March 3, 2009

Council Recap! And A Note!



-- For our patient PRU readers, a quickie council recap!

As we reported yesterday, the City Council had another meeting planned for last evening. Most of the items on the Council's agenda for approval were listed under the consent agenda that assumes no public discussion is necessary, as the items being approved are considered routine. The PRU Crew does not recall the Council routinely approving any Ground Water Ordinance (.pdf) or Limited Environmental Indemnity Agreements, but under the Frimark administration lack of public discussion does seem to be a routine.

Our sources report that Mayor Howard took full advantage of the evening's lack of scheduled public discussion to thrill those in attendance with an endless series of comments, offered under the Mayor's report portion of the agenda, though none of his comments were listed as agenda items. As we know, Mayor Howard just loves to surprise everyone with his missives!

Mayor Howard's comments included another mumbled reading of a Youth Commission* Proclamation, as well as slaughtering the English language while reading a City press release and a press release from Rep. Rosemary Mulligan concerning O'Hare expansion. Neither of which are listed on the terrific medium for City communications to residents known as the Park Ridge City website.

The two agenda items listed for discussion by the Council last night were "Approval of Modifications to CPS 36 -- Use of City Facilities" and "First reading of Modification to the Liquor Ordinance (12-6-10) -- Live Entertainment.

The first item passed unanimously without any questions or discussions from the Mayor or Alderman.

The second item also passed unanimously without discussion. Though we are told Alderman Dave Schmidtzkrieg (1st ward) recused himself because he is holding a fundraiser at Uncle Dan's which we are told will include live entertainment.

Under New Business on the Council agenda, our sources report that Ald. Dave made a statement regarding the disappearance of yard signs -- asking that all members of the community respect each other's right to free speech and respecting each other's right to take part in the democratic process. PRUdos to Ald. Dave!

Also under New Business, Benedict Alderman Robert Ryan (5th ward) asked City Manager Jim Hock when they would discuss the "objectives and goals" for the creation of a City Noise Commission. Confusion ensued as City Manager Hock seemed to recall that the matter of forming a Noise Commission had been deferred to the Council's March meeting. Benedict Ald. Ryan is reported to have disagreed with Mr. Hock's recall. The PRU Crew can only assume Benedict Ryan didn't read one of the documents (.pdf -- pg. 2&3) in his Aldermanic packet -- but at least Benedict Ryan made it to the meeting!

Finally under New Business, 3rd ward Alderman Don Bachtard reported that the Public Works Department has budgeted money for a City-wide study of the Park Ridge sewer system, and he invited Public Works Director Wayne Zingsheim to explain why 2.05 inches of rain could cause 26 basements to flood, 50 streets to have minor flooding, and make 2 streets impassable. The answer is? Because the frozen February ground caused the water to run off and not be absorbed. According to Zingsheim the 2.05 inches of rain falling on frozen February ground was the equivalent of 3 to 4 inches of rain falling in a short period of time.

There you have it faithful PRU readers!

*Note* -- thanks to a PRU reader for the correction. The notes we received said "campus", but a double check with a few of our other sources inside the city confirms that while Mayor Howard mumbled Youth Campus it was ideed the Youth Commission.


-- A Note from the Crew

Please, you can stop sending us copies of the Mary Jo PADS email -- we've gotten a ton of them! We swear it! And yes, it's more of the same bullshit the PADS pushers have been spouting since discovering, after decades of residency, that Park Ridge doesn't have any homeless shelters.

As for the role PRU may have played in seeing to it the PRMA, PADS, and certain pastors did not get to run rough-shod over the rest of the community in pushing their latest pet social cause down everyone's throat without being subject to regulation -- you're welcome.

For those of you who haven't seen the latest round of email garbage on the PADS issue, you can read the crap pasted below -- tsk tsk, Mary Jo. Maybe you should just keep to Book Group activities such as reading, instead of writing.

"Hello to all of the PADS team,

I just wanted to get a quick e-mail out to you regarding the upcoming mayoral election. We all had first-hand experience of Dave Schmidt's role in derailing the PADS initiative last year. He publicly referred to homeless shelters as "flophouses" and "cesspools of infestation". He quoted Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged in advocating the philosophy that those in society who work and are successful are in no way obligated to help those who are not. He aligned himself with the Park Ridge Underground even when it vilified and ridiculed Fr. Carl and other church leaders and citizens who didn't share their anti-PADS sentiments. Many of the people who were affiliated with the PRU and against PADS now actively support Mr. Schmidt.


The reason I write all of this is not to dredge up bad memories, but to encourage you to let people who were not involved in the PADS initiative know about Mr. Schmidt's role in it. I recently had a conversation with a life-long Park Ridge resident who called me about the Sunday Suppers. She was so upset about the outcome of PADS, but delighted that we are doing the dinners. She then went on to tell me about voting for Dave Schmidt. She had no idea about his role in derailing PADS and thanked me again and again for letting her now about it. I think there are a lot of people out there who are looking for change in local government, but who are unaware of Mr. Schmidt's history.


Hopefully, we can get the message out that Dave Schmidt is NOT the change we need or want. In my estimation, Dave Schmidt, the Park Ridge Underground and the anti-PADS movement represented the antithesis of what a caring community should be. On the other hand, the past month-and-a-half of working with so many people of good faith in our community on the Sunday Suppers has revealed the best of Park Ridge. It has shown a spirit of fellowship, compassion and unity that I dearly hope we can continue to build on and nurture. During these tough economic times, it seems that we need an even greater spirit of compassion and empathy from our public leaders for those in society who are most in need. We need leaders who are advocates of inclusion, not exclusion. In regard to Howard Frimark, I can only comment about what I gleaned from the PADS experience of the past year. I know that he sincerely tried to find a way to make the PADS initiative work and has fully supported the Sunday Suppers. In fact, he and his wife stopped by at last week's dinner to see how things were going and to show their support. Mayor Frimark always seemed willing to find middle ground and compromise, while Mr. Schmidt was divisive and always seemed to be politically posturing himself. I just think it is important that voters are aware of the difference.


I'm sorry if I may have crossed a line by sending this, but it just seems that there is a lot riding on this upcoming election.


Thank you for "listening"!


Mary Jo"

38 comments:

Anonymous said...

PRU--great council recap. It was PAINFUL to listen to Howie ramble and mis-read his countless statements.
To "Mary Jo"--I wish you a happy Lenten season. And I GUARANTEE YOU that people like you make people like me work harder and harder to get Dave Schmidt elected.

Anonymous said...

PRU, thank you for continuing to report council recaps, and ditto that anony-mouse! The PADS crowd just does not get it!

Anonymous said...

Let me get this right, do they mean to tell us that the sewer system can't manage 3 or 4 inches of rain???!!! WTF???

Anonymous said...

No, our sewers can't handle 3-4 inches of rain in the winter when the ground's frozen.

Where's Zingsheim's clown nose?

Anonymous said...

fred,

That is just the thing, Mr. Zingsheim likened the 2+ inches of rain on frozen ground to 3 or 4 inches of rain. My take is that he was explaining our sewers can't handle 3 or 4 inches of rain when the ground isn't frozen! I think that is ridiculous!

Anonymous said...

It is unfortunate that the pro-Howard forces are still trying to inflame the PADS issue and perpetuate the divisiveness which had only recently begun to subside.

What is worse, the pro-Howard folks are thoroughly misrepresenting the facts, including the fact that most of the aldermen agreed that homeless shelters needed to be regulated and that PADS should be a co-applicant.

Anyone who wants the straight poop can go to www.electdaveschmidt.com and find it on the issues link.

Anonymous said...

Little miss Mary Jo did more than cross a line.... she flat out lied!

I will say this, if whether or not Park Ridge has a homeless shelter or not is what anyone is basing their vote on, then this is a sad day for all.

We have WAY more problems in this town than a homeless shelter (or lack of one) and the're NOT because of Mr. Schmidt.

If lying and spewing venum is what sends a tingle up your leg...tingle away. The rest of us will focus on the issues that will effect the quality of life we've all worked so hard for.

Anonymous said...

Did Dave Schmidt not have a role in the PADs affair? Did he not speak at the public meetings? Did he not have a position on it?

It appears that many of his supporters were involved with the SPC and St. Mary's anti-shelter/PADs groups. I would assume they were thankful for his support and now support him.

Is it only fair to raise the issue if you agree with Dave Schmidt?

ParkRidgeUnderground said...

If it were only fair to raise the issue in agreement with Alderman Dave, we wouldn't have posted Mary Jo's email -- we hope that answers your question.

What you didn't address is whether or not the information in Mary Jo's email is truthful.

The PRU Crew's opinion is that Ms. Mary Jo D. is as big a twister of the truth as is Carl Morello, Ted Stone, Steve Larson, Brett McClenneghan, the PRMA, and the PADS organization.

Anonymous said...

Is it not fair to say that is HAS NOT been the supporters of Dave Schmidt that has brought Pads into this election?

But rather those whom chose to twist and contort the truth, to support the other candidate?

I think yes.

And, is it not fair to say that you are chosing to USE the most divisive issue this town has seen is a long long time, to further divide our community rather than letting it heal.

God bless! and sleep well!

Anonymous said...

Mary Jo sayz: "Mayor Frimark always seemed willing to find middle ground and compromise,"

Is she talking about the same Howard that cut the city council to eliminate the number of alderman who would speak against him? The same Howard that was against ethics ordinances that would have HIM in a "trick bag," but that were understandable to the rest of the community? Is this the same Howard that was unable to find a compromise on the PADS issue? That cannot find any middle ground on the casino impacts because it did not come up at coffee with Mayor Tony? Who finds middle ground with residents under the new flight path by making promises he cannot keep?

What he is willing to do is say anything to anyone to get a vote.

Howard is an "budiot" - a bully and an idiot. Nothing more.

Anonymous said...

Just like the rest of the Alderman Mr Schmidt had 1 vote.

So why is it that you all aren't angry at the othe 6 Alderman who voted in favor of the co-applicant portion of the ordinance that required pads to join the church in the special use and license which is what ultimatly sent pads a running?

You see, no one or seven person(s) kept pads out. Pads did that all on their very own.

But golly let's focus on that and take the heat off the real issues this town has before us.

Idiots!

Anonymous said...

I think it was the Youth Commission, not the Youth Campus that received the proclamation. Mayor Howie did mumble something about the Youth Campus during his oration, but I think he just mis-spoke...again.

Anonymous said...

YOU are the ones who posted the letter from Mary Jo-and Father Carl for that matter, several months back-so who is being divisive here? Mary Jo sent this email to a very small group of people-she didn't post it on a blog, or in the PR Herald Advocate, or in any other public forum for debate. YOU chose to post it, so if any debate is reignited, it's YOUR doing. I still don't see anywhere in her email where she lied about the statements made by Mr. Schmidt at the many City Council meetings regarding the regulation of homeless shelters. Sure, she has OPINIONS regarding the mayor and Mr. Schmidt, but so do you and many others.

Speaking of the many city council meetings regarding this issue, perhaps if the pro regulation folks hadn't made such an issue out of what has been pretty routine in every other community, our Mayor and City Council would have had more time to devote to more important matters facing our city.

ParkRidgeUnderground said...

Anon@7:14 --

Posting widely circulated emails that make their way to us is the risk some people will have to endure should they continue to engage in politicking about public policy through widely circulated emails. As we originally stated, we received several copies before posting it.

As for poor pitiful Mary Jo D., having herself exposed as a teller of 1/4 truths and misinformation about the canidate we support in the coming mayoral election and we're going to be eager to expose that bullshit. Especially when, as you incorrectly characterized it as a "small group of people", that original circulation contained no less than 47 email addresses -- and the subsequent lists of forwarded recipients have contained an average of 10 email addresses.

We find it laughable that instead of condemning the divisive name calling in Morelleon's email, you and others continue to moan and groan about that jackass being exposed for the jackass that he is -- calling his own parishioners, those who dare to disagree with him, racial and economic bigots.

We're happy to reignite the debate as there really are those who weren't paying attention at the time and should be provided with the opportunity to learn exactly what the depths of idiocy are which can be plumbed by certain white shirted sheeple. We're happy to reignite the debate because when the white shirted sheeple start telling their lies again, we consider it our civic duty to expose the bullshit.

If Ms. Mary Jo D. is telling the truth, why not ask her to cite her sources. That's what we do when we post. Asking us to prove she lied is asking us to prove a negative -- can't be done. Better that Ms. Mary Jo D. prove her positively stated statements.

Good luck with that.

Anonymous said...

Sheeple; Morelleon; Jackass; Liar---is this the divisive name calling to which you are referring?

Anonymous said...

Why is it that Howard's main campaign tactic is to try to show that the other guy is worse than Howard is, rather than trying to convince the community that Howard is the better candidate?

Rhetorical question, I know.

Honesty?
Integrity?
Leadership?

NOT Howard.

So instead he has strawmen/women spew bullsh!t to see what sticks.

It all stinks.

Talk about the issues.
Talk about the future.
Talk about how to address the problems facing the city.

ParkRidgeUnderground said...

Anon@8:56 --

No, we were referring to Morelleon the jackass's name calling of his own parishioners, several of whom gave til it hurt to build the facility that now bears Morelleon's egomaniacal name. You know, the kind of name calling thing that every good christian leader does to set a good example for his sheeple, right?

We don't pretend to be above, such things. In fact, the Crew spends a considerable amount of time trying to construct new and interesting things to call the so-called "leaders" in our community. But we admit, sometimes we're just slackers and resort to the old stand-bys like "jackass" or "liar".

Anonymous said...

I'm trying to find some sanity in this completely insane town. From what I see and read, there are a bunch of self important people pointing fingers at other self important do nothings. We worry about the number of TVs a restaurant can have, but don't care about a tacky drug infested casino on the corner because "it's far enough away from me to not care about it". Historic homes are torn down to put up just another tacky prairie style monstrosity. No one can come together in any kind of harmony because you're all too fabulous to work WITH anyone, but seem to relish working Against someone or something. What's with petitons about police stations?! get a real cause!

ParkRidgeUnderground said...

Anon@9:14 --

Working with the likes of Mayor Howard and his lapdogs is like telling a cancer patient to try to get along with his tumors, which would be a suggestion much less than sane.

The PRU Crew always tries to give credit where credit is due. We just find there aren't many opportunities for doing that under the current Mayor.

Anonymous said...

More time? If you had been paying as close attention as you claim, you'd know that there were nearly 10 months of time spent on the shelter issue.

Certainly you can't dispute, that is more than ample time for all of our elected officials to have done their homework, and come to a conclusion that best suited the needs of OUR community as a whole.
Of corse it seems that you may believe that it was a waiste of time and would have been better to have left you all alone to suit YOUR needs reguardless of the rest of the community, or our ordinance.

As for the "pro ordinance" people you refer to, it seemed to me that their interest wasn't in what "other communities" do or have done but rather what THIS community does. Bur hey if you feel that they should have let you alone to do as you please, remember this, to have allowed you to open a sheler under our current ordinance, would have allowed you to BREAK THE LAW! and if you think that it's o.k to break the law as long as you have a good cause, I can tell ou that our prisons are filled with pleanty of folks who broke the law for a "darn good reason".

Perhaps those pro ordinance people actually did you a favor and saved you alot of embarassment.

Anonymous said...

Did anyone see the online Herald Advocate today? Wait wait here's what it says regarding cutting expenses....

Frimark said the city needs to extend the life of its equipment and vehicles as long as possible and "look at eliminating extra frills," although he did not specify what these might be.

Extra frills? Although he did not specify what these might be? Does he even realize how detached from reality he is?

Anonymous said...

BRING IT ON--let's bring the PADS debate back! let you pro-pads people put on your white shirts again.
You WILL LOSE. You are being used. Do you GET IT?
Morello and Frimark and their merry men are USING YOU!

Anonymous said...

hey Steve--Frimark is probably going to ask for funds at the next City Council meeting for one of his friends to do a "study" on how we can extend the life of the vehicles.
Watch and see...

Anonymous said...

Steve Macko,

I saw that too and wondered again about Howard's alternative reality...the same alternative reality that inspired Howard to also say in that article..."health inspections of restaurants need to be more "friendly" by helping establishments more than penalizing them"...

Of course...because penalizing food establishments for failing health inspections that might imperil the public as it relates to food safety isn't..."friendly".

That does beg the question of..."friendly" to whom? Perhaps not so much diners...

I can just picture the Chamber's next "shop local" campaign...Show You Care, Share Fecal Matter With A Friend!...or...how about...Nothing Says Friendly Like Salmonella!...or...even...Lose Weight, Get Food Poisoning at a Park Ridge Restaurant Near You!

Anonymous said...

Bean...ewwwwwww!

Anonymous said...

anony-mouse,

Are you trying to say I don't have a future in writing advertising copy?

Harumph!

;)

Anonymous said...

Mary Jo - Why don't you go and live in their neighborhood(s).
Why not and try to live down on lower Wacker yourself.

I'm sure you can bring your Starbucks,U of I blanket, and 8X10
of Howie and more....

If you think for one moment that the PADS issue is the KEY issue here - your wrong.

I also don't think that Ald. DS is totally against helping those in need.

To further place the blame game on him is also a bunch of BS.

You need to talk to the families of those kids.

You need to talk to those families that were getting ready to flea the area and attend other schools.

Were are your priorities!

What about the state of Illinois Bill HR 5615 that pertains to the approval of abortion that state Rep. Rosemary Mulligan ( yes Howie's mouth piece ) fought for and the people of St. Paul fought against !!!!

Get you facts straight, get your priorities also straight.

Its time to drop the silver spoon,the Hillary bell shaped haircut and relocate yourself.

Anonymous said...

Am I missing something here? Didn't the City Council pass an ordinance which set forth minimal, common sense regulations, that in no way disallowed the presence of temporary overnight shelters in Park Ridge? Again, I may be wrong, but I thought that if the PRMA wanted to open up a shelter in SPTC's gym, or in any other school in PR tomorrow, they are in no way prohibited from doing so under the ordinance.

The only requirement they (i.e., Mary Jo and her email friends) seem to be annoyed at is the co-applicancy provision. As was stated earlier...that was PADS' decision to pull out of PR because they did not want to open their books up to public scrutiny.

This is just my conspiratorial speculation, but it makes one wonder whether the DNC was providing money to PADS to register voters who would otherwise be unable to prove residency. Maybe PADS didn’t want to be subject to the same review and resulting criticism that ACORN experienced during the 08 election cycle. Hmmmmmmmmmm....

Anonymous said...

Anon. You dini't miss a thing. That is EXACTLY what the ordinance did.

It ALLOWS SPC or any other church along with Pads or any other shelter program provider to apply for a special use and licence and OPEN a shelter. It in NO WAY WHAT-SO-EVER prohibits the opening of a shelter. The only thing that put the kibosh on things was PADS lack of wanting to follow the simple rules.

Anonymous said...

Doesn't the failure of the city council to pass the "no strings attached" version of the PADS proposal truly reflect the total lack of leadership by our so-called mayor?

Here are the facts:

Howard has Allegretti, Bach, Cary and Ryan in his pocket. With those four votes, he should be able to get ANYTHING passed by the council by at least a vote of 4 to 3.

But since Howard could not rally his 4 votes, HE could not deliver for the PADS crowd. It is Howard's inability to LEAD 4 aldermen that resulted in the compromise regulations, not the votes of any ONE alderman.

Open your eyes people. Howard failed you on this issue.

Anonymous said...

Anon at 7:02 am-this type of post is completely out of line. You tell someone who does not share your opinion to get a new haircut and leave town? Wow-that adds alot to the discussion and debate. Grow up. We have serious issues to discuss and you are wasting people's time.

Anonymous said...

Mrs. DiRe is not atypical of many Park Ridge residents for whom one issue is all that matters. And if these one-issue voters can wrap themselves in the warm blanket of moral superiority and look down their noses at their heathen neighbors, so much the better.

So they put on their white shirts, sing a few hymns, claim they are doing The Lord's work, and say that they speak for the majority of the community. And so long as they don't need to put their view of that one issue to a countable vote, they can't be proved wrong.

But you do have to hand it to Frimark. He realized he had screwed up the city so badly in almost every respect that he had no chance of re-election without acquiring a new group of motivated, single-issue special interest voters he could appeal to.

Enter Mrs. DiRe and the PRMA White Shirts, for whom crumbling streets, flooded basements and budget deficits don't mean a thing compared to their homeless "pet project."

And let's not forget the departing St. Paul fathers, Carl
Morello and Rob Schultz, who helped stir up this dust storm knowing that they would soon be high-tailing it out of town. Good job, guys.

Anonymous said...

Anyone who wants to know what really happened and where Schmidt stands on that or any other issue should go to his website, www.electdaveschmidt.com. It's all in there.

Anonymous said...

PLEASE, get a haircut? relocate? It seems the real issue here is someone dosen't like someone else. I thought this was about issues and maybe even solutions. Seems the PAD issue is a dead one, what's the point?

Anonymous said...

4:05, the point I guess is that the people who were all for PADS, with no regulations for the community's safety concerns, aren't gracious or reasonable even after they won the ability to expose our young school children to potential dangers. They won't quit picking the PADS scab unless they eventually get no regulations at all.

Instead of knowing that the issue of regulations for shelters and PADS is a dead issue, they keep trying to perpetuate myths about who blocked what and who said what. Only now they are doing it for Howard Frimark's campaign effort instead of just out of some pure but ill formed preference for PADS and homeless shelters being unregulated.

I challenge Mary Jo DiRe and her PADS Team to do as the PRU said, find and cite the sources for the things she claimed in her email. Find and cite the sources for all the quotes she's attributing to Alderman Schmidt. Then I would like to hear Mary Jo explain why she didn't discuss the role all the Aldermen played in passing regulations, unless she thinks Alderman Schmidt left his seat and held a gun to each of the other Aldermen's heads as they cast their votes to for regulations on homeless shelters, or unless she isn't being honest about her motives being about PADS and her motives are really for supporting Howard Frimark, which is purely political and has nothing to do with fostering greater empathy for the needy and a compassionate community. Dear Mary Jo, that is just shallow political opportunism, nothing more.

Then I would like to hear Mary Jo explain why Alderman Schmidt is responsible for PADS deciding not to open a shelter in Park Ridge, unless she thinks Alderman Schmidt held a gun to the heads of the PADS people too and he made them decide not to co-apply for the necessary permits.

Mary Jo, really, what a silly and shallow email. I wish I could say I'm surprised at you.

Anonymous said...

Silly and shallow information in a political race - OH MY GOD!!! It is silly and shallow to me because I would prefer that Alderman Dave win the Mayoral election. But is it really so surprising?

Those who were huge supporters of PADS/shelters saw Alderman Dave as a "point person" so to speak, whether it was accurate or not. If one fits in that group, this is the way you would see Schmidt and this is the kind of e-mail you might write.

It happens all the time on both sides of any highly contested issue. The recent campaign sign "stories" serve as an example. Aside from what I have read on the blogs, I heard a conversation standing in line at Starbucks on Tuesday. Two ladies were chatting about the controversies in PR and one said "did you hear the Frimark campaign was stealing Alderman Dave's signs from peoples yards?" The other lady was, of course, shocked - Oh my god!!! I can only the imagine the e-mails flying around amongst those in the know within the schmidt Campaign (I am not in any inner circle, just a plain old voter). Yet, if I may quote Pub Dog, "we have heard of no evidence - as opposed to mere suspicion - that their removal was the work of the Frimark Campaign or of anyone officially connected to that Campaign or to Mayor Frimark himself". But if you are trying to get someone to vote of for Schmidt it is a great thing to say. Is this any less silly or shallow the the above e-mail?

The answer to that depends on who you want to win. It is my job to sort through all the crap as best I can. If I filter out all the noise and look at the issues, what Frimarks performance has been on the issues and Schmidts position on the issues, then Dave wins hands down.

Anonymous said...

This is totally hilarious! Only one comment got it totally right. Frimark is using the pro PADS people for his own gain in this election. You pro PADS people are idiots.

Don't you get it? If Frimark had really wanted no regulations for shelters then his council puppets would not have passed any regulations for shelters! But they did! Now Frimark gets to play the "I'm on your side" card no matter what!

You wanted regulations? My aldermen passed them! You didn't want regulations! Blame Schmidt!

Totally hilarious how the SHEEPLE can baa baa baa all day long and not get a clue.