The Obama Administration Rebate Plan looks like this --
The Alderman Frank Wsol Rebate Plan looks like this -- 
Hello everyone! We hope you've been staying cool during our recent heat wave!
We've been keeping up with the goings on and we've gotten a good laugh or two out of the things we've seen and heard taking place.
We're sure tonight's City Council COW will offer more entertainment. Come on out and enjoy the show!
The PRU Crew is especially looking forward to hearing 7th ward Ald. Frank assWsol justify giving taxpayer dollars away from an already bloody red City budget! We're wondering why this discussion for funding a subsidy program isn't taking place during a Finance and Budget Committee meeting, but logic hasn't ever stopped either Ald. assWsol or Public Works Committee Chairman, Ald. Don Bachtard, from moooooving forward with one of their schemes!
Another item on tonight's COW agenda includes a discussion of 3rd ward Alderman Don Bachtard's idea to add pit bull terriers to the City code which lists "prohibited animals" but, from what we read, new Police Chief Kaminski is coaxing Ald. Bachtard back onto the reservation.
Another sure bet highlight from tonight's COW will be 5th ward Benedict Alderman Robert Ryan's solution for unkempt properties -- if people won't mow their lawns before the weeds grow to 12 inches high, then dammit, reduce the height allowed by the City code! But whatever you do, do not discuss issues of enforcement of the existing City code!
We just love City government in action!
August 10, 2009
COW Clunkers!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
33 comments:
Hi PRU! Good to have you back!
Welcome back PRU.
I think the cash for clunkers rebates have been considered wildly successful in spurring car sales and getting inefficient gas guzzlers off the roads. I don't know if I agree or not with giving that program another huge hunk of money. I do know that I am not too hot for the idea of giving our local tax money to home owners for their own flood systems.
My point is I see differences between the two rebate ideas.
Anon@10:06 --
We agree with you as to the details of each, but give aways are give aways, no matter what level of government is involved.
If they do somehow pass this "Cash for Soggy McMansions" thing, I'm putting together a Google Maps mashup to show exactly who got the money, cross-referenced against addresses of campaign donors.
How much longer until we can vote these ding-dongs off the council?
Welcome back!
Just some info. you might like to share.......we hear further expansiion of O'Hare will put 60% of air traffic over P.R. The next runway planned is called Granville (9center). Are the folks in that area being informed of the impact, or is Bach going to leave them in the dark the way he left SW Woods?
anon at 10:38 don't bother. Ald Wsol already told us it's the 'people who need our help the most.' Oh wait, that was the people at the Brickton Art Center.
Having said that, I don't particularly have a problem with some sort of LOAN program set up to assist those residents who are getting sewage in their homes. That's a health hazard that must be dealt with and with the credit market as tight as it is, it may be difficult for right now for them to fix the problem. If you've already fixed your problem well then you don't need a loan.
Anonymous 11:00 AM:
Your loan idea is at least more fair that money would have to be paid back to the city.
Did everyone get the notice about a town hall meeting with Jan Schakowsky at Niles West H.S on Aug. 31 at 6:00 p.m.?
Hope to see you there! Also, did you know that a staff member of hers is at the P.R. Library on Wed. mornings all year from 9:00 til Noon? "Thanks" aldermen for letting us know where to take our concerns and sharing that info. Just another failure!
PRU:
Glad you are back and there is one point I wish to clarify. I understand that cash for McMansions has a nice ring to it but I am not sure it is accurate. I cannot speak for all of PR, but on my street, and surrounding blocks, the majority of the homes that flooded (especially in Sept) were not McMansions. In the June storm, there were some McMansions that did get water because the power was out long enough to run out their battery backups. Perhaps a generator give away is next?!?
I am not a builder by profession (so please tell me if I am wrong) but I believe that most of the McMansions have overhead or some sort of flood control.
I guess it has more impact to say that the give away is to people that can afford million dollar homes, I am just not sure how accurate that is.
Anon at 11:46,
Not to quibble...but, I'm not sure it's fair to tattoo the Aldermen...your local/city representatives...for not keeping you informed about when your federal representative is available for you.
Maybe it's just me...but isn't keeping you informed of your federal represntative's availability, the responsibility of [that] federal rep? ...and if you believe you weren't kept informed about [that] federal rep's availability...I'm thinking that isn't your Alderman's "failure"...
Anon@12:02 --
Busted! You are correct, what we were trying to illustrate is the nature of the Wsol give-away plan failing to take into account need, without the arguable benefits of give-aways such as the Cash for Clunkers subsidies.
We are aware that new construction requires the installation of overhead sewer systems, which do nothing to prevent overland flooding, as was experienced in the Mayfield Estates area -- which is merely one example of areas with a fair share of McMansions flooding, and one example of the source.
Ald. Wsol's rebate plan provides for all manner of subsidies for all manner of flood controls, not only overhead sewer installation.
However, Anon@12:02, yours is a very good deconstruction and measured thought of the simple illustration and argument we offered. Nicely done.
There is a new house on Vine that was built in a way that seems to be in violation of zoning.
This house will contribute to flooding the neighbors yards and other possible flooding problems.
The building department staff refuses to enforce the codes for regular building issues.
I do not think they can be relied on to enforce any zoning that would cover flood control installations that would then give $2,500 to the owners.
~~~~~Waving~~~~~
PRU, it's good to read you again!
PRU wondering why you oppose the pit bull ban. Yes, I do know as a breed they are not #1 in dog bites, but I believe they cause the most damage when they do bite. I'm not sure that's a bad idea, but I can't say I've thought about it at great length. I'm a dog lover and in general oppose these types of ordinances. On the other hand, pit bulls are unique.
anon 3:17:
I have read posts about this house on Vine before. I am not sure that they were from you. I believe I know the house from jogging by. Can you please tell me exactly what zoning regulations they have violated and how that will cause flooding in the neighborhood?
Thanks
Anon@4:53 --
We aren't necessarily opposed to a ban. There are plenty of communities that have taken the step of banning specific breeds, and court challenges appear to have been upheld.
However, if you take a look at the Center for Disease Control study on dog bites, and particularly deadly dog bites, you will see that while pit bulls certainly have a reputation for being fierce and deadly, the data does not bear out the claim. The CDC study, which can be found at --
http://www.cdc.gov/HomeandRecreationalSafety/Dog-Bites/dogbite-factsheet.html
-- says --
1 -- "the data indicate that Rottweilers and pit bull-type dogs accounted for 67% of human DBRF in the United States between 1997 and 1998. It is extremely unlikely that they accounted for anywhere near 60% of dogs in the United States during that same period and, thus, there appears to be a breed-specific problem with fatalities."
2 -- "Although the fatality data are concerning, one must broaden the context to consider both fatal and nonfatal bites when deciding on a course of action. A 36% increase in medically attended bites from 1986 to 1994 draws attention to the need for an effective response, including dog bite prevention programs. Because 1) fatal bites constitute less than 0.00001% of all dog bites annually, 2) fatal bites have remained relatively constant over time, whereas nonfatal bites have been increasing, and 3) fatal bites are rare at the usual political level where bite regulations are promulgated and enforced, we believe that fatal bites should not be the primary factor driving public policy regarding dog bite prevention."
And the CDC's fact sheet says the study --
"it does not identify specific breeds that are most likely to bite or kill, and thus is not appropriate for policy-making decisions related to the topic. Each year, 4.7 million Americans are bitten by dogs. These bites result in approximately 16 fatalities; about 0.0002 percent of the total number of people bitten. These relatively few fatalities offer the only available information about breeds involved in dog bites. There is currently no accurate way to identify the number of dogs of a particular breed, and consequently no measure to determine which breeds are more likely to bite or kill."
In other words, it may be more effective to work on educating the public, both owners and non-owners about preventing all dog bites. Enact ordinances that place responsibility for responsible dog ownershp on owners -- owners of any and all dog breeds.
As I said, the Crew isn't necessarily opposed to a ban, however, such breed specific bans may contribute to a false sense of security for both the general public and dog owners alike and do little if anything to really increase public safety.
Kind of like Red Light Cameras.
The ban on pit bulls is misconceived. What should really be happening is the enforcement of the already existing city code of leashing your dog. There are too many owners that deny that their dog could or would hurt anyone and leave it off a leash or are not careful about keeping their gates closed. It's not the dog - it's the owner.
Dogs don't bite people, people bite people.
Leashing would help. Walk past our parks early in the mornings and watch people with their dogs off-leash running all over...and doing what dogs do all over, with nary a plastic baggie in sight.
Good to have you back, Crew.
the fees for tickets if you have your dog off the leash, without tags or if you dog bites someone need to be upped to something more substantial so that people pay attention to the laws.
$20 if your dog is off leash? Come on!
Red light cameras give a sense of security? No, I don't think so, they are revenue generators and nothing more. I will have to look at the CDC data on the dogs. I would like to say though that my concern is not so much fatal vs. non-fatal dog bites. I know that fatal dog bites are relatively rare. My belief though is that damage caused by a pit bull bite versus a non pit bull bite is more extensive due to their instinct to 'tear' once they bite.
anon: 7:08 PM:
As someone who takes their kid and also jugs in the park on a regular basis I agree that there are plenty of "land mines" left by lazy or inconsiderate dog owners.
Having said that, I am also a dog owner. There are very responsible dog owners around who do pick up after their pet. Also, just because a person let's their dog off leash does not mean that they are irresponsible. I have my dog off leash in the park to play ball but not in an area where there are lots of people. It is my responsibility to control and clean up after my pet. It is common sense - something which seems to be lacking with many today.
Anon @ 7:05
Whether there are people around or not, YOU are irresponsible by letting your dog off leash in a public park! The rules apply to you too, Bunky.
anon 9:20:
I guess in a pure sense you are correct. If I ever get a ticket I will be "responsible" for paying it. From my perspective, what I meant was I am always am in control of my dog. I make sure that he never even runs up close to a person because, even though he is completely harmless, I know that there are some who do not like or fear dogs. I have trained my dog to respond to my commands. If I play ball with him it is always a long way away from people.
If taking some liberities with the law at times means I am irresponsible I am really in trouble!! Can I ask you a question?? Do you ever speed? I am often headed back and forth to Wi in the summer and, on occasion, I have been known to drive above the posted limit. I do not drive 100 MPH and cut in front of people weaving in and out of traffic. Now that would be irresponsible!!
The rules still apply to you bunky!!!
Dogs in parks must be on a leash.
That's the rule.
A few complaints have already made their way to the Park Board and the police are being asked to step up enforcement.
Funny....you did not answer my question...Bunky!!
What the hell was Hock doing last night? He stuck his nose into a political fight, appearing to contend that discussion about the financial aspects of a rebate program was proper at a Public Works Committee meeting, even though Wsol and Bach denied they were doing that. Stupid.
I find his comment about doing away with the standing committees even more interesting. I don't believe organizing the legislative body is in Mr. Hock's job description. His time would be better spent organizing and cleaning up CP&D and leave the council to the voters.
I am very curious about Allegretti trying to block Comcast..what is his agenda? who is the "mystery" citizen who couldnt attend the meeting? his behavior reminds me of Dean Wormer putting the Delta House on "double secret probation." Something's not right.
You're gonna get a BIG fight from me, Mr. Alderman, if you try to block ATT and keep the cable monopoly in Comcast's pocket.
Oh, is the monopoly in someone else's pocket TOO? HMMMM?
uh...I meant block AT&T from getting into PR with their UVerse product.
I WANT MY U-VERSE!
Anon @ 10:30
you are misinformed....the fine is $50.00...feel better
Post a Comment