-- is not like the others. Can you spot the difference?
by: digitalgod.deviantart.com
Beginning excerpts from three letters printed in today's edition of the Herald-Advocate:
Ministers didn't plan to be near schools
If you've been reading the Herald-Advocate, you know that the Park Ridge Planning and Zoning Commission recently voted that homeless shelters cannot be located within 500 feet of a school. The City Council must now decide whether or not to adopt the P&Z Commission's recommendation.
Here's what you may not know - on Jan. 30, 2008, the Rev. Amity Carrubba, pastor of St. Mary's Episcopal church, sent a letter to the neighbors of St. Mary's. In it, she wrote: "The Park Ridge Ministerial Association (PRMA) understood the host parish needed to be selected WITH GREAT CARE IN PARTICULAR RULING OUT ANY CHURCH WITH AN ON-SITE SCHOOL." (all caps added by me for emphasis)....
M. Cohen Park Ridge
PADS should be a local discussion
At the Oct. 6 City Council meeting, Alderman Bach proposed that the 500 ft. distance between PADS and a school be replaced with a time separation. I believe TIME is a better separation. PADS guests should be required to leave the premises at least one hour before school starts, or whatever time span the council and Zoning Commission decide.
At the last Zoning Commission meeting, the Commission was asked "why 500 feet?" the answer was, "That's what others do." Must Park Ridge blindly follow others? Cannot we think outside of the box? Does that mean that a shelter could operate 501 feet from a school DURING SCHOOL HOURS?...
Roger Loeffler Park Ridge
Try Civil Behavior lessons on PADS
Thank you to the City Council for providing a forum on Sept. 29 for the Park Ridge community to further discuss the PADS issue. After hearing and reading the arguments on both sides, I strongly support a PADS shelter in Park Ridge. A PADS shelter in Park Ridge presents a real-life opportunity to demonstrate the District 64 Civil Behavior values and skills at work:...
Annalise Herman Park Ridge
That's right faithful PRU readers -- only the first letter writer actually understands the issues and questions before the Planning and Zoning Commission, City Council, and the Park Ridge community. PRUdos to M. Cohen! The second two writers don't get it. But we can't say for certain if their ignorance is willful or not -- we feel it probably is. They can't really be dumb enough to ignore the issues and questions of regulations in general for any and all homeless shelters and the organizations that operate them, can they? We wonder why that is.
October 16, 2008
One of these things --
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
35 comments:
Great post and great writing by M Cohen. The ridiculousness of this all! The PRMA has been behaving out of line, contradicting themselves, and truly not taking in consideration anything more than their own agenda. They will not listen to compromise, will not look at optio and instead look down at people who have realistic concerns. I don't understand their stronghold with the exception of helping Frimark in re-election !
Why won't the aldermen listen to their constituents and the facts and instead let the PRMA and Frimark boss them around?! ALDERMEN wake up and listen to the facts, the evidence, and the knowledge brought forth to you. Understand this is a greater issue than just the PRMA opening up a homeless shelter!
Signed...Completely Annoyed
anon @ 10:29 hit the nail on the head regarding this unholy alliance between frimark and the prma. frimark figures that his prma allies can get the sheep in their "flocks" to forget about all his kinky deals for napleton, adreani, and his other contributors and friends.
religion and politics is a really bad combination. thanks, frimark and the prma, for proving it on a local level.
I am so sick of this issue. Put it on the ballot and let us speak.
The comments from PRMA that "the majority" of residents support the shelter are so FREAKING WRONG. Out of touch much?
Let us vote. Then end it. Move on.
The grapevine and mojo wires are heating up...
I've heard a compromise is in the works and the information has been passed to all the aldermen...watch your IOMA drawers there boys...
Supposedly the Public Works Service Center will be offered up as a site for a PADS shelter...but the very best part is that supposedly the city will "partner" with the PRMA, and it's being claimed that the PRMA will be considered the "operator" of the shelter, while the city will be considered the "applicant"...and the PADS folks will be let off the hook for any co-applicancy for licensing and/or regulation...
What value the PRMA brings to the "unholy alliance" of such a "partnership" is beyond me...but then, I'm not looking to insulate the PADS folks from having to stand before a public body and answer questions about their organization...
I surely hope this is only a rumor...unfounded and untrue...I would hate to think our elected officials would commit city property and resources to this farce of an operation...and then not even demand accountability...
What's the phrase...BOHICA?
Exactly.
you mean the Public Works place that has bad ventilation?
nice....and CLASSY too!
This "nice compromise" just appeared in a news story on the Herald-Advocate website. Bach is quoted, in his role as Public Works chairman, as supporting it. Anyone hear from Ald. Ryan, in whose 5th ward this will be?
Whoot!! Way to go St. Mary's neighbors and Concerned SPC parents...
Frimark, Bach, DiPietro and Allegretti are still tools...but at least this keeps it a reasonable distance away from your kids and your homes...
I still hope folks will press to have PADS or any other shelter operators held accountable for THEIR programs through a licensing process...deny it as they will, PADS is THE operator of their farce of a program...and it is PADS (or some other shelter operator) whose volunteers will be running the shelter after going through PADS' (or some other shelter operators) "volunteer training"...
Roger Loeffler is a volunteer for one of the Chicago Archdiocese steering committees or something. Talk about tools. Nice letter, Rog, you old tool. Looks like you're Howard Frimark's tool on this one. Obvious set up of a letter naming Schmidt as not offering any compromises while now Howard Frimark tries to sell himself as having brokered a deal and compromise on this. So who's your brain Howard? Come on, let everybody in on the secret.
Anon@7:15 --
We can't speak to a set up, if any, but it sure looks like Mr. Loeffler does indeed have strong ties to one of the Archdiocese organizations -- the Catholic Campaign for Human Development.
We did find Mr. Loeffler's name listed as a member of the CCHD's Allocations Committee.
Link -- http://www.archchicago.org/departments
/peace_and_justice/pdf/cchd/
cchd_annual_report_06.pdf
Thanks for the tip.
I agree with Bean. This is a clear win for the health and safety of our kids. I'm breathing a little easier but I'm not too happy about hearing that even more of our city resources could be going to this shelter business.
Well done, SPC parents. All the research and meetings and sticking to your guns when it was the unpopular position paid off. You conducted yourselves with grace and class and made a fine example for a large portion of SPC. Kudos.
So many who knew in their hearts and guts that PADS had no rightful place among innocent little students, lieblings, but could not speak out for various reasons are also smiling a big sigh of relief tonight. I can think of quite a few SPC teachers / staff...
Thank you, thank you, again thank you...
And thank YOU, PRU, for being the antidote to the Herald Advocate! TBKA!
And let us all remember, there is still NOTHING preventing a single bleached-button-down wearer from lending a hand to the homeless. What we do not need are any more plaintive appeals from the god squad; you are as free to help tonight as you were 6 months ago.
m cohen is awesome!
Anon@7:48 --
Much obliged.
All should keep in mind that if this compromise is put in place by the council there are community interests that should still be considered and guarded.
Remember, the council still has to adopt a zoning text amendment allowing temporary overnight homeless shelters to operate in Park Ridge, and under what restrictions, if any. And they still have to consider what, if any, licensing regulations will also apply.
apparently, it's not a rumor after all about the public works building.
http://www.pioneerlocal.com/parkridge/news/1226260,pr-padsatpw-101608-s1.article
Thanks to Anon 8:39pm for posting the link -- that's the article mentioned in my earlier post. Looking for the press to realize that Ryan should comment. 5th Ward residents -- what do you think about this?
Well I can guess that after trying to sell the PR folks a line of bull ____, frymark is praying that the shelter will go through, cause it should be the only way of him getting votes to be re-elected...
anyone else care to join him????
Robert Ryan is my alderman, fwiw. Of course Mr. Ryan should comment but he is probably as unavailable for press comments as he has shown himself to be for people in the fifth ward. I am somewhat pleased that talk of where to put a PADS has moved from predominantly residential areas and inside schools to a public building. I have to say it should not have been this hard to get our representatives to think of residents first and not the PADS first. The drawnout process has left a bitter taste in my mouth.
I am relieved that it appears that SPC may no longer be targeted as the site for a homeless shelter. HOWEVER, we still need to be vigilant about the language of the zoning with regard to proximity of any future shelters to schools or daycare centers. This is still not over!
So I kinda feel like I am at the optometrist - Which is better/same/worse?:
Is it any better to give a voice to only Park Ridge residents? I know for a fact that there are non-residents who send their kids to SPC. So it would seem that Mr. Loeffler does not think they have a right to speak as a concerned parent. It's not their community, just their children.
I also know for a fact that some Park Ridge citizens send their kid(s) to school beyond the PR city limits...
But I dont think he would agree that maybe the Park Ridge citizens who dont have children at these schools should be left out? It's not their children, just their community?
Better/same/worse?
Does he or Mrs. Herman fit into one of the aforementioned categories?
Or maybe we should listen to all interested parties?
I think the forum for non-resident parents of SPC students would be within the school board - or the parish. As parishioners and parents their voice deserves to be heard. It can be argued that they have no say in how our city operates, but before I say that remember how mucho dinero was spent by Park Ridge trying to control the O'Hare expansion?
9:29 PM is on to something! Frimark is desperate for votes and is trying to buy them with favors, like a PADS shelter. And our Christian leaders are corrupting city politics by seducing the Mayor with votes. Neither the PRMA nor the Mayor gives a damn about Park Ridge and its citizens.
I will not lie.... I have not read through all the comments here but I do wonder about something. Is it me or does it not make sense when the PRMA gets excited that 300people show up for a rally/prayer vigil and they think that that is the majority of the town. The town has over 36,000 residence. Since when did 300 become a majority of 36,000? Just wondering.
JR
The mayor is ringing the phones for all of his cronies such a Rosemary,
Dan K.,and more........
So as to the questions raised here...yes its a group effort to get the PADS - passed!
Yes - Its part of the " pro choice gang to see that the PADS get through.
I wonder...is Frimark looking for federal dollars again.
Usually he goes to his buddies within the fed or the state levels
to do that.
I believe there's more to it than the eye can see with this PADS.
Thanks.
To 9:59 pm. I couldn't agree with you more. All of this has left me questioning why I moved here to begin with.
The mayor's new plan changes the city's involvement from being the licensing authority to being the operator of the shelter. There are a few questions that should be answered before we move forward on this idea.
What city resources will be used for the ongoing operation of this shelter? For example, does the city intend to provide staff oversight? Or police presence (even if it isn't full time)? Or additional expenditure on heat or lights? How about cleaning the conference room and restrooms after the guests leave? Are these acceptable uses of the city's money, especially since most of the guests will not be residents of Park Ridge?
We should not decide to make serving the homeless part of the PR government's mission without open discussion and agreement on the programs. We need to ensure that we all know what programs are being put into place and how much they will cost before we proceed.
I'll add this - the 500 foot restriction language needs to stay in the zoning text. Same with the co-applicancy. PADS must be made to show its hand. They are bad news.
Anyone else smell a rat on the timing of this press release? What gives? More than we'll ever know, to be certain. Credit goes to St Mary's neighbors and SPC parents, but this is bigger than any neighbor or parent posse...
It'd be mighty handy to get PADS in under Frimark's plan 3.0 and then switch gears after a few months and try to shove it down a school/church community's throat again.
With all that has been brought to the surface about the way PADS conducts itself, and more, all that cannot be brought to the surface because of the suppression of PADS related crime info, Park Ridgers should remain firmly against PADS - keep this organization out of town. Aid can be ministered without PADS being involved.
No PADS!!!
To 9:30 AM - Should we add liability insurance and ambulance costs to your list?
I agree, we need numerous questions answered. Where is the funding coming from? Tax dollars? Besides why tax dollars, what will suffer? What about liability? I can see a nice law suit one day and I guess OUR tax dollars will have to cover this. I know that churches, not that I am for PADS sights at churches near schools, have kitchens. Does the works building have a kitchen or our we going to use tax dollars to cater nice expensive hot meals? Like mentioned above, lights, heat, clean-up, guarding, ect.... Since, we the people are at risk, we the people should decide through a vote!
I have issues with this for a couple of reasons. After reading some posts on here, I checked with several people that I know who live in Arlington Heights. It's not a pretty picture. The homeless hang out all over the train station bothering the riders. Residents have told me they no longer go their library because the homeless are bathing in the bathrooms, stealing coats, etc. For all the money they put into the downtown area, it sure doesn't seem like the residents are enjoying it.
I'm happy for SPS parents, but the shelter will still be here and my fear is it will bring these types of problems.
Also, what if one of the guests is hurt in the Public Works Building. Is the city, with its deep pockets, setting itself, and therefore us, up for a law suit?
I know the people I will NOT be voting for at the next election.
9:21 AM -- The PADS plan isn’t part of the pro-choice gang's agenda, it belongs to the pro-life group. The federal dollars that support it come from a program started by George W. Bush. The concept was introduced by Ronald Reagan, but gained momentum in 2001 by the executive order of Bush to create The Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiative. David Kuo’s book, “Tempting Faith, An Inside Story of Political Seduction” has all the details.
A11:12 - Thank you so much for responding to A9:21 in such a calm and non-threatening manner.
I was rather inclined to respond with "What the **** kind of crack are you smoking?"
A9:21 needs to pay attention and at least make a token attempt to not confuse the issues (though I know that this may be hard for A:29 to do given the clear misdirected tunnel vision).
PADS is not a "Republican" or "Democratic" issue. And demonizing members of either party provides benefit to no one in resolving the PADS issue.
But since A9:21 has brought the topic into play, let's all take a moment to at least pretend to look at the facts. A9:21 names Democrats as being the Mayor's "cronies". Had A9:21 taken half a second to check, and engaged even a dozen brain cells, A9:21 would have recalled that the Mayor is (or at least USED TO BE - wonder how those winds are blowing these days) a Republican favored son who continues to take every opportunity to snub Democrats. Until, of course, he needs them. Just ask Jan. The Mayor rode into office on a rallying cry that the Democrats were coming to ruin PR, and engaged the help of otherwise rational and highly capable members of the Republican party with the scare campaign that Democrats were going to run rough-shod over the last election and that he was their only chance at salvation. How many of the Mayor's beloved Alderpuppets would voice affiliation with the Democratic party?
Perhaps if A9:21 could at least *CONSIDER* not blindly voting straight ticket (providing of course, that A9:21 actually *took the time to vote*), we might have a chance of building a city government with members who have an average IQ higher than that of a doorstop.
And in the interest of full disclosure, I am pro-choice, I make an attempt to minimize my carbon footprint, I do many of the things that are typically associated with "the left", but I am vehemently opposed to both the concept and implementation of PADs. I would assume a good portion of the people who are upset about this issue are similarly situated.
So perhaps I'll just go ahead and close with asking A9:21 "What the **** kind of crack are you smoking?" Really.
http://www.pioneerlocal.com/parkridge/news/1226260,pr-padsatpw-101608-s1.article
I do think this article was written to get us all to back off. After dealing with this very arrogant pr mayor at city hall meetings regarding pads, I can not believe he's just gonna move it. So, we all came up with valid factual information covering every spectrum of this shelter at spcs and he fought it EVERY step of the way. Come on now...He gets a shelter in pr only now all of us parents and non-pads supporters will back down because its not at a school. So now what? We just forget the whole p & z recommendations, so this can be brought up again sooner or later and none of the recommendations were implemented? I do not believe this mean rude mayor is now just saying "ok we'll just put the shelter somewhere else away from kids and we(pr) along with prma will take all the responsibility." I think hes gonna stick it to us all by coming up with some excuse why it cant be at 400 Busse and we will all be in the same place we first started.
Yes, my glass is half empty.
It sounds like more and more people are coming to understand this - thankfully. Keep the conversation going. YES it is good the site is not in a school. But YES now it is a public space which is not being voted on by the people who pay tax dollards for that site. Many questions, legal and financial are not being answered.
Do they think we are going away? Because we are not. THe language is going to still be pushed - 500 ft. restriction, co-applicants. All a MUST as the PR council is not to be trusted. Neither is PADS. This is a bad program that brings bad things and bad people.
Tell your neighbors, write your aldermen, email them, the mayor, let them know you won't vote for them if you are inclined. Let the know where you stand on PADS, the shelter, AND the language. PR resident have to proptect what they have built. You a a right to do so and the PRMA should not rule the municipality.
Come to the meeting, speak out as a PR citizen. You earned the right, be there.
If you feel, as I do, that the Public Works building is a big improvement over either St. Mary's or St. Paul's, then both the St. Mary's neighbors and the Concerned St. Paul Parents deserve the credit for not sitting back and letting the PRMA, PADS, Frimark, Morello, etc. railroad them.
Now the test is whether the Council will roll over entirely for PADS if Public Works is approved as the site, which is what DiPietro, Ryan, Bach and Allegretti will likely push for in return for this "compromise." As Churchill said: "Never, never, never give up."
Nobody should trust the prma gang, which includes the mayor. I used to work for the city, when grant money is granted, it must be used within that fiscal year or given back. They risk losing it every week, month that pads is not in operation in PR.
The wording in the Jennifer Johnson article is that this is a temporary solution. I don't believe for a minute that they can be trusted. BOHICA!!!
I'm still amazed that the PRU posting that detailed the declining enrollment in the PADS sites wasn't refuted by any PADS supporters. I forwarded it on and never got any response.
Post a Comment