September 16, 2010

Listening Politely!

Sorry people -- this post was supposed to be scheduled for publishing this morning but PRU.ADMIN, not to name any names, somebody forgot!



For our faithful PRU readers interested in the City's efforts to mitigate neighborhood flooding problems, by proposing use of Park District property as we mentioned here a few weeks ago, some of the news does not appear very promising.

As many of you may be aware, the City of Park Ridge has approached the Park Ridge Park District, armed with the recommendations from Burke Engineering -- the City Flooding consultant, about the idea of using park property for storm water retention ponds. The location currently under consideration for discussion are a significant portion of the fields at Northwest Park.

At last week's Park District Board COW meeting, Park District Commissioners were treated to a 90 minute presentation and discussion of the subject with two of the consultants from Burke Engineering, the Park Ridge City Manager Jim Hock, Director of Public Works Wayne Zingsheim, City Engineer Sarah Mitchell, and 2nd ward Alderman Rich DiPietro. City officials attempted to persuade the Park Board of the necessary wisdom of allowing the City to spend $1.9 million for the project, which could probably reduce flooding for 145 homes in the area, but would have the effect of also reducing the availability of the playing fields.

According to the Park Board
minutes (.pdf) page 7 of the meeting, in addition to the reduced availability of the fields, Park District Commissioners also expressed concern about field damage and water safety issues.

Park District Executive Director Ray, The Big O, Ochromowicz did offer an alternative option to City officials -- turfing and lighting fields at Centennial Park so they are playable and available for night games. Some preliminary estimates we've heard are that the alternative plan could cost as much as $2 million in additional dollars to the City. Ironically, if the alternative plan were accepted, the total cost would be approximately $4 million -- equal to the amount Burke Engineering has estimated it would cost for underground work at Northwest Park.

The Park Ridge Park District Board has not formally discussed the alternative plan and City officials are said to be requesting the Mayor's involvement in the discussions, moving forward.

Why the Mayor hasn't already been involved in the discussions we can't explain.

In other Park Ridge Park District news, according to their meeting minutes --

"Executive Director Ochromowicz expressed his concern with the [Senior Services] agreement and said the District needs to stop the increasing subsidy. He said subsidy has to be decreased and he believes the senior building is used 99% of the time for Senior Services so the Senior Services should pay 100% of the full-time employees' salaries. Still under negotiations are that all programs that are planned and organized by Park District staff are open to all Park Ridge residents with no penalty." (sic)
~~THUD!!!~~ We're in love!!!

64 comments:

Anonymous said...

a few thoughts in reading this.

First, did anyone think that the PD was just going to roll over for having a significant portion of one of their parks gutted???

Second, it appears the Mayor has painted himself into a bit of a corner. We are at 4 million for just one piece of this project for "only" 145 homes. Considering his panic/doom and gloom about the financial condition of the city, how does he come out in favor of any of this??? Of course if he does not, he looks like a fool for has wasting all of our time with this commission.

By the way, good question about why he is not involved now - could it be he does not want his name attached??

Anonymous said...

How much per house was Wsol's idea?

This one is $14k at the low end and $28k at the high end.

ParkRidgeUnderground said...

Anon@3:08 --

As we recall, under $10,000 per home.

However, we still do not believe taxpayers should be giving those types of subsidies to private homeowners for private home improvements.

We liken it to the City's Facade Improvement program for commerical properties, also of which we do not approve.

What we would like to see considered is, if the City should untertake to perform underground work, can the effort be commodified and at what cost.

If the City is going to go through the effort to capture and retain storm water, we would like to know if the City can figure out a way to use the water it captures and retains to offset costs paid to the City of Chicago for the purchase of water.

Anonymous said...

PRU:

Either way, it would take millions in bonds to fund a flooding project.

The Mayor has said we don't have any money so how can we pay the interest that would be hundreds of thousands?

We could get the same results for all flooded houses with Wsol's idea without disturbing the park land.

Anonymous said...

Is Director Ochromowicz so politically naïve that he can’t see the fire storm from the senior and near-senior community? Has he factored in all of the costs to the community relating to his idea? His budget issues not withstanding, I think he would be politically and financially smart to reconsider any cuts in staff or services at this time.

ParkRidgeUnderground said...

Anon@3:27 --

The flood mitigation subsidies proposed by Ald. Wsol for private homeowners would not necessarily guaranty success.

We've suggested looking at a way to make such a City project return revenue. We'd prefer that course of action be investigated well before the City takes the route of providing taxpayer subsidies to private homeowners for private home improvements.



Anon@3:30 --

We find the suggestions made by The Big O fantastic. If Seniors who enjoy exclusive use of the publicly funded, staffed, and maintained Senior Center aren't willing to share the space with all residents without penalty, then they should welcome the opportunity to preserve such exclusivity by paying for the Park District employees' salaries, and they should learn to live within their Senior Services means.

Anonymous said...

3:30 PM

What do you mean by "politically"? What firestorm would there be? There aren't that many seniors in town who are members at the center.

Are you saying he shouldn't piss off the seniors because they vote in big numbers? So what. He isn't elected to the director position.

Anonymous said...

PRU:

With all due respect, Wsol's idea was much for economical than the one being talked about with the parks.

Anonymous said...

"I will support accelerating the program for building relief sewers and modernizing and repairing our existing sewer lines in an effort to prevent potential catastrophic flooding problems in the future. I will also ask the Public Works Department to investigate using a new type of porous asphalt which allows water to percolate through the pavement instead of pooling or creating run-off and contributing to flooding"........Mayor Dave Schmidt

ParkRidgeUnderground said...

Anon@4:07 --

Point taken.

However, we will point out that Mayor Schmidt's statements, ideas and subsequent actions, while questionable in their practicality and extent, are far more than his predecessor offered and more than any other elected official has offered, to date.

Anonymous said...

An article in the Tribune mentioned that a gigantic ‘vessel’ to retain water under the Des Plaines Casino is being excavated. http://triblocal.com/Des_Plaines/detail/213289.html
Mayor Schmidtzkrieg could ask the City of Des Plaines to do the neighborly thing and share that vessel to help solve our joint flooding problem and to mitigate the burden of locating their gambling den by our high school.

Anonymous said...

His predecessors and the aldermen would be vilified for ideas that are "questionable in their practicality and extent". Just trying to be consistent!!

ParkRidgeUnderground said...

Anon@4:20 --

And you're welcome!

Anonymous said...

Anon 3:56

I take it you are one of the people who get sewer backup and you want help paying for ways to stop it.

Alderman Wsol's plan was only to give subsidies for check valves and other equipment to stop sewer backup.

His plan wouldn't have done anything for the people who have overland flooding problems in some parts of town.

Anonymous said...

you bring up a very good point. I have a question. Now, maybe I missed it but after all this investigation by the commission and consultant, can anyone tell me how much of each flooding issue (back up versus overland) that we have?? I know in my neighborhood it is 99% back up that causes the flooding. What is it city wide?? 50/50?? 70/30?? Anyone??

ParkRidgeUnderground said...

Anon@5:06 --

We checked the rather lengthy 198 page flood report on the City's website and found the following information in answer to your question --

Flood Causes

The data obtained in September 2008 and June 2009 indicates that the primary cause of flooding was sewer back-up from drain(s). Data from responding residents indicated
75% of the calls for the September rain experienced sewer back-up and for June 66% experienced sewer back-up. Not surprisingly, yard flooding and surface water entering the house were more common
in September (43%) than during the June rains (6%). In September, 74% of the respondents experienced yard flooding versus 30% of the respondents in June.

Anonymous said...

It's good to see our local governments at least trying to find a solution. I understand the Parks wanting to protect their property. Solutions to big problems are never fast and easy, but what I don't want is they just throw our money at it.

PRU.ADMIN said...

Anon@5:26 unpublished --

While there is nothing libelous about your comment and while I agree with your sentiments, I've decided not to publish your comment.

We've noticed for a while now the same dynamic you reference. We feel the situation is very sad and unfortunate, and not showing any signs of improving.

The issues you have should be taken up with the owner of that site vs. commented upon here. The issues are entirely irrelevant to the discussions which are taking place here, at the moment.

I thank you in advance for your understanding and cooperation on this matter.

Anonymous said...

No way do I want my kid playing sports in a cesspool. Thank you Park District commissioners for telling the City no way.

The City should do what it takes to fix the sewers and quit looking for the easy way out.

Anonymous said...

PRU, what is the facade improvement program??

ParkRidgeUnderground said...

Anon@7:52 --

The short answer to your question is, the facade improvement program is for the purpose of the City providing grants to commercial property owners for the purpose of helping them improve the appearance of their building facade.

The premise of the program is, the City will get a return on investment of the facade improvement grants through both increased property values and the assumed tax assessment increases. And the improved appearance of the building will draw more retail traffic and produce greater sales tax revenues.

We've yet to see any comprehensive analysis supporting those claims.

For a longer and more detailed explanation you can visit the City's website page on the Facade Improvement Program.

Anonymous said...

That does not sound like one of the essential expenditures the mayor likes to talk about!!!!!!

Anonymous said...

If the park idea is a no, then what will the city plan be?

Anonymous said...

How dare the Park District talk about cutting funding to the Senior Center. This is the single most organized, well run, and beneficial group in town. It provides the most benefit of any organization in by providing seniors a place to meet, and get out.

This blog is so clearly biased against seniors like myself (like the Park District) it's not even funny.

Someday you just might be a senior as well. Watch out!

Anonymous said...

Park commissioners, thank you for listening to the idea and thank you for saying no to the idea. I agree with others here who said the city should just fix the sewers.

Anonymous said...

9:01 AM:

The Mayor doesn't care about people. He and his propaganda minister only care about property.

ParkRidgeUnderground said...

Anon@11:25 --

You are absolutely correct.

This blog is so clearly biased against seniors like yourself.

Emphasis on "seniors like yourself."

Anonymous said...

"Like myself" ???

Seniors like myself are planning to run for the Park Board this April. We'll add to our membership who are already seated on the Board so we have a majority and we're going to replace the Director with someone who does not discriminate based upon age.

What will you do then?

ParkRidgeUnderground said...

Anon@11:54 --

Thanks for the heads up.

We will do what we always do -- point and laugh.

Anonymous said...

11:38:

What is funny is they do not really seem to care about debate either. For all this talk about transparency and the Mayor looking for input, their/his blog cuts off debate whenever anything contrary to their position is raised. Neither seems to have any interest in considering other positions. They are more interested in simply defending their own. Their mind is already made up - period.

Anonymous said...

11:54,

You are going to replace the Director because you think he discriminates based on age??? Isn't that exactly what YOU are doing???

Anonymous said...

1202

What? Huh? How is that I am discriminating against seniors?

I'm not the one who wants to close the senior center like the Director of the Parks does.

The only friends the Senior Center has at all in this discussion are Commissioners Brandt and Vile.

O'Brien, Maloney, Wynn-Ryan, Herman, and Biaggi are clearly on the same page and simply want to shut the Center down.

Anonymous said...

12:10,

Are you having a "senior moment"?

You said the Director is discriminating based on age. I say YOU are doing the same thing.

I haven't heard any person say they want to shut down the Center. You are making that up or having another "senior moment".

Anonymous said...

1217 Were you at the meeting? Have you talked to the board or the director? I have talked to board members who have said this is what they want to do.

Did you know the Board in the short term is going to change the name of the Senior Center to take the word "Senior" out of it.

We will not allow that to happen though, we are running a slate of candidates out of Senior Services and we will stop it.

Anonymous said...

11:25 and 11:24 said -

The Senior Center "provides the most benefit of any organization in by providing seniors a place to meet, and get out."

How is providing people a place to meet qualify the Senior Center as the most beneficial organization? And I believe the Big O was only suggesting that Senior Center staff members be accounted for as such, rather than having parts of their salary hidden in the accounting of some other entity.

It is puzzling why Seniors -- who as a group tend to be more conservative and as a generation generally built their ideals around the concepts of frugality and personal responsibility -- would condone subsidies and government handouts.

Anonymous said...

12:20,

I was not at the meeting and I haven't talked to the Director but I haven't read or heard any person say shut down the Center.

Changing the name might be a good idea. The building should be open to be used by every person not just Seniors.

Anonymous said...

12:38:

"I was not at the meeting and I haven't talked to the Director but I haven't read or heard any person say shut down the Center."

Have you talked to the Commissioners? Talk to any of them and their contempt for seniors will be obvious (except for Friends of the Center -- Vile & Brandt).

We will have our time, and those that discriminate based on age will be out, including the director and the commissioners who follow him blindly.

Did you know they've given him two bonuses since he was hired. Why is that? How much money is the district sitting on?

Anonymous said...

@September 17, 2010 12:20 PM

Did the director and/or commissioners O'Brien, Maloney, Wynn-Ryan, Herman, and Biaggi tell you they want to simply want to shut the Center down?

Who told you they want to shut the Center down?

Bean said...

Anonymous Senior Services Cheerleader,

If you and your organization have enough money to run a slate of candidates in the next round of PRRPD elections...

...and you do according to your guidestar 990 filing = $114,222 in reserves...

...then you have enough money to pay the salaries of the employees dedicated to the "meeting place" you and yours enjoy the exclusive, but community-wide subsidized, use of.

...ooooor you could up your membership fees a bit, start charging nominal amounts for all those free activities you enjoy, and draw from your own reserves instead of expecting the PRRPD...and the entire community which subsidizes your recreational activities...to cover your over-spending, spendy habits.

Bean said...

...and, Snap!!!

It just occurred to me!!!!!

You're organization has asked the city to follow-through on a community contribution to your organization, in the amount of $35,200!!!!!

...and you've "pledged" to use Senior Services for the purpose of political activities!!!!!

I'm not sure that's legal!!!!!

I AM SURE the city shouldn't give you a penny of taxpayer money in light of your revelation about your orgainization's political intentions!!!!!

ppppppppppppffffffffffffttttttttttt!!!!!

Anonymous said...

LOL. 1220, Open mouth, insert foot.

Rick Biagi said...

Dear Anon 12:10:

If you are going to falsely attribute statements to me and my fellow Commissioners, please at least spell my last name correctly when doing so. It's Biagi, B-I-A-G-I.

Anonymous said...

Since you have chimed in Mr. Rick Biagi, would you care to tell me why you have given the two bonuses to Director Ochromowicz in the last three months, and why you are changing the name of the Senior Center, or are you going to claim those facts are false as well?

Also while we are talking, are you sure you know what all your fellow Commissioners are saying? I know I have talked to at least one who said that they believe to be the intent of the director is to run the senior center out of business. Perhaps that is why you are giving him not one but two bonus checks. Did all employees get two bonuses?

ParkRidgeUnderground said...

Anon@2:21 --

We believe Mr. Biagi will be kind enough to answer your question if he comes back and sees it.

You should return the same courtesy to the other posters here who have asked you questions, which we are aware you have spent time reading.

Anonymous said...

What question have I not answered?

ParkRidgeUnderground said...

Anon@2:40 --

"Did the director and/or commissioners O'Brien, Maloney, Wynn-Ryan, Herman, and Biaggi tell you they want to simply want to shut the Center down?

Who told you they want to shut the Center down?"

-- asked by Anon@1:05, who has not been back as yet.

Anonymous said...

-Yes

-One of the Commissioners said it was their belief that the Director and other Commissioners would be happy if the Senior Center was shuttered.
The way the Park District dragged the heals in negotiating with Senior Services and the Senior Center have been telling as well. That I have seen first hand.

ParkRidgeUnderground said...

Anon@2:51 --

Ah.

Then we would caution you about attributing statements of fact and opinions to individuals from whom you have not heard those statements of fact and opinions, first-hand.

We would also urge you to pass on this advice to "one of the Commissioners" to whom you spoke -- we assume, either Commissioner Brandt or Vile.

Anonymous said...

Where are the answers from Slick Rick? Not surprisingly, there are none.

ParkRidgeUnderground said...

Anon@3:18 --

Mr. Brillnoggi has not been back, as far as we can tell.

However, if you are burning with curiosity -- you could review the Park Board minutes.

You seem familiar enough with the issue -- finding the information you want shouldn't be that tedious or time consuming. We assume you've got the time.

Anonymous said...

Slick Rick's silence is deafening.

Anonymous said...

@PRU September 17, 2010 2:42 PM

Thanks for asking my question again.

@September 17, 2010 2:51 PM

Thanks for finally answering my question. To me you've proved you're a loose canon that twists stories around.

Anonymous said...

If anyone wants to know the position of the PRPD Board, they simply should look at the meetings on video.

ParkRidgeUnderground said...

Anon@11:53 --

Good idea. Remind us come November.

Anonymous said...

May I ask an off-subject question :)
On Channel 7 news, was that our very own Charlie Melidosian attending Todd Stroger's Zoo Day for Flood Victims??

ParkRidgeUnderground said...

Anon@6:10 --

Yes, it was.

Anonymous said...

Folks, the flooding issue around Northwest Park is nearly 100% overland flooding. This area also has a very high concentration of downward-sloping driveways, and incurred the worst of the damanges in the Sept 2008 flood (myself included). This area desperately needs rain water detention. I challenge anyone to come up with a better idea than the one Burke has thoughfully proposed.

Rick Biagi said...

I cannot and will not comment on any matters relating to compensation of Park District employees as these are matters covered in closed session pursuant to the Illinois Open Meetings Act, Section 2(c)(1), 5 ILCS 120.

What I will say, unequivocally, is that I am not aware of any Commissioner, including myself, who believes and/or has ever stated that they want to see the Senior Center shut down. Any such inference or statement to the contrary is erroneous and lacks any foundation in fact, whatsoever.

If the issue of the Senior Center is of interest to you, I would strongly suggest that you attend one or more of the Board meetings, where it will be discussed. Curiously, it was discussed at last week’s full Board meeting but not a single citizen was present.

Anonymous said...

From the meeting minutes 7/15 at the www.prparks.org:

"Commissioner Herman moved to pay the Executive Director a bonus of $3,000 as recognition of his performance to date and for the Executive Director to indemnify and present to the Park Board for approval if nescessary, appropriate line item transfers in the budget sufficient to make such payment. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Vile and passed by a roll call vote."

Not closed session, this is open session. Care to comment now?

ParkRidgeUnderground said...

Anon@1:19 --

Are you concerned only with the bonus approved by the Board members, including those Commissioners annointed as "Friends of the Center," for The Big O?

Did you fail to note the approval of bonuses for other employees in the minutes we linked to in our post?

Anonymous said...

I'm concerned about both bonuses. It just so happens the Director was given a bonus twice. Once in the minutes your referenced, and once in the minutes I referenced.

ParkRidgeUnderground said...

Anon@2:29 --

Perhaps we mistakenly construed your focus on the bonus approved for The Big O. Of course, you can reasonably understand such a mistake, given the absence of any comment from you on the otherbonuses for other PRRPD employees.

We're not certain whether or not the Park District Director has actually received two bonuses, as you claim.

In answer to your question about the reason for the Commissioner's approval of a bonus to the Park District Director, including the approval of those Commissioner's you've deemed "Friends of the Center," we draw your attention to the minutes you quoted in your previous comment -- "a bonus of $3,000 as recognition of his performance to date"

We understand you may disagree with the merits of that performance to date. However, it seems clear the Board holds an opposing view to your own.

Anonymous said...

Clearly the Board has a different opinion than I do on lots of things. Perhaps Mr. Rick can clear up the confusion about if Mr. Ocramowicz was awarded one bonus or two.

ParkRidgeUnderground said...

Anon@3:57 --

Are your Commissioner "Friends of the Center" no longer speaking to you?

Perhaps you can ask them, then return here to enlighten everybody.