Our congratulations to the winners.
Our condolences to the losers.
We're glad the frenzied federal election season has come to a close.
Enjoy the rest of your week.
November 5, 2008
Freewheeling!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Email
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
Irreverent and Unrepentant Satire and Irony
parkridgeunderground
@gmail.com
@gmail.com
Blog Archive
-
▼
2008
(227)
-
▼
November
(16)
- Happy Thanksgiving!
- Sunshine Superman! -- Updated!
- We're Gonna Need A Bigger Boat!
- Real Estate Downfall!
- Reader Soapbox!
- New Meat!
- Attempting A Municipal Mobius Strip Trip!
- Solutions Seeking Problems!
- Awesome!
- More PRU Briefs!
- Rosemary's Risky Business!
- Veteran's Day 2008 - Observance
- Fat Cat Frimark!
- Freewheeling!
- Election Day 2008!
- PRESSto Chango!
-
▼
November
(16)
Links
Answers to FAQs and Searches
- Mayor's salary = $12,000 per yr
- City Clerk's salary = $9,000 per yr
- Alderman's salary = $1,200 per yr
- 2010/11 annual budget = $52.7mm
- 2010/11 City Employees = 259
- School Board salaries = $0
- Park Board salaries = $0
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
42 comments:
Maybe now Frimark can take a rest too.A long one.........
And maybe Rosemary Mulligan will stop sending out ads with Obama's name on it
Good old Rosie...when she's not busy being a hater...she's busy being deceptive...no wonder she and HOward get on so well...both of them are grown from the same old mold...if you'll pardon the twist on an old cliche...
There will be four open seats on the District 207 school board and four open seats on the District 64 school board come April. Anyone want to run? Please go to www.parkridge.info/caucus for more information.
To anonymous @ 7:19,
Why should someone have to go to the caucus for more information? If people want to run for seats on the school boards they should just run. They don't have to be stamped with some kind of 'safe for handling' label from the caucus before they get sold to the voters.
Despite the good feelings about Obama's election, I feel depressed about the fear mongers (aka D. Schmidt) who succeeded in running PADS out of fortress Park Ridge.
At least we won't have hear his self promoting mouth going off about the flop house anymore.
Anon@1:14 --
Are you suggesting that Alderman Dave single handedly saved Park Ridge from the opportunistic interests of the PADS flop house franchize?
If he's got that much juice, we can't wait to see if he runs for Mayor.
Schmidt's bloviating, ignorant, self promoting pronouncements are perfect for the fortress mentality.
Who ran PADS out of town? No one.
Read the paper 1:14. Beth Nabors of PADS herself said they were not run out of town. And if they had chosen to stay, all they would have had to do is apply for a special use permit and license, and everything would likely have been hunky-dory. But no, they and the mayor believed they were too good to obey the same zoning ordinance that 37,000 Park Ridge residents have to everyday.
No 1:14, you and the white shirts are just bitter about not getting your way and are looking for someone to blame. Instead, you should roll up your sleeves, open your pocketbooks and lend a hand to the Center of Concern which actually has a record of accomplishing something tangible for homeless people.
ueo
How do you know that I don't volunteer?
I am speaking to the collective "you". If you, personally, already volunteer, I applaud you and say more power to you. As for me, I have already opened my pocketbook to the Center and wish I had more time to give of myself.
u.e.o:
"....all they would have had to do is apply for a special use permit and license, and everything would likely have been hunky-dory".
Do you honestly believe this????
Anon@3:01 --
We do. But could you articulate what it is that you believe about the process of PADS applying for a special use permit and license? Other than the less than persuasive argument that other towns don't require special use permits or licenses for PADS and other homeless shelters, we have yet to hear what the problem is for Park Ridge doing so.
I have no problem with liscenses. But, I believe it would have yielded one of two senarios. Either it would have defined requirements that there was no way PADS could meet or that would have illiminated a huge percentage of the population that they hope to serve or, if they requirements would have allowed them to open in any way near there current form there would be protests, law suits and the like.
My issue with the prior comment was not liscensing but instead this this idea that everything would be hunky-dory. This was a battle that was just begining. They did not show much back bone by not choosing to engage but I guess that is their choice.
Anon@3:28 --
Thank you for your answer.
Compliance with the laws of the land should yield a hunky-dory outcome. The promoters of PADS have long said their flop house franchize is great. If the PADS flop house franchize can't cut it when subject to scrutiny and accountability of what it is they claim about their business then good bye and good riddance.
3:28 was obviously not following the proceedings that closely. There was nothing, repeat nothing, in the ordinance that would have been impossible for PADS to comply with. No one was looking to eliminate certain individuals. Talk about bloviating.
So you are saying as this process continued, even at the public works building, there would have been no protest from concerned neighbors about PADS clients? You are saying that there would have been no attempts to keep those with mental illness and or addiction issues out? Are you saying that the only issue was the 500 ft rule and a sprinkler system?
I may not have been at all the proceedings related to the ordinance but if you think the above statements are true then you have not been following the argument.
I do not believe the Council could have written an ordinance excluding anyone with mental illness or addiction issues unless they posed an imminent threat. The Council could exclude convicted sex offenders which was the reason for the 500 foot rule.
You don't have to be vetted by the caucus to run, but the caucus has an event in January in which all candidates for both 207 and 64, slated and unslated, have a forum to address the public. The caucus is made up of numerous groups, churches, schools, civic clubs, etc. from all over the 207 and 64 districts so represent a good cross-section of interested citizens on which to practice your stump speech. Worth considering, at least.
parkridgeunderground spouts "Compliance with the laws of the land should yield a hunky-dory outcome." This the same type of argument used by oppressors everywhere to hold down the oppressed.
I think Dave S. has the stones
to run a tough well thought out campaign that will have positive results this spring!
Thank you.
And yet the council was about to ignore (aka amend to the point of rendering useless) the 500 ft rule and go forward with the new ordinance wording. How was this not a total win for PADS who wouldve gotten what they wanted, where they wanted it, if only for the small details of filling out a form, paying the equivalent of a vehicle sticker, and being held accountable???? OOPS Thats where they got stumped....
The PW site seemed better for Park Ridge (at face value at least) but it seems not so good for PADS and their master plan.
Accountability was the deal breaker huh?
And now PRMA has come out and stated plainly that they will not open any shelters without PADS...
What happened to the "mission" and the "good Christians" and the "help thy neighbor(s)" and "Samaritans" "doing unto others"???
My my, your white shirt seems to need a washing...
I believe they backed down due to an issue of costs. Fighting a battle cost $$$. Laywers, time, paperwork, planning, ect. PADS would be better utilizing their money on thier program, not fighting a battle. Choose your wars, not your battles!
Anon(s?) at 1:18 and 1:24:
The only fear mongering, bloviating and ignorant, self promoters that were involved in the PADs debacle were Howie, PADS/PRMA, the white shirt brigage . . . and YOU. If we're talking fortress mentality, that would be the Fortress of Stupidity currently entrenched around City Hall - with the sole consistent and notable exception being (you guessed it) Alderman Dave.
Let me be among the first to pull out my checkbook and contribute to the Schmidt campaign - should he choose to run for mayor. I'm sure I won't be the last.
Anon@4:05, first, please do not make us out to be villians if we do not want drunken, high, mentally unstable homeless people wandering around town. Second, unfortunately, the truth is, it would have been unconstitutional to say that anyone with a mental health issue or an addition issue is not allowed, so no, it wouldn't have happened. On the other hand, if, after the shelter opened and one of the guests did cause a disturbance, I'm sure it would have reported to PADS and they would have been under pressure to not allow THAT particular guest to stay at that site. My question for you is why is this a bad thing? Don't the surrounding residents have the right to enjoy their property without a drunk person vomiting on their lawn? The answer is yes, they do.
I've no doubt those that supported PADS had nothing but the best of intentions; but when an individual has an addition or mental health problem, they don't need volunteers, they need professional help. By allowing them to continue to abuse substances or not take their meds and roam from church to church, you DON'T help them, you enable them.
what homeless person is going to admit they are a sex offender? Really, I want to know you idiot if you really think a potential pads client would say, Yep, I'm a convicted sex offender!!!
I'm with seeking nessie...where do I send the check?
Not sure how exactly the homeless are "oppressed?" There are a variety of reasons one can become homeless, but oppression isn't one of them.
anon 10:24:
Isnt there a whole registration process for those sex offender that have been caught? Now were you meaning the ones who havent been caught yet?
But one concern, I believe, was that the homeless shelters could be a place for a "registered" sex offender to evade a permanent address to register under. Maybe do a little flying under the radar?
Im all for innocent until proven guilty but after guilty, some are required to register so that others can be aware and informed about them. The lack of background check (or adequate checls) with the "Just trust us, we're PADS..." explanation was a big concern. They appeared to be enabling someone who may want to abuse the system.
Hey if those expensive condos uptown don't sell.....then what?
I think we have a huge white elephant
on our hands - here!
Hopefully, we are wrong here but I don't see much activity going on.
Anon@10:24-
"...An offender must register any and all places he or she resides for a period of 3 or more days in a calendar year. If an offender changes his or her address, he or she must inform the local law enforcement agency in which they reside of the move, and the law enforcement agency in which they are moving to within 3 days of that move...(This means cumulative days; it does not necessarily have to be 3 consecutive days.)
It is unlawful for a child sex offender to be present in any school building or property, or loiter within 500 feet of school property without the permission of the superintendent or school board, or in the case of a private school the principal unless the child sex offender is a parent of a child at that school, and the parent is on school grounds for..."
(and theres a list of approved reasons with restrictions)
So they are REQUIRED to admit (in not so many words) that they are a convicted sex offender by law! Its just called registration...
But Im sure that it is possible that these rules are sometimes overlooked. Thats why there was concern over the quality of the background checks that PADS would do. It may be on the honor system. And you would trust a convicted criminal to have honor right?
To all of the anti-PADS, I'm with you. When do we start digging the moat around FORTRESS PARK RIDGE.
you wouldn't want to get you white shirt dirty, now would you?
Why don't you take in one of the 3 homeless people in park ridge if you have so much time on your hands? I would be ashamed of myself if I was a pads supporter these days. They've made fools of themselves with all their name calling.
Let's see, ANYONE opposed to their view: racist, bigot, jackal, snake. And making nasty comments in Church too!!! WOW, I'm impressed with the way you all talk the talk. I truly feel sorry for your children. If you're all talking like that God only knows what your children are absorbing. I'm going to warn my children to stay away!!!
anon 2:33:
I do not disagree with your post but I do find something very ironic. Many of the vocal group of SPC parents are very much against this position taken by their parish and Fr. Carl, and yet instead of doing as you suggest and keeping their kids away, they are fighting to have their kids educated in the very place with whom they have this huge disagreement. It is like they are saying " you do not understand the risk and do not care about the city, the parish or the kids at SPC.....now here you go. Teach my kid!!"
we've been Catholics all these years DESPITE the priests, not because of them. Likewise DESPITE the holier than thou pads supporters.
I will continue to volunteer, have my kids continue to help w/volunteering, but definitely not w/ white shirts, prancing around to make sure everyone knows what a good christian, catholic, we are.
I am a member of St. Paul of the Cross Parish, I am against the PADS shelter, and I think that Fr. Carl Morello (of the "Morello Parish Life Center") is a whiny, sanctimonious and pompous ass. But I was a St. Paul parishioner before Carl Morello ever became a priest, and I'll still be there after the Archdiocese finds some other place to stick him. I will not let him and his idiotic and divisive brainstorms (like the PADS shelter) drive me away.
I can see the few people who still read the vitriol spewed on this cowards blog are having a good time talking to themselves. The rest of Park Ridge has gotten past any curiosity that might have existed when the crackpots who publish this mean and spiteful garbage first started their hate campaign.
Anon@5:07 --
Our meter says otherwise and the crew is humbled by it.
Anon @ 10:24...the funny thing about criminals, (like sex offenders), is that they don't follow the laws....hhmm wasn't that PADS problem? They didn't want to follow the law?
I find it both interesting and troubling how certain people - like Fr. Morello, for example - can say or do things that are arrogant, mean-spirited, or just plain stupid and get away with it. Yet the moment they are legitimately criticized, it's the critics who end up getting lambasted.
The attitude that "Father" (or "Reverend") can do no wrong and is above criticism because he's a priest (or minister) is one of the reasons why pedophiles in Roman collars got away with decades of abuse of children, and why con artists in Roman collars continue to get away with looting church coffers - including Fr. Mark Sovillo, who pleaded guilty to stealing nearly $200,000 from St. Margaret Mary parish on the North Side of Chicago; Fr. Brian Lisowski, who pleaded guilty to stealing about $1 million from St. Bede parish on the Southwest Side of the city; and Fr. Robert Wielosinski, who pleaded guilty to stealing more than $200,000 from Our Lady of the Snows, also on the Southwest Side.
And that's why the Catholic Church has been paying tens of millions of dollars in court judgments and settlements.
Vey nice SPC Sunday bulletin message today.
Don't hold your breath waiting for Mr. Morello to explain his previous statement about the "racial and economic bigots" here in Park Ridge and don't expect him to come out against his pal, Robert O'Neill, and his rather unique "Open Letter of Contempt" in the Herald Advocate on Thursday.
Probably not too wise to wait on Mr. Larson to delievr on his statement about how the PRMA has been / will be tyring to bring the community together.
What's the word I am looking for...?
From Gene:
We have seen the election results.
The people have spoken. Now is the time to work together as one.
We are all Americans.
Thank you.
Post a Comment