October 22, 2008

Possibilities!



Some of the comments we've received have asked about any connection between the issues of homelessness and affordable housing. For those interested in a starting point on the subject, you can review our following posts --

1. The HUDdled Masses And More!

2. Avast, mateys!

For those of you interested in what a contractual agreement between a PADS franchise and a municipality can be or become, you can review the following document --

20 comments:

Anonymous said...

great. just great. a lot of people have said that PADS asks for $$$ wherever they go. it's only a matter of time before they start trying to tap our city budget too.

Anonymous said...

something shady is going on, frimark can not be trusted. What benefit would the govt of park ridge have if the pads homeless being brought in and hanging around required low income housing?

Can we find out why frimark is so HELL BENT on pads, temporarily in the Public works bldg, permanently at SPC school?

Anonymous said...

anonymous @ 2:49--
he's probably getting his pockets lined from PADS; he needs the $$ now that Napleton pulled out of the 2 PR locations. The other one isnt doing very well.

Anonymous said...

HEY PRU! I think you need to make an instructional diorama out of an old shoebox. Be sure to dress the little people all in white.

Impossibly, it seems some your readers do not know how lucrative subsidized housing can be for the party on the deed. Guaranteed income, LORD, what some people wouldn't give for that kind of cashflow...

Create the need, build the units, cash section 8 checks. Repeat step 3, ad infinitum.

ParkRidgeUnderground said...

Anon@4:34 --

We have a lot of evidence that anything PRU readers don't know or understand is because the powers that be have treated them as if they are mushrooms -- keeping them in the dark and feeding them manure.

But once the light is turned on and real information is provided, there is nothing our readers won't come to understand. And we don't even mind if their understanding disagrees with the view of the Crew -- g'damn red light cameras.

Anonymous said...

I just don't get it. Land value is too high to buy and build any type of low income, affordable, section 8 housing. The goverment pays all or part of the rent on a fixed rate depending on the size of the family, household income, and number of bedrooms regardless of what the property is worth. I just don't see goverment suplement rent coving the taxes in this city let alone the note. What I am missing? Nothing here makes any sense.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous at 452,

The way I have been reading about this is that builders would be setting aside some number of units for low income housing, not a whole development. From the article PRU put up that looks like exactly what Arlington Heights is requiring from developers. Aren't they getting some block grants too for these projects?

I think I remember about the City wanting to next redevlop the Main St. or Higgins too. Those would be prime areas for condos that sometimes get bought as investments and then rented out.

Anonymous said...

Here is a nice point of synergy addressing PRU's comment about shrooms in the dark and anon's at 4:52.

Not getting it is in part due to the fact that most of the shenanigans are far from obvious, by design, per the theme in that Portland blog post; things can and do happen in a behind-the-scenes or close transaction manner that the public would never 'get' because of the nature of the crooked beast.

I do not claim to know - thinking creatively leads me to consider outside the bounds of the big twisted picture, even. Private parties can contract to pretty much whatever they want if it doesnot violate the law, but heck, if no one is watching, who knows? Price of land too high? How about loan forgiveness? Isn't he in insurance - current macro misery surrounding appraisal / fraud among friends, be it on a residential level or ala AIG, credit ins, et al? What goes on in there in SW Florida, for instance? Who knows, it's 1000 miles away... The state pays a fixed portion depending on who lives there? Ha!Who's to say who lives there!? If the powers that be are pushing for this, it's not like they are going to bust you on such a point of minutia. Besides, know anyone at the state level to help out with that??? Is there an environmental firm that gets something out of development? I don't know much re car dealership sites, common sense tells me there's a heck of a lot of crud in that soil - does refitting a car lot into something else lead to brownfields / redevelopment 'problems' that someone with a nice consultancy gig can grab onto???

The whole religious angle of the homeless thing is nothing but a handy diversion. I'd pity the white shirt puppets if innocent little children weren't still on the line.

The whole thing is absurd and would be a terrific dark comedy but for the fact that little kids are STILL involved vis-a-vis the 500 foot rule. This mess will all funnel into a tragic, if preventable event in due time, especially once they sneak it back into a school... The research verily guarantees it. PADS is a tragedy waiting to happen in Park Ridge. Frimark is as guilty as the PADS criminal who perpetrates whatever heinous act it will be.

People, you gotta stop him.

Anonymous said...

another thing - was reading about the alberta oil sands today; CN is the rail line that most services that area. CN is also the only RR that crosses USA both north-south and east-west. CN is trying to buy the EJ&E rails to increase its total freight traffic 5 fold or similar. on a local note, barrington and other outlying burbs are furious, picketing, demonstrating, etc about what this will do to QOL in those places; also holding a multi-burb symposium to stop the deal...guess which near northwest suburb has anted up support for CN's purchase? you guessed it, park ridge!
what? why? for whom?

just more to the behind-the-scenes point made earlier...

Anonymous said...

anonymous @ 6:19pm---
WHAT?
WHAT?!!!!
I feel like I've been sleeping and woke up in the Twilight Zone.

Anonymous said...

Here's a question? How come no one has addrssed the homeless guy who spoke in favor of having a shelter and saying he would like to have a hot meal and a warm place to sleep one night a week. From what I've heard, he's not even a Pads member, so how would a P.R. shelter benifit him? Nice of the Christians to use him as a pawn? Where do you suppose he slept Monday night? Do you think he was even offered a place to sleep or a warm meal for his time and testimony?

Anonymous said...

There must be some hidden federal tax dollars somewhere should PADS
open here.

If not then what could be his motivation ? Votes ???

Is there PADS in Fla ???

HF must be behind this whole last min
site change.

HF must have the dems on speed dial.

federal and state level.

Anonymous said...

6:19 PM -- That CN RR might bring homeless people from Canada directly into Park Ridge. Many years ago I saw the River Grove police remove what we called Hobos from boxcars.

Anonymous said...

question for PRU: did you say that it would be illegal for the city of PR to deny a shelter? maybe I misread that.
If so, WHY is it illegal?
If WE THE PEOPLE say no, then why is it?
thanks....

ParkRidgeUnderground said...

anony-mouse --

Because homeless shelters are otherwise legal uses. The city can regulate legal uses -- it can't prohibit them.

Anonymous said...

anon 3:12 am:

Interesting connection of the two issues. Sometimes sarcasim is lost on me so if that was your intent, I apologize. I am either laughing my ass off or completely flabergasted.

Anonymous said...

so if we vote NO on a referendum to prohibit any & all homeless shelters, then it's not illegal?

Anonymous said...

Re - the CN line thing, hobos riding the rails from Canada, LOL. Good chuckle - stress release, highlights the ridiculousness of the situation.

..I suppose there could be stowaways in the boxcars, wearing oversized sportcoats, playing the harmonica and carrying belongings in red bandanas tied to the end of sticks [=my hobo Halloween costume, decades ago, complete with shoe-polish smeared on my face to represent stubble].

But to buttress the point made earlier -- it is a tangled political web of quid for who-knows-what-pro out there, that there is without a doubt a benefit off the books and out of the spotlight that is accruing to Frimark AND/OR his major supporters. Like that assessor guy in Portland said, it's not obvious; can't-be-accounted-for favors happen daily. Which is to say, support for something like a railline way out northwest, that has no bearing on PR, seems like a random and foundationless thing to be supporting, there's no freight traffic here. What could PR have to gain by being a cheerleader for it? If they stop cheerleading, will there be a token of appreciation? That is really just trotted out as an unrelated example, not the direct causal link to anything PADS.

It doesn't necessarily have to walk like a duck and talk like a duck to be a great waddling windfall...

And no, again LOL, PADS in Florida is not the point. Maybe he needs a favor there and someone here can lend a hand with that as long as some suspect city deal gets pushed through. Say he has a stucco dryvit house that is falling to pieces there from a hurricane which insurance won't cover - What did Blago get done to his house without ever paying a bill - an addition? tuckpointing? Etc Etc Etc. The economy in southwest Florida is really bad - maybe his country club in Bonita is hitting the skids and IT needs something in the way of a big favor.... Harder to know anything b/c Fla is so remote from PR.

The point is only that there has to be a mutual benefit and it must be big, and religion is probably not the point. It's not as narrow as PADS itself. This is about money, one way or another.

And so the far out hypotheticals are meant to show that a creative approach might help find Frimark's up$ide in some otherwise seemingly harmless, meaningless or completely attenuated transaction, relationship or coincidence.

ParkRidgeUnderground said...

anony-mouse --

A majority vote of NO on a referendum would not make it legal for the city to prohibit homeless shelters.

Anonymous said...

Is it illegal to make them be minimum of 2000' from a school or public way (aka street/alley) and require an almost impossible to get license???

Sure...open a shelter...somewhere at least 12 miles from here!