Did you miss us?
We took a break to unwind and relax. We also took the time off to discuss some future plans for the blog.
We will be adding at least one regular feature: A bi-weekly, freewheeling and reader-driven post that will be open to subjects on the minds of PRU readers. It's an idea that the Crew had been considering for some time since we get a ton of email questions, and the idea was also suggested by a couple of our faithful readers. We are hoping that the questions people in the community have about whatever topics they are interested in will be asked openly and answered by other people in the community who may have knowledge or an opinion on a subject.
As always our PRUle about "no libel -- no bullshit" applies.
We have also been catching up with the goings on about town. We see the subject of the St. Mary's PADS shelter has been heating up over at the Pub-dog's site. We have to laugh. Did you think we were kidding when we told you back in early December about the Christie's Carousel of Learning move to the Presbyterian Church and then said, "We wonder if the newly available space at St. Mary's Episcopal Church is being readied for a PADS Program?" There must not be any "knowledgeable" St. Mary's Episcopalians among our PRU readers! Or, they would have spoken up, right?
We hear Mayor Frimark is telling residents he only knows what he's been reading in the papers.
More on that tomorrow.
March 31, 2008
Goooooooood Morning, Park Ridge!
March 20, 2008
March 19, 2008
Those Mangy Mutts!
The Pub-dogs scooped us again!
Interested PRU readers may view the exhibits Schmidtzkrieg included with his response to the Mayor's and the Frimark Five's condemnation here.
March 18, 2008
Speaking Up and Out!
Under the council agenda for 'New Business' at last night's city council meeting, Alderman Schmidtzkrieg (1st ward) rose to face the Mayor and City Council and delivered the following address:
TO THE MAYOR’S “STATEMENT OF CONDEMNATION”
I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY AND LACK OF DUE PROCESS
On March 3, 2008, Mayor Frimark read a statement condemning my actions for disclosing to the public contents of two confidential memos authored by then-City Manager, Tim Schuenke, dealing with the Park Ridge City Council’s closed session discussion of issues related to a police station and an investigation of the City’s Police Department. The condemnation was joined by Aldermen DiPetro, Bach, Allegretti, Ryan, and Carey.
According to Black’s Law Dictionary, to “condemn” an individual means to “[t]o find or adjudge guilty.” The civil law definition of the term “condemnation” is “[a] sentence or judgment . . . which declares that [the individual’s] claim or pretensions are unfounded.” (Exhibit 1)
In other words, the mayor and the Frimark Five adjudged me of guilt by secret ballot, without giving me any opportunity to respond and defend myself.
Since the mayor and the Frimark Five have deemed it appropriate to adjudge me of being guilty of wrongdoing, I will take this opportunity to present my defense and then let the Court of Public Opinion decide who is guilty.
II. I CANNOT BE CONDEMNED FOR TAKING ACTION WHICH WAS LEGAL
First, and most importantly, I received an e-mail from Mr. Schuenke sent shortly after my disclosure of his memos confirming that he had no knowledge of any statute, ordinance or rule that prohibited the disclosure of closed session materials and discussions. (Exhibit 2) I also received an e-mail from the City Attorney confirming that my actions were legal. (Exhibit 3) Therefore, the mayor and the Frimark Five took the absurd action of condemning me for doing something which the City Manager and City Attorney conceded was perfectly legal.
I am not alone in finding such an act to be absurd. In fact, the Illinois Attorney General has stated in an official opinion letter that “the possibility of imposing sanctions against a member of a public body for disclosing what has occurred at a closed meeting would only serve as an obstacle to the effective enforcement of the Act, and a shield behind which opponents of open government could hide. Such an absurd construction of the law, which would render ineffective the public policy of this State favoring openness in government, must be avoided.” (Exhibit 4, page 3) (emphasis added).
To summarize, the mayor ran around behind-the-scenes and consulted privately with individual aldermen who gave their consent to what amounted to an adjudication of guilt against me without giving me any notice of the charges to be brought against me, without giving me any chance to respond and for doing something which the City Manager and City Attorney said was legal and which the Attorney General says is protected conduct. Now, that is truly absurd.
III. THE MAYOR’S “STATEMENT” WAS AN ILLEGAL RESOLUTION
Black’s Law Dictionary defines a “resolution” as “[a] formal expression of the opinion or will of an official body or a public assembly, adopted by vote.” (Exhibit 5)
According to the City Attorney, the mayor asked him to draft a resolution, which he said reflected the will of the majority of the aldermen. (Exhibit 6) The document that the mayor circulated to the aldermen and sought their support for was labeled as a “resolution.” (Exhibit 7)
At some time after the mayor circulated the resolution but before the City Council meeting, the mayor was advised that a resolution would require open discussion and an open vote. To circumvent that requirement, the mayor had the audacity to simply change the heading of the document to “STATEMENT” and remove some verbiage which clearly identified the document as a resolution. (Exhibit 8) However, Alderman DiPetro wrote to me, “A majority of the Council enacted a Statement condemning the release of Confidential Closed Session matters.” (emphasis added). That is the definition of a resolution. (Exhibit 9)
I hereby condemn the mayor and the aldermen who joined him in adopting such a resolution in secret, without any due process and in violation of the law.
IV. MY ACTIONS IN RELEASING CLOSED SESSION INFORMATION WERE PROPER AND IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CITIZENS
Finally, let’s examine the substance of the meaningless condemnation/resolution itself. I was accused of compromising the City’s position on the purchase of real estate for a police station without any evidence supporting the accusation. In fact, before the mayor delivered his statement at the City Council meeting, he knew, and had told others, that the negotiations with the potential seller were still very much alive. Moreover, I make no apology for disclosing to the public the fact that the City was attempting to purchase property for a police station before having public discussions as to whether we should put a police station there or anywhere and, if so, how we were going to pay for it.
The second transgression I was accused of was compromising the integrity of police officers and the police department in general. However, not a single active police officer was named in Mr. Schuenke’s memo. (See the memo attached as Exhibit 10). The mayor simply made it up. Moreover, I again reiterate that I have no qualms at all about my disclosure to the public. The citizens had every right to know about the Council’s discussions concerning the scope of the police department investigation.
So, in short, the mayor ignored the Open Meetings Act, circumvented proper procedure for a resolution and fabricated grounds for a condemnation, and the Five joined in without discussion. Why? The answer seems pretty clear. I have stood up to the agenda of the mayor and the Five which has rewarded the mayor’s political contributors at the expense of the residents and the taxpayers. I will let the residents decide who is right and who is guilty.
The defense rests.
We've been told that copies of Schmidtzkrieg's response with exhibits were placed on the document table at the back of the council chamber for members of the public, but a city staffer removed them. We will try to get copies of those exhibits, then post them here.
March 17, 2008
The Beat(ing a hasty retreat) Goes On!
Director of Human Resources, Mr. Mike Crotty, announced his resignation last Friday, March 14, 2008. Mr. Crotty has been the Director of Human Resources for the City of Park Ridge for about two years and is considerably less than 50 years of age, which means he isn't eligible for the Early Retirement Incentive program (.pdf) that he helped usher into being for the City of Park Ridge. Mr. Crotty is leaving to take a position in Wheeling, which we understand will not mean a shorter commute to work for Mr. Crotty.
Also out the door is the relatively newly hired Administrative Assistant, Reluca Bruce, who recently gave notice of her intention to leave the City's employment. Her resignation was announced last Friday, along with Mr. Crotty's. Ms. Bruce is also not eligible for the Early Retirement Incentive program.
Let's review the recent departures:
Joe Saccomanno, public works director
Brian Emanuel, enviro. health coordinator and asst. dir. of community development
Randall Derifield, community development director
Tim Schuenke, city manager
Barbara Van Diggelen, graphic artist, library
Vivian Mortensen, reader services mgr, library
Eleanor Pierce, information coordinator, library
Larry Kleckner, access services mgr, library
John Watson, maintenance
Joe Levatino, maintenance
Pat McDonald, mechanic
Barbara Kasan, fiscal tech.
Jerry Holub, community services mgr
Don Zimmer, plan inspector
Carl Nielsen, plan inspector
Jeff Caudill, chief of police
Mike Crotty, human resources director
Reluca Bruce, administrative assistant
18 and counting...6 at the department head/director level. The City of Park Ridge employs roughly 255 full time employees, give or take.
The (questionable) benefits of the ERI are predicated upon either leaving positions open and/or hiring replacements at a lower salary level. The PRU Crew does not believe much of a savings, if any, will be achieved with this program. We also believe the hidden cost of employee turnover -- the brain drain on institutional memory -- was not accounted for in the original plan.
With the exception of the last three, all these dearly departed city employees are said to have taken the opportunity to participate in the ERI.
We certainly are not going to call them "rats", but we do get that sinking feeling.
March 14, 2008
We Have A Winner!
Congratulations, Alderman David Schmidt!
17th Winner of the STOTW!
(Sunshine Troublemaker of the Week - click above link to read)
Carry on and enjoy a rewarding weekend!
"Here Comes The Sun" - performed by Nina Simone
Images provided by deviantART.com
March 13, 2008
Do As I Say...
Mayor won't investigate alleged leak
Park Ridge Mayor Howard Frimark said he is not investigating 1st Ward Alderman David Schmidt's charge that details of a separation agreement with Police Chief Jeff Caudill were leaked to a member of the public before the City Council received a copy of the agreement.
"I'm personally not looking into it," Frimark said. "I only do requests that are made by the City Council and this is a request by Alderman Schmidt."
Schmidt claims a former police officer knew details of the agreement and was sharing them even though aldermen had been told the agreement was confidential. Schmidt said Frimark later told him that terms of the agreement were leaked by a member of the Police Pension Fund Board, but the mayor denies knowing who, if anyone, had shared the information. He said he has not spoken with any members of the Police Pension Board. Acting City Manager Juliana Maller said she provided the mayor with a list of individuals who had access to the separation agreement.
In a March 5 e-mail sent to Maller, Schmidt wrote, "It is apparently the position of the current mayor and council that disclosure of confidential information is a serious matter which needs to be forcefully addressed. In the spirit of that recently-demonstrated position, I expect that this matter will be thoroughly investigated."
Frimark said that if Schmidt wants the alleged leak investigated, it would "behoove him to find out where the accusation is coming from."
So there you have it folks. Your Mayor is more concerned about who ratted out his toady than he is with the fact that his toady was croaking his fool head off!
At one point, Mayor Howard was so concerned about the disclosure of confidential information that he pressed for a condemnation of an elected official and lobbied individual aldermen to lend their names to that condemnation. And he did that without a "request from the City Council".
