and review. The Chief of Police is a public employee, whose compensation is directly paid for by the taxpayers of Park Ridge; though Mayor Howard and the city council have worked hard to keep Park Ridge taxpayers in the dark.
However, what the PRU Crew finds really entertaining in all of this is that Mayor Howard has taken the position that city council closed sessions are to be kept strictly confidential. And a majority of the Mayor's lapdogs on the council agree with that position. Mayor Howard has even tasked the 2nd Ward's Lord of the Manor, Rich DiPietro, with the job of raising the issue before the Procedures & Regulations committee; the committee will be discussing the issue, along with other interesting items, at their meeting Tuesday night. And the Procedures & Regulations committee chairman, 4th Ward Ald. Allspaghetti, is a known and notorious Mayor Howard lackey, who will eagerly do Frimark's bidding.
As we have said before, we believe a policy or ordinance mandating confidentiality and imposing a punishment on those who disclose closed session information is contrary to State law.
But we have to ask, if the Mayor's lapdogs on the council foolishly enact a policy or ordinance that mandates confidentiality and imposes a punishment on those who disclose closed session information, will they then be willing to also punish Mayor Howard for doing exactly what he has hypocritically objected to others having done?
Come on aldermorons, you know Mayor Howard may be one of the biggest gossip mongers in all of Park Ridge.
We can't wait for the twisted contortions of the pols when and if they have to explain it all as they pucker up and kiss the Mayor's ass on this one.
And it should also make whatever Mayor Howard has planned for tonight's "council decorum" discussion all the more amusing to listen to; like Heidi Fleiss being invited to deliver a Sunday sermon on the benefits of clean living.
