March 30, 2009

We're Baaaaaaaaaaack!


From -- nps.gov (national park service) -- photographer unknown

We hope everyone got a chance to relax, spend some time among family and friends, or just hibernate over Spring Break.

Did our faithful PRU readers miss us? Thank you to each for the very nice email notes -- that were mixed in with some not very nice email notes. Jeez!

As we told one of our friendly correspondents, we've been plowing through the mountains of slush left unattended while the Crew was on break.

And now we're back!

We think we will commence and dispense with an email note -- forwarded to us by a faithful PRU reader.

Some people should learn not to play with fire.




Below for your review is an unsigned email sent from Mary Seat of Wisdom. The sending email address is pads@maryseatofwisdom.org. We have chosen to delete the names of 134 of the 136 recipients, as they are not responsible for the action of this email being sent, nor for being selected as recipients, and they are private citizens, as opposed to public figures. The recipients whose names remain listed are that of City Clerk Betty Henneman, who is running unopposed for re-election, and Mary Seat of Wisdom Pastor Gerald Gunderson.



From: Pads At MSW <pads@maryseatofwisdom.org>

Subject: Park Ridge Mayoral candidates and support for PADS

To:
bhennema@parkridge.us, ggunderson@maryseatofwisdom.org

Date: Friday, March 27, 2009, 7:16 PM

I am writing this brief email in response to recent queries I have received regarding my observations of the Park Ridge mayoral candidates and their position regarding support for a PADS site in Park Ridge.

As many of you know I am an active volunteer at a local PADS site and supported the initiative to find a site in Park Ridge.

I should start by stating the obvious - the best way to understand a candidate's position is to enter into a dialogue with them directly.

That said, during the period that this was a topic of discussion, I attended many of the meetings and hearings. I observed first hand the clear and determined opposition to the PADS initiative demonstrated by Alderman David Schmidt. This contrasted with Mayor Frimark who was supportive of finding a method to support a shelter locally.

I am sharing this information as it has been brought to my attention that this level of detail is not widely known outside those who attended the meetings.

For the benefit of City Clerk Henneman, Pastor Gunderson, and any interested parties we are providing the following level of detail and a link --

IRS Tax Guide for Churches and Religious Organizations (.pdf)

On page seven of the guide you will find the following level of detail --

Political Campaign Activity

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all IRC section 501(c)(3) organizations, including churches and religious organizations, are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise tax.

The IRS tax guide provides further level of detail on page 8 --

Key factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:

* whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office,

* whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval for one or more candidates’ positions and/or actions,

* whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election,

* whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election,

* whether the issue addressed in the communication has been raised as an issue distinguishing candidates for a given office,

* whether the communication is part of an ongoing series of communications by the organization on the same issue that are made independent of the timing of any election, and

* whether the timing of the communication and identification of the candidate are related to a non-electoral event such as a scheduled vote on specific legislation by an officeholder who also happens to be a candidate for public office.

A communication is particularly at risk of political campaign intervention when it makes reference to candidates or voting in a specific upcoming election. Nevertheless, the communication must still be considered in context before arriving at any conclusions.

Other interested parties may want to read this link for more level of detail.

24 comments:

Anonymous said...

We missed you! Welcome back, PRU. Thanks for heralding your return with more investigative reporting, to boot. I am a Schmidt supporter, and supported his line on PADS: like any such endeavor, it must fit within zoning guidelines -- and we needed to have zoning guidelines established. So that's what we got. For the writer of this e-mail to say Schmidt was "against" the PADS shelter isn't accurate. (Tell me if I missed something here?) Last point: Clergy and communicants alike can register whatever opinions they like, even uninformed opinions. I think the laws you cite prevent only the expression of opinions by actual institutions -- which is why the e-mail address domain ("@maryseat...") is problematic. Once again, welcome back!

Anonymous said...

...busting those whom believe themselves to be untouchable......PRICELESS!

Anonymous said...

Glad you're back and hope you had a terrific week away!

Anonymous said...

Glad to have you back, PRU.

I think we all should have learned by now that the good Fathers think they are above the law.

This is no big surprise. Frimark has been running round town for a while, saying that the members of the PRMA would be organizing for his campaign.

Playing with fire is right on. The good Fathers better be careful or they might get burned and have to start paying property taxes on all that land like the rest of us.

Hoover said...

Too many members of today's clergy, irrespective of religious stripe, view themselves as political and social movers-and-shakers, not merely content with ministering to the spiritiual health of their congregations. They are modern day Pharisees, playing at religion and politics as they choose.

Before the PADS shelter became an issue, Frimark saw that he was losing support across the City. So he smartly hitched his wagon to PADS and the PRMA, and he's trying to reap the benefits with stuff like this.

Here's hoping the voters see through this ruse and label Frimark for the rank opportunist he is.

Anonymous said...

As we all know, this isn't the first time that MSW has dived into the political pool. They are still employing Jerry Kellman, the "community organizer" who first hired Obama when he came to Chicago. Kellman spoke frequently at MSW during the election about reconciling Catholic moral teaching and voting for BHO.

Anonymous said...

I read somewhere that if Howard really supported the Pads issue, he could have used the alderman that support him to get it passed with four votes. Is that true? Is all Howard needs to do anything he really wants is four aldermen?

Allegretti? check
Carey? check
Bach? check
Ryan? check
DiPietro? check

Seems like that is more than enough to do whatever he wants, if he REALLY wants something.

Anonymous said...

Good point on Howard's influence. Every one of those five will do whatever Howard demands of them - IF he demands something. The only time one or other of them doesn't vote his way is when he doesn't need their vote because he already has enough - except when Carey gapped out and didn't vote FOR the Napleton deal, forcing Frimark to step up and break the tie.

Carey most certainly got his butt burned by Frimark after that one.

anony-mouse said...

oooohhhhh...HAPPY LENT peaceful people of Mary Seat!

PRU--Missed you terribly. love the pic too.

Anonymous said...

Idiots. What Schmidt was against, like so so so many parents, was having a homeless shelter INSIDE A SCHOOL!

These people are a bunch of idiots. They got their way. They can open a homeless shelter INSIDE A SCHOOL!

Idiots.

Anonymous said...

nooo....he was FOR regulating and setting guidelines for those who wanted to open a shelter.

Anonymous said...

This is simply a feeble and deperate attempt to keep the feathers ruffled. It is obvious that their reckless attempts to perpetuate the lies that surrounded the Pads issue are beginning to fall on deaf ears. Smart people see and hear the facts and the truth always pervails in the end. What's so sad about it is, they even know the truth but are willing to put their own faith at risk by lying about it, because somehow they believe that to lie for the right thing really isn't a lie. WRONG!!! A lie is a lie is a lie and I doubt even the Lord above would approve.

Anonymous said...

The trouble is, HE does not get a vote.

Anonymous said...

Proof is in the pudding. I challenge the good people in Park Ridge to examine the facts.

Read an e-mail claiming knowlege of what happened, having personal opinion interjected.

Read official city minutes where the facts are in black and white.

If you really want to make an informed decission educate yourselves.

Anonymous said...

For better or for worse, there is a small cabal of ex-religious at MSW that think it is their sole/soul purpose in life to save the world. They believe that they can single-handedly eradicate third-world debt, offer healthcare for all, and provide shelter and food to everyone in need. They have used MSW as their bully-pulpit to force through their political agenda while the MSW staff and Archdiocese knowingly looks on.

Anonymous said...

anon 1:19:

Well thank god this is an attitude that is confined to MSW. Are you kidding me??? This is one of the things I found so strange about the whole PADS discussion. This is not just what MSW does, or SPC. This is what the Catholic church does - like it or not it is a part of their mission.

I agree that shelters should be regulated but I just do not get the shock. If it looks like a duck and it quacks like a duck, guess what?? It's a duck.

Anonymous said...

Frimark's gettin nerrrrrvous!

Anonymous said...

6:36

You can say that again!!!!

Nervous usually translates into...dirty, scuzzy, nasty, gutter trash!!!

Anonymous said...

If Schmidt is against PADS, then I am for Schmidt.

Anonymous said...

The churches all wanted pads because they wanted to OUTSOURCE their mission of helping the homeless. It interferes with their posh lifestyles... I think I've seen Father Carl at Gibson's at least 10 times... if that's poverty then show me chastity!

Anonymous said...

Pads was a once a week deal, what do the homeless do on the other 6 nights a week? what a sham

Anonymous said...

1135...Schmidt was for regulation of homeless shelters.

Anonymous said...

Was Carl Morello having the bone-in sirloin, or the double lamb chops?

Too bad he didn't get the post at Faith Hope and Prosperity - he'd fit right into that affluence.

Anonymous said...

For MSW to even get involved with the politics of today as well as yesterday - is unlawful. Their 501c3 is up for grabs when pastor Gerry get's a bug in his collar.

Those weak kneed joint smokers from the 60/70's also need to stay off the pulpit.

We don't need to hear from them.

Let's move on!