Hey Baby, What's Your Sign?

For our faithful PRU readers, who've had the dubious privilege of attending a meeting in the City Council chamber at City Hall, you may have noticed there are signs on either side of the Council horseshoe -- No Citizens Beyond This Point.

The PRU Crew feels very strongly, we need new signs. See above.

The practical effect of the new signs may be reducing the number of Alderdunces allowed to sit at the Council horseshoe, but the voters of Park Ridge have already shown their approval for reducing their representation. What could possibly go wrong?

For those interested in watching the smaller, more efficient Council in action -- there's another City Council meeting tonight, set to begin at 7:30 pm. If you're interested, you can review the revised agenda (.pdf) and then send Ald. Allspaghetti and possibly Ald. assWsol a thank you note -- so much for Allspaghetti's continual harping on talking issues to death! The Council is reportedly set to entertain a motion to reconsider the Hoffman Homes project (.pdf) proposed for Touhy Avenue. Because as we are all learning, "no" does not mean "no."

The meeting will also include another veto (.pdf) from Mayor Schmidtzkrieg -- this time, of the Police Chiefski's salary. Approval of the proposed City Manager's contract (.pdf), is also up for discussion and a vote, and we look forward to more unsubstantiated claims by those expected to whine their way through discussion of suspending the City's Facade Improvement Program (.pdf).

B.O.H.I.C.A. humbug.

Bah Humbug Grab Bag!

The PRU Crew is in a bad mood. Sorry. Not really.


For our faithful PRU readers who look forward to viewing the City Council meeting videos, it appears you may have to wait longer than usual. The City did manage, after 48 hours, to post a 3 minute video of the Special City Council meeting -- aren't they all? -- from Monday night, but hasn't managed to post the video of the regular City Council meeting as of 10:00 AM this morning. We may have thought somebody would get a clue and realize that 3 video views in 24 hours means people aren't very interested in what's been made available, and are instead waiting for something more substantive than the Council rubber stamping approval of the tax levy. Apparently not.

The PRU Crew is wondering if any of the people posing as our representatives in local government have bothered to inquire about the delay.


For our faithful PRU readers who thought there was any hope of city officials getting the message through your majority votes on referendums, guess again. As covered in an online article by one of the local rags, we learn "no" does not mean "no." Just ask the O'Hare Airport Commission people -- they'll explain it!

And remember, way back when, we explained why Police Dept. brass was willing to keep on keepin' on with "the golden fleece boy, who answered the siren's call - hi there, Hoopty Lou, how's it going in traffic? - [who] can be kept safe for future use as a PRPD pitchman; there are not too many coppers with the ability to speak and write impressive sounding bullshit as well as Hoopty Lou can."

A new proposal for renovation and expansion of the Park Ridge Police Dept. was offered for review at the City Council's budget workshop on Tuesday night. And the PRU Crew now understands very well why no supporting documents were included on the City website for review prior to the meeting.

The PRU Crew is again wondering if any of the people posing as our representatives in local government have bothered to inquire about the lack of supporting documents being made available for public review -- and the limited demands of the law should not be an acceptable excuse.


Covered in another online article in one of the local rags is the anatomy of a travesty. While the PRU Crew more than understands the legal questions, as well as the risk of precedence, we cannot get past how thoroughly and completely the City process screwed the Vine Ave. residents.

We don't know what the answer is, but we know we haven't heard it yet. And we strongly encourage the City Council and staff to find a way to make those residents whole. What has happened to them, throughout this saga, is unacceptable and should never be allowed to happen again.


Finally, the Park Ridge Recreation and Park District Board will be meeting tonight (agenda .pdf). They are scheduled to go into closed session, which is expected to last a very very very long time. We hope the discussion includes talking really really really bad about these people!!!

In all seriousness, we wish calm heads and reasoned consideration for the Park Board as they contend with the task ahead -- it's certainly a loss, but not the end of the PRRPD world as we know it.

Good luck.

City Council 12-6-2010 Video!

For the viewing displeasure of our faithful PRU readers!

We suggest viewers pay special attention to the discussion of the vote to override the Mayor's veto of the amended and suspended Facade Improvement Program, which begins @ the 0:23:13 mark of the video. It would seem Mayor Schmidtzkrieg may have made a new frenemy!

Residents Mr. Declan Stapleton and Mr. Ed Berry, of O'Reilly's Public House fame, address the Council beginning @ 0:24:00 mark of the video. And the PRU Crew feels it's very sad how little understanding Mr. Stapleton has not only for general municipal accounting practices, but also that Mr. Stapleton has less than zero understanding of TIF district financing in general, or the Uptown Redevelopment TIF district, specifically.

And despite the PRU Crew's strong suspicions that the Council doesn't understand either municipal accounting or TIF district financing much better than Mr. Stapleton, they somehow managed to vote to sustain the Mayor's veto of the amended and suspended Facade Improvement Program -- which they plan to discuss and amend again at the December 20th Council meeting.

Under Citizens Wishing to Address the Council on Non-agenda items, we hope people will give consideration to the remarks offered by resident and local builder, Mr. Rob Lohens, begining @ 1:14:02 mark of the video. Unfortunately, while Mr. Lohens' comments on public employee salaries and pensions have much merit, his grasp of the Crook County property assessments and the property tax system is lacking.

For others who may not quite get how the whole mess currently works -- as simply as we can state the matter -- property value assessments are created for the purpose of apportioning shares of the property tax burden, within any given taxing district. You can have your property tax assessment reduced and you still may end up paying as much or more in actual property tax dollars. Why? Because until the local taxing bodies actually reduce the tax levies -- the actual total dollars they ask for from the taxpayer pool -- taxes will generally continue to remain the same or rise. Place your bets, people!

Thus concludes our PRU civics lesson for today.

The discussion of the proposed Hoffman Homes project, as recommended to the City Council by the Planning and Zoning Commission, begins @ 1:20:51 mark of the video. And we found the discussion of affordable...er...no...make that, attainable housing very entertaining.

The Aldermen voted 3-yes (Sweeney, Bach and Allegretti) to 3-no (DiPietro, Ryan and Wsol) on the matter. Mayor Schmidtzkrieg attempted to break the tie by voting "no," but the City Attorney advised him his vote was not necessary as a tie vote means the request for approval of the special use dies for lack of receiving a majority.

The project developer, Mr. Hassinger, then took the opportunity to let the Council know he would not be back with a new application. So there!

Enjoy the rest of the show!

Are You Paying Attention?

The PRU Crew and all our faithful PRU readers should, by now, have come out of our Thanksgiving turkey comas.

If you have been paying attention, then you know there's a City Council meeting tonight, at City Hall, beginning at 7:30 pm.

And if you have really really really been paying attention, then you also know the City's Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended to the City Council that the residents of Park Ridge be spared the blight of non-conforming signs.

However, P&Z Commissioners Arrigoni, Piche, Wells and Rifkind believe it is in the best interest of the Park Ridge community to allow a 70% increase in density (8 additional units over the zoning code limit of 12 units for this "high density" district) for the proposed Hoffman Homes condominium development at 1963-1975 W. Touhy Ave., and have recommended the City Council grant a special use for the 3-story, 20-unit condominium development. Did we also mention the allowances for additional lot coverage and decreased set-backs? Flooding, schmudding.

The PRU Crew takes particular note of Commissioner Rifkind's observation of the economics involved -- we must have missed the part of the Planning & Zoning Commission's mandate to ensure economic benefit to developers who ask for lots of extras.

Of course, when developers come asking for extras, they offer amenities to the community from which they are asking for those extras. What will Park Ridge be getting? Affordable housing units.

Be still our beating, bleeding hearts!

Nobody saw this one coming, right? Oh. That's right. We did.

The rest of tonight's City Council agenda should be entertaining, as well -- included under the action items for the Finance & Budget Committee is a "First reading for approval of December 2010 Property Tax Levy – For the Budget Beginning May 1, 2010 and Ending April 30, 2011." B.O.H.I.C.A.!!!

Ladies and Gentlemen! Boys and Girls!

c1899. Prints and Photographs Division of the Library of Congress

The circus we've come to know as our Park Ridge City Council will be meeting tonight at City Hall. For our faithful PRU readers, interested in live entertainment, the show is set to begin at 7:30 PM.

Tonight's program (.pdf) features two acts which hold promise for providing special excitement!

First, Ringmaster Schmidt will attempt to amaze the audience with another veto! This time Ringmaster Schmidt will attempt to make the City's amended and then suspended facade improvement program disappear! The PRU Crew has serious reservations about how this vanishing act will be conducted. And we are again hoping discerning consideration will win out over ham-fisted treatment of this budgetary issue, but we have our doubts.

The second act we are looking forward to is the discussion of the O’Hare Airport Commission's Recommendations regarding the Taber Law Group (.pdf). A friendly correspondent worded concerns surrounding this issue as --

First we will get, and I quote, "a strongly worded letter with this presentation to the FAA," which it is anticipated will not work.

Then we will get Mr. Taber to, and I quote, "select these experts [for "air quality and noise impacts" studies] based on his substantial experience with EIS law and science and Mr. Taber's firm would also outline the scope of work." And presumably, since Mr. Taber will be researching various avenues for funding these studies, Mr. Taber's fee does not include the costs of these experts and these studies. What is the ballpark/range of such experts and studies and why, exactly, do we need Mr. Taber to select these experts, why shouldn't the members of the OAC be doing this research? After all, they were able to dig up Mr. Taber.

Then finally we will again have Mr. Taber, and I quote, "submit another letter to the FAA, again requesting a supplemental EIS based on "significant" new information." I presume this letter too will be "strongly worded."

So, for the nice tidy sum of $8,987.50 the actual work product Mr. Taber, himself, will be producing for the city of Park Ridge is two letters to the FAA requesting a supplemental EIS study; $4,493.75 per "strongly worded" letter, the first of which it is presumed will fail in its' goal.

Though there is cold comfort in knowing that, for $8,987.50, the city will get two "strongly worded" letters to the FAA, which is a better return on investment than we got from "investing" $650K for a Peotone study.

There you have it ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls -- enjoy the circus!

City Council 11-3-10 video!

Some hair of the dog for your viewing displeasure!

Hump Day Post-election Hangover?

We hope our faithful PRU readers are recovering from any post-election hangovers. However, for those who believe in the hair of the dog cure, we suggest giving the City Council some of your time and attention this evening.

What passes for our local representative government will be meeting tonight at City Hall, beginning at 7:30 PM.

The revised agenda (.pdf) isn't as jammed with entertaining possibilities as usual, but there are some important topics under consideration. Supporting documents for tonight's meeting are available on the City website, here.

City Council 10-18-2010 Video!

Another City Council clusterF --

A refresher on Roberts Rules of Order may be a good idea.

This would be as good a place to start as any -- Decorum in Debate

Tuesday Quick Hits!

For those interested in a quick hit update on the doings at last night's City Council meeting, this one's for you!

Last night the City Council, in a vote of 4 (Sweeney, DiPietro, Carey and Wsol) to 3 (Bach, Allegretti and Ryan), upheld the Mayor's veto of City Manager Hock's contract. We can't account for the apparent change of heart in Alderman Carey, but the PRU Crew approves. As we previously stated, the original contract offer was more than generous. We also believe it is in the City's best interest to make sure all payments to employees are contracted for properly. What we do not approve of is the foot-dragging irresponsibility of having let this issue languish for so long. Like it or not, that kind of irresponsibility creates instability throughout the internal workings of the City. And if controversy is added to the matter, undertaken in public discussions, multiply that instability by 100.

Also last night, despite the issue being, in our opinion, improperly listed under the Mayor's report -- because it is the City Manager's responsibility -- the issue of the vacant Finance and Budget Director position report and discussion was handled by the City Manager. We understand information about potential candidates to fill the vacancy will be given to the Mayor and City Council in the coming days. The PRU Crew is wondering if the City Manager, in hopes of cajoling our elected officials, is bringing them into the process to obtain their approval prior to his hiring a new Director of Finance -- perhaps particularly in relation to an employment contract. Otherwise, the PRU Crew is at a loss to explain what role the Mayor and Aldermen have in this process -- other than micromanagement of personnel issues by elected officials.

The O'Hare airport Resolution – Request for Supplemental Environmental Impact Study passed the Council with...we can't resist...flying colors. We're pleased this action didn't cost anything.



Also at last night's Council meeting, it was reported that there are a number of 1st ward residents concerned with a proposal by the Park Ridge Park District for the installation of cell towers at Northeast Park -- which we first discussed here. As we told one of our recent correspondents -- We fully understand the concerns expressed and strongly encourage people to make those concerns known to the PRRPD Board of Commissioners. We also understand that, while the Park District's budget is in reasonable financial shape, there are always spending pressures and unavoidable cost increases on units of local government, and we are open to ideas for ways in which those units of local government can generate revenue for the benefit of residents without attempting to increase property taxes. We hope people will keep an open mind on the subject of alternative revenue generation.



After last night's open meeting, the Council adjourned to closed session to to discuss the appointment, employment, compensation, discipline, performance or dismissal of specific employee(s), pursuant to 5 ILCS 120/2 ( c ) ( 1 ) -- but as we understand it, Park Ridge now has a new Chiefski! This time for the Park Ridge Fire Department. Our sources tell us congratulations go to Mr. Michael Zywanski, who will be leaving his current position as Deputy Fire Chief in Naperville, IL.




For our faithful PRU readers who take an interest in local school issues, and for any of you School Board hopefuls, the PRU Crew thinks you may find a recent report by the Chicago Tribune very interesting -- New ISAT lets kids pass with more wrong answers.

The above report comes on the heels of another Chicago Tribune article -- School days shrinking in Illinois.

The PRU Crew would be mighty pleased to hear the current School Board and candidate hopefuls discuss these issues and share their opinions.

Of course, the PRU Crew has opinions on both of these matters but we want to hear what the school district whizzes have to say about them first.

COW 10-11-2010 Video!

For the viewing displeasure of our faithful PRU readers. It was a very long meeting, but we strongly urge people to take the time. As we said in our Monday post -- the agenda for this meeting was flush with consequential issues. And we feel strongly that these subjects deserve your attention.

Special City Council 10-11-2010 Video!

The agenda for the special meeting --

O’HARE COMMISSION REFERENDUM INFORMATION
a. Should the City of Park Ridge disseminate information to the Park Ridge residents?
b. If so, what information should be provided to the residents?
c. How should the information be disseminated?
d. How much should the City spend to disseminate the information?

Previously provided referendum information documents --

OACReferendumInformation

Now, if our faithful PRU readers were to email a link to this post to all their fellow townsfolk, we may be able to save the City more than a mere $750.

Another Happy COWlumbus Day!

From fun to collect.com

Well faithful PRU readers, it looks as if the City is staying with the posted agendas for tonight's City Council meetings, and not adding more supporting documents for your reading displeasure!

First up is a Special City Council meeting -- aren't they all? -- beginning at 6:30 p.m. at City Hall. The agenda (.pdf) includes the following --

O’HARE COMMISSION REFERENDUM INFORMATION
a. Should the City of Park Ridge disseminate information to the Park Ridge residents?
b. If so, what information should be provided to the residents?
c. How should the information be disseminated?
d. How much should the City spend to disseminate the information?

The PRU Crew cannot wait to hear more about how the residents of Park Ridge need to be edumacated on the issue of O'Hare Airport and the referendum question which will appear on the November election ballot. Because, according to the current PROAC chairman, people in Park Ridge are confused, very confused, by the referendum question.

"Shall the City of Park Ridge allocate funding in an amount not to exceed $500,000 to seek expanded and accelerated noise abatement solutions intended to address the negative impacts of O'Hare airport's expansion on residential property values, local schools and the overall quality of life in our community"

Clearly, the question is quite a referendum riddle!

Should the City Council vote to approve funds for a direct mail piece, to edumacate residents, we can all just think of it as a tuition payment. And should the City find itself incurring attorney's fees as a result of any legal challenge, we can all just think of it as another tuition payment for earning our collective post secondary education -- the education we seem to collectively continue to need, post Peotone fiasco.

Also scheduled for this evening is another COWlumbus Day City Council Committee of the Whole meeting, set to begin at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall. The revised agenda (.pdf) is filled with fodder for all manner of municipal fun!

The PRU Crew is looking forward to a number of expected discussions. But we are gratified to see the Council will finally have an opportunity to address the City's Facade Improvement program (.pdf), which we first mentioned more than a year ago and have continued to mention as being something of which we disapprove -- not only because we find the basis for the program highly questionable, but also because the current expenditure will be coming out of the City's TIF fund, which has relied heavily upon loans from the City's General fund to stay afloat. What this means for residents outside the TIF district is, not only are taxpayers subsidizing the Uptown development directly, but also providing subsidies to other commercial properties in the TIF district, beyond merely the redevelopment project alone, while incurring higher property taxes outside the TIF district and reduced City services, in general. We guess the facade improvement program didn't make Mayor Schmidtzkrieg's radar when he was blipping about non-essential expenditures.

However, the PRU Crew will be tempted the next time somebody says, "Park Ridge isn't friendly to business," to firmly plant a pair of Doc Martens up their ass.

All in, there's a wealth of issues scheduled for consideration this evening and we strongly encourage residents to pay close attention to what their elected representatives will be doing in their name.

What the PRU Crew finds most unfortunate is, under the best of circumstances, this Council can't seem to figure their way out of the proverbial paper bag -- with an agenda flush with consequential issues, the odds are pretty good these guys will screw something up.

City Council 10-4-2010 Video!

Amazing men on their flying trapeze!

The Circus Is In Town!

AP Photo/KEYSTONE/Eddy Risch at http://animal.discovery.com/

The three-ring circus we fondly refer to as our City Council will be putting on another show tonight! Come one, come all -- watch as our Alderclowns, lead by our duly elected Ringmaster Schmidt, make a freak show of the democratic process! You'll be amazed and astounded by their depth-defying leaps in logic! You'll thrill to the sounds of Alderclown amendments and motions to defer! And you'll grip the edge of your seat as you witness Ringmaster Schmidt welcome ladies, gentlemen, and children of all ages to the greatest veto show in town!

Interested and faithful PRU readers can check out the revised agenda (.pdf) for tonight's show! And for a sneak peek at Ringmaster Schmidt's act, you can read the following press release --

from: Dave Schmidt
to: presscontacts@electdaveschmidt.com
date: Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 2:31 PM
subject: Fwd: Mayoral veto of City Manager's contract

Pursuant to the powers vested in me by the City's Ordinance, I am vetoing the City Manager's employment contract which was approved by the City Council on September 20, 2010.

There are several reasons for this action. The first reason involves the payment of approximately $8500 in deferred compensation in return for the City Manager opting out of the City's health and dental insurance plan. I have serious reservations about whether the payment complies with federal law. I have no reservations at all that the payment is inappropriate, even if technically legal.

When Mr. Hock was first hired in 2008, then-Mayor Frimark negotiated a cash payment of $7720 to Mr. Hock in return for his opting out of the insurance plan. In July 2009, one of the City's attorneys, Seyfarth Shaw, wrote a letter stating that such a payment likely violated Section 125 of the Internal Revenue Code, because it discriminated against lower-paid City employees who were not given the same option. The attorney's concern was that the payment could jeopardize the City's tax exempt status which could have adverse tax consequences for the City and its employees.

In the subsequent contract which I attempted to negotiate with Mr. Hock, Mr. Hock purported to remedy the tax issue by calling the payment "deferred compensation." Since the City Attorney who drafted the new contract apparently believed this would solve the tax problem, I agreed to the payment, but at a lower amount, approximately $3500. This Council subsequently voted to reject my recommendation, and then voted to actually increase the amount of the payment to $8500.

Upon further reflection, I am not convinced that using sleight of hand to call the payment "deferred compensation" would avoid running afoul of the IRS provision. However, I need not make that determination, because I am convinced that the payment is inappropriate since it discriminates against lower-paid City employees who have not been given the same option to receive deferred compensation in lieu of insurance coverage.

I fully understand that some will claim I am reneging on a promise made by Mayor Frimark to Mr. Hock. However, that contract provision was unfair from the outset, and it put the City's tax exempt status in jeopardy. It is my duty to make sure that error is not compounded. I can and must do what I believe is right, and approving this payment is not right.

A second and equally important reason exists for vetoing this contract. The citizens of Park Ridge have the right to a completely open and transparent government. However, the non-disparagement clause in the contract is the antithesis of transparency. The City Manager is the highest paid official in Park Ridge, earning almost nine times the combined salaries of the mayor and all seven aldermen. The taxpayers are paying his salary. He answers to them as much or more as he answers to the aldermen and me. As written, the clause would effectively prevent any elected official from explaining to the taxpayers why certain action regarding the City Manager was taken. I cannot condone such enforced secrecy against the citizens of Park Ridge.

Finally, the constructive discharge clause is also inappropriate. Mr. Hock's original contract contained no such provision, and I see no reason why it should be included now. In effect, the provision would tie the Council's hands if it decided that a salary reduction for the City Manager was necessary and/or appropriate, because it would trigger a potential severance payment which could cost the City up to $100,000 or more. It is simply unwise for such a new provision to be included in the contract.

I ask the Council to support my position and to come up with a contract which is in the taxpayers' best interests and which is fair to other City employees.

Enjoy the show!

There Oughta Be A Law!

In a Friday, September 24th online article from the Journal & Topics, Falling Trees Could Lead To Lawsuit, we read --

"Neighborhood dissatisfaction with the falling of two trees on Bonita Drive in Park Ridge is manifesting itself in other ways and could lead to a lawsuit against the city.

Police received an anonymous complaint about a B class truck parked in a driveway on Greenwood Avenue.

The truck belongs to the parents of the family on Bonita where the two trees were recently removed, explained Police Chief Frank Kaminski.

“The man parks his truck on his driveway a couple days a week,” Kaminski confirmed. “According to the zoning ordinance, that’s illegal."

Of course, now the City will enforce the zoning code ordinance and put an end to this illegal activity. Right?

Wrong.

If our faithful PRU readers have been paying attention, then you know at last night's City Council COW, staff proposed a housekeeping ordinance change action item for approval -- Parking of Commercial Vehicles in Residential Areas (.pdf). The memo states --

"The City Attorney has recommended moving the attached language from the Zoning Ordinance to the Municipal Code. Paragraph 13-10-11 B has been added to the Municipal Code to address off-street parking. This change will result in a violation being fined a $50 fine, not $250 as outlined in the Zoning Ordinance."

Please note -- "from the Zoning Ordinance to the Municipal Code."

Additional language in the City staff memo suggests the weight and size of commercial vehicles that qualify for a waiver from the parking restrictions, specifically --

c. Exceeds twenty (20) feet in length, eight (8) feet (6) six inches in height or seven (7) feet six (6) inches in width, or has more than four (4) wheels.

We again remind our faithful PRU readers of the memo language -- "from the Zoning Ordinance to the Municipal Code."

Setting aside for a moment the questionable wisdom of essentially removing a land use ordinance from the zoning code, we're wondering why the newly proposed language seems to have expanded the size for which a commercial vehicle may qualify for a waiver. The existing zoning code ordinance (.pdf), section 12, 11-A-3 states --

"A. No truck of eight-thousand (8,000) pounds GVW or less (i.e., Class B license) shall be permitted to park in the front or corner side yard of any residential lot, if the truck:

3. Exceeds twenty (20) feet in length, eight (8) feet in height or seven (7) feet in width, or has more than four (4) wheels."

It appears the more restrictive zoning code language, governing the size of commercial vehicles, is being eased in the proposed language for addition to the municipal code.

The Journal & Topics article goes on to report --

"...resident Tom Bernick says the trucks don’t qualify for a waiver.

He said three vehicles, two cargo vans and a straight truck, are being parked at the address.

He claims one of the vans has a gross vehicle weight of 10,000 pounds, the other is 8,900. “The straight truck is 14,500 pounds,” he said.

Bernick said the family has parked the trucks for about three years and said he has also seen the resident allegedly dumping food waste products down the storm drain. “We’re going to sue the city for not enforcing its ordinance,” he said. Referring back to the tree decision, he added, “It’s the same favoritism that’s going on."

It took three years for someone to alert the proper authorities? The PRU Crew is pretty confident the commercial vehicle parking problem wasn't viewed as much of a problem until neighbors in the area got the idea that for some people no doesn't mean no, especially when it comes to buying and removing City property -- which is precisely what we feel occurred in the continuing saga of the Meatgate trees.

The PRU Crew can't say for certain if Mr. Bernick is correct in his assessment of favoritism. But we sure do wonder what the hell is going on over at 505 Butler Place these days.

Anyone know a municipal attorney willing to issue a cease and desist order on bullshit from City staff?

Anyone know a zoning attorney willing to submit a map amendment to the zoning code designating City Hall a No Bullshit zone?

Monday Grab Bag!

Grab a seat at a meeting, or grab a book to read! Either way, there's no reason for boredom here in Action Ridge!


#1 -- Our illustrious City Council will be holding another COW meeting tonight at City Hall, starting at 7:00 pm. The agenda (.pdf) covers Finance and Budget, and Procedures and Regulations.

It looks as if there is a ton of potential fun to be had! The PRU Crew is eagerly anticipating the discussion of the Davis separation agreement (.pdf), as well as another variance discussion concerning zoning code regulations. How new is the new zoning code rewrite? And how much did the City pay for consulting services to rewrite it?

We also see the 5th ward's Benedict Ald. Ryan has gotten his wish -- the Council COW will be discussing the merits of the possible unbudgeted purchase (.pdf) of the Scharringhausen parking lot. The PRU Crew again believes this to be an especially stupid idea at this time. But then again, consider the source of this idea, and stupid is to be expected.

Finally, for our faithful PRU readers who pay very close attention to what's taking place, we're sure the contents of two particular background memos caught your attention -- succinctly stated, no doesn't mean no for some people.


#2 -- The District 64 School Board will be holding their annual budget hearing (agenda.pdf) this evening. The budget hearing is scheduled to begin at 7:20 pm, before the regular School Board meeting (agenda.pdf) begins at 7:30 pm at Jefferson School.

We strongly urge anyone, who is interested in how the School Board has planned to spend our money in the upcoming year, to take full advantage of those ten generous minutes allotted to the task. Though the PRU Crew doesn't blame the School Board for setting such a brief budget hearing schedule -- traditionally, nobody shows up for the monumental event.


3# -- If attending meetings of your local government bodies isn't quite what you do for fun, may we suggest reading a book?

It's once again time for Banned Books Week!

For those interested in making a subversive selection of reading material, you can check here and here for ideas!

As we offered here, the PRU Crew still thinks "District 207 should consider adding an elective Junior and Senior level course to the high school curriculum devoted entirely to the reading and discussion of "banned" books.

With a heavy dose of Constitutional and public policy issues thrown into the mix.

Keep the thought police hopping!"

City Council Meeting 9-20-2010 Video!

More theater of the absurd for your viewing pleasure!

Another Two-fer Tuesday!

#1 -- For our faithful PRU readers interested in a mini recap of last night's City Council meeting, we provided the following in response to a comment request --

Alright -- per our sources --

The various proclamations were well received.

Anne Lunde's history presentation was the answer for those seeking non-pharmaceutical sleep aids.

The City Attorney recommended the Council take action to approve the severance contracts or the City could be open to litigation. The Council seemed pissed off.

The City Manager's contract was approved by a vote of 4 (Bach, Allegretti, Ryan, Carey) to 3 (Wsol, Sweeney, DiPietro).

More than ever, there is no love being lost between Mayor Schmidtzkrieg and Benedict Alderman Ryan.

The Pickwick theater received a unanimous vote for landmark designation, becoming the first historic building to receive the designation under the new historic preservation ordinance.

Discussion of the Taber report about the airport was deferred.

The Mayor's veto of community group contributions received sustaining votes on all but three line items -- Center of Concern, Maine Center for Mental Health, and Meals on Wheels.

We told ya so, Schmidtzkrieg!

We're also told, under new business a certain Unfriendly Ghost attempted to make ethics ordinance amends by finally disclosing a $5million economic relationship his engineering firm has with the O'Hare Modernization Program.

The fun never ends at 505 Butler Place!



#2 -- Speaking of airport noise mitigation efforts, the Tree Preservation Task Force will be meeting again tonight at 6:00 PM to go over a revised version (.pdf) of the private property tree preservation ordinance they intend to forward to the City Council for consideration.

The PRU Crew noticed in the minutes from the last meeting (.pdf) a curious little blurb --

III. NEW BUSINESS

A. Director Zingsheim handed out a memo he received from City Forester Gliot regarding parkway trees, stating that he was distributing it solely as a courtesy for the Committee to have the information. Pat Livensparger, 413 Courtland, said that it shouldn’t be given out, as it was not the agenda. Director Zingsheim replied that although he disagreed with her about it being required on the agenda, he would collect the memo back from the Committee members. (Note: City Attorney Hill has verified that the distribution of the memo was not required to be on the agenda.)

As we understand it, the Task Force chairman invited the Public Works Director to pass out and discuss the memo before the Task Force Committee members.

In any event, we see the City Attorney has assured everyone that the courtesy offered to the Committee members was perfectly legit, despite the memo not having been listed among the supporting documents for the last meeting, nor placed on the agenda for distribution and possible discussion, and the Task Force chairman's apparent knowledge of the intended courtesy.

So the PRU Crew is wondering why the courtesy isn't being offered to the Task Force Committee at tonight's meeting?

Another Monday Call To Order!

Once again our faithful PRU readers have another chance to watch what passes for our local democracy in action! The City Council will be meeting tonight at City Hall beginning at 7:30 PM.

The most interesting item, not noted for discussion anywhere on the agenda (.pdf) nor specifically listed under the City Attorney's report, is likely to be discussion of the City Attorney's Authority of City Manager Memo (.pdf).

The memo is the result of "Park Ridge Mayor David Schmidt [having] asked for a legal opinion as to whether City Manager Jim Hock overstepped his authority by providing a laid-off city employee with a payment of $25,000 without receiving approval from the City Council." as recently reported in an article in one of the local rags. The article also notes the concern of 7th Ward Ald. Frank Wsol -- "Wsol pointed out that the City Council did not approve a contract with former Public Information Coordinator Aggie Stempniak for Stempniak to produce future copies of the city newsletter, The Spokesman. He has also sought a legal opinion on the matter."

What is most notably absent from the City Attorney's memo is any information regarding the City Manager's authority in reference to the $20,000 severance paid to our dearly departed Director of Economic Development Ms. Kim Uhlig -- presumably because neither Mayor Schmidtzkrieg, Ald. Wsol, nor anybody else asked about that.

All of the above and the absence of specific agenda placement, for discussion of the City Attorney's memo, should make the debate surrounding the City Manager's Employment Agreement (.pdf) all the more entertaining!

City Council Meeting 9-7-2010 Video!

More detailed indexing to come --