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.

Referendum Madness!

from: Reefer Madness (1936)

People, tell your children! Keep them safe from the degenerating terrors of referendum madness! It could lead to brainwashing and communism!

It starts innocently enough -- a lone alderman diabolically proposes a referendum. The next thing you know people are going crazy in the streets -- trying to take over local businesses in their effort to collect signatures on petitions! The referendum scourge is only temporarily averted by the bravery of those willing to confront the problem!

Before you know it, the menacing dangers of this referendum madness have spread to the seats of power! And other aldermen begin to take part in this democratic debauchery by offering more referendum madness to the voters! Even Don Bachtard (3rd ward) our reliable Constitutional UNscholar has been heard to utter his desire for placing a referendum question on the ballot asking voters if they want to fund the fight against O'Hare expansion!

Now, even our Senators and Representatives are pushing this insanity from the devil's garden of democracy! And the PRU Crew has been told our Maine Township officials have fallen for this trickery!

Three referendum questions will appear on the April ballot asking voters for their opinions on government matters!

It's referendum madness!

Council Recap!

Greetings, PRU readers! We've got a council meeting recap for you today -- it's not as full as we wanted it to be, but sometimes digging into background information isn't as easy as we would like it to be. And sometimes we come up empty too.

Without further ado, here's your council meeting recap!

Monday night's City Council meeting began with an attempt by the leader of the ORD-REST community group to provide a power point presentation.pdf (we assume it's the same one presented at the 12/13/08 Town Hall Meeting) to the assembled masses, but Ms. Christine Kutt-Zolt couldn't get cooperation from the technology gods. Instead Ms. Kutt-Zolt went ahead and verbally presented the case for ORD-REST and what they hope to do. Mayor Howard and some of his Alderdopes are looking to make ORD-REST a city sponsored task force, and no doubt shift the responsibility for dealing with the O'Hare issue away from themselves, the elected officials who dropped the ball on this for the last two years.

Our sources report the Council's eyes boggled as Ms. Kutt-Zolt began listing expenses for the proposed ORD-REST groups becoming a city task force -- the grand total being $300,000.00 to begin the effort to research whether or not there is anything that can be done to pursue some forms of relief from the O'Hare expansion.

The ORD-REST effort could include the hiring of many many consultants to research and advise on such things as the Environmental Impact Statement issued for the O'Hare Modernization Program, write federal legislation "to protect us and others" from airport problems, give ORD-REST a "seat at the ONCC table" -- which conveniently lets Mayor Howard and Alderdunce Don Bachtard (3rd ward) off the hook of accountability -- as well as suing the FAA on behalf of property owners in Park Ridge who believe their property value has diminished in light of the opening of the new 9L/27R O'Hare runway.

We feel those efforts would be an exercise in futility. However, we strongly feel the City of Park Ridge should not even be thinking of using taxpayer money to fund lawsuits on behalf of some private property owners. We know there are those who will argue that the city has an interest in the value of that private property; however, we maintain that city funding of lawsuits that may or may not return monetary relief to private property owners, in the way of some settlement, is not the sort of interest the city should take in the issue and would not serve to protect the collective city interests.

Sources tell us that after the Alderdopes listened to the dulcet tones of the cash registers in their heads begin ringing, the 2nd ward's Lord of the Manor, Rich DiPietro, suggested the issue be referred to committee and that the process of interviewing task force members, by the Mayor's Advisory board for recommendation for appointment by Mayor Howard be followed. And here PRU readers should note, bureaucracy has its advantages -- as every bureaurat comes to understand in time.

The City Council then moved on to discussion of how the City Council COW meetings are to be conducted. We are told the low light from this portion of the meeting was having to listen to 4th ward Alderman James Allspaghetti, in response to an amendment offered by 1st ward Alderman Dave Schmidtzkrieg that would have demanded a super majority vote of the council to limit debate, argue that debate should be allowed to be limited by a simple majority vote, and that he's never seen the limiting of debate "abused", and that he feels demanding that a super majority vote to limit debate of public business is not good government. For his part, Alderman Bachtard whined that "COW meetings should mirror City Council meetings" and that now there would be two sets of rules for different meetings. Schmidtzkrieg argued that COW meetings are supposed to be different from City Council meetings.

Initially a voice vote was taken on the amendment and it seemed to pass, with our sources telling us that Aldermen Bachtard, Allspaghetti, and Benedict Alderman Ryan voted no on the amendment that would have demanded a super majority vote to limit debate. But then, in what has become a sort of City Council tradition, confusion ensued and a roll call vote was requested -- a sort of City Council do-over. With the roll call vote, sources tell us the Unfriendly Ghost from the 6th ward, Tom Carey, seemed to change his vote to a no and then the amendment to demand a super majority to limit debate was defeated.

The Council also discussed the complaints they had received about the COW meeting location at the Public Works Service Center -- by consensus they have decided to hold COW meetings at City Hall.

The next item on the agenda was discussion of 7th ward Alderman Frank Wsooooolman's resolution to include a referendum on the April ballot asking voters something -- we still don't know exactly what -- about building a new Park Ridge police station. Alderman Wsooooolman said he was introducing this resolution because, until Monday morning when Joe Egan and his volunteers submitted 2800 plus signatures to the City Cluck for their referendum effort, it had seemed to him the citizen effort to get the referendum question on the ballot wasn't going to be successful, so he figured he would do it. Which leads us to wonder why, after learning Joe Egan and his volunteers were successful, Ald. Wsooooolman didn't pull his discussion item for a referendum resolution off the City Council agenda?

During the very lengthy and circular discussion of Wsooooolman's resolution the assembled masses were treated to another Ald. Allspaghetti dissertation on the ignorance of the citizens of Park Ridge, saying we are "uninformed." Allspaghetti's remarks elicited a pointed retort from Ald. Schmidtzkrieg who said "calling the populace uninformed is wrong." Then the Lord of the Manor, Ald. DiPietro, offered that Ald. Wsooooolman had come up with referendum language because at an earlier meeting Joe Egan had said that if the council didn't like his referendum wording they should come up with their own. Alderman Benedict Ryan said he though Ald. Wsooooolman's referendum "clarifies" the issue. The PRU Crew is wondering if Benedict Ryan needs a new pair of glasses because the final wording of the Council's referendum --

"In adopting a capital project to improve the administrative/public and police facilities, shall the city of Park Ridge require as a condition of issuing any bonds for such improvements that the total spent, absent interest and operational costs, be less than $16.5 million and the facilities be located at 505 Butler Place on land already owned by the city?"

-- seems to us to be anything but clear, or clarifying.

Ryan then attempted to amend the referendum by adding language that said approval of the referendum "will not cause an increase in taxes, fees, or service reductions as of 2008 levels."

The first portion of that language to get axed was the "as of 2008 levels" then, after City Manager Jim Hock said the language would tie the hands of the City Council while making budget decisions, the Council nixed the rest of Benedict Ryan's amendment.

The Unfriendly Ghost, Tom Carey, motioned to have the issue deferred for two weeks, but that motion failed.

We are told Alderman Wsooooolman then launched into some bellicose bellowing, to borrow a phrase, on how all the discussions about building a new police station and land needed for the project had taken place in open meetings.

Sometimes this really is like shooting fish in a barrel, isn't it?

Would anyone like to remind Ald. Wsooooolman about the discussions that have taken place behind closed doors about land purchases? Would anyone like to remind Ald. Wsooooolman about Mayor Howard's discussion and attempts to INCREASE THE PRICE THE CITY WOULD PAY for the property at 720 Garden Street, all of which took place behind closed doors? Would anyone like to remind Ald. Wsooooolman about Mayor Howard's attempts to get a deal for his friend and campaign contributor, Bill Napleton? Many many many of the discussions about the deals, plural, for Napleton's property have taken place behind closed doors.

The final vote on inclusion of the Council referendum on the April ballot was approved by a final vote of 5 (Wsol, DiPietro, Bach, Ryan, and Carey) to 2 (Schmidt and Allegretti).

The Council then moved on to discussion of Ald. Wsooooolman's next proposed referendum question -- whether the voters want the City to go to referendum whenever non-emergency debt is being considered. This item was referred for consideration to the Finance and Budget committee by a unanimous vote.

Next up, City Manager Jim Hock let everyone know that it's business as usual with ComEd. Hock reported that 80 homes were without power during the recent subzero temperatures, and that this outage was actually scheduled by ComEd. Hock also told the Council that another report received from ComEd said that an additional 1000 homes were without power, but that report turned out to be false. Unfortunately, the City had begun notifying residents before being able to confirm the validity of ComEd's report. Alderman Bachtard said it wouldn't do any good, but he wants to call ComEd on the carpet anyway. Sensational!

The assembled masses were then given a report by acting Chief of Police Tom Swoboda on his investigation into the Oberweis incident involving allegations officers had attempted to intimidate employees at the ice cream shop who were allowing police station referendum petition volunteers to collect voter signatures in the store. The result of Swoboda's investigation resulted in his finding that one employee received a telephone call from a woman claiming to be a Park Ridge police officer, who complained about the referendum effort. The PRU Crew is wondering if dollface has been smiling and dialing? Swoboda also said that one officer had been in the Oberweis store but nothing other than "small talk" took place. Swoboda then went on to complain bitterly about inaccurate information being released to "the press" and how that unsubstantiated information damages the reputation of the police department. Chiefy, the PRU Crew thinks you do a pretty damn good job in helping that effort along yourself.

Mayor Howard then took the opportunity to say, and we quote -- he was "incest" because of the incorrect and invalid accusations, and that "our police officers aren't types that bully people."

Next up, City Manager Jim Hock proposed the City Council go into closed session to approve closed session minutes and als discuss acquisition of land. Ald. Wsooooolman earned his only PRUdo for the night by asking City Manager Hock if the land acquisition item had any relation to the Park Ridge Police Department? Mr. Hock reportedly replied, "Potentially." Ald. Wsooooolman, fully realizing the implications, then said "this is why residents don't trust us." Ald. Bachtard simply said "we can't afford land right now", but Ald. Allspaghetti said that discussion doesn't mean we have to buy it. The Council approved the closed session agenda item to review other closed session minutes but did not vote to discuss any land acquisition in closed session.

The Council then voted to form a task force to review the tree preservation ordinance, because you can't possibly have too many unelected, Mayoral appointed bodies making recommendations to elected officials on city policy.

Under the Council's agenda item for New Business, Ald. Bachtard again said he wanted a ComEd representative to come to Park Ridge. Sensational! Bachtard also went on to say he has received complaints about empty stores and city policies that "keep them empty" so he wants the Procedures and Regulations committee to review city ordinances governing local business matters. We can't wait for the recommendations from the Procedures and Regulations committee!

All together now --

Give us a "T",
give us an "A",
give us an "S",
give us a "K",
give us an "F",
give us an "O",
give us an "R",
give us a "C",
give us an "E"!

A PRU Tuesday Twofer!

#1 -- Follow the Leader!

For those of you who spent the time to read 3rd Ward Alderman Don Bachtard's letter to the press announcing Mayor Howard's re-election bid, we commend you for your endurance. You may recall the following passage from the letter, where Bachtard claims :

"We have had far fewer closed session meetings compared than other neighboring cities, and all of them have been in compliance with the Illinois Open Meetings Act. If any of them were not, I am sure Mr. Schmidt and his cronies would have seen to it that the incidents were reported and prosecuted for their own political purposes. Since this has not happened, in spite of their best efforts to try, it should be obvious that Mr. Schmidt's bellicose bellowing about transparency is motivated by his desire to win the election and has no basis in fact. Please also keep in mind that Mr. Schmidt was censured by his peers on the council for revealing confidential information from a closed session."

Well it looks like somebody did report it, and Mayor Howard and his cronies were admonished by the Office of the Attorney General. We thank one of our faithful readers for the submission.

MadiganIOMAltr508pg1&2

Publish at Scribd or explore others:

This is the incident that earned Park Ridge an Illinois Press Association 3rd Place Worsty Award. We do note that the Country Club meeting was moved back to City Hall, according to Mayor Howard, "to make everybody happy." So Bachtard's claim that all the meetings the City Council has held have been "in compliance with the Illinois Open Meetings Act" is technically correct. But that doesn't mean Mayor Howard and his lapdogs haven't tried! And it also means that 1st Ward Alderman Dave Schmidtzkrieg's "bellicose bellowing about transparency" does appear to have some "basis in fact," in addition to the citizen survey results we assume Bachtard was given a copy of.

We also see that Alderman Bachtard is listed as a recipient of a "cc" for the Madigan letter, but maybe Bachtard didn't read it because he was busy with other things -- like spending quality time with his dictionary in preparation for one of his nasty letters to the press?


#2 -- Quickie Council Recap

As expected, at last night's City Council meeting --

1. -- PRC developers got what they asked for; the City Council voted to allow the Uptown developer to rent retail space to service provider Coldwell Banker. However, semi-PRUdos for the Council requiring that, should Coldwell Banker leave the space before the term of the lease expires, PRC will guaranty the sales tax replacement payments to the City. Additionally, the sales tax replacement payments will not be added to the deductions PRC takes before it figures the 11% rate of return on the development before profit sharing with the City. Still, don't expect any profit sharing with the City.

2. -- The 5th Ward's Benedict Alderman Ryan offered a formula for figuring square footage and the allowable number and size for televisions in restaurants. We are so relieved! The change to the liquor ordinance passed with flying colors.

3. -- Alderman Bachtard and Mayor Horses Ass got blasted by one resident who found Bachtard's letter to the press, announcing Mayor Howard's re-election bid, very negative. We're wondering if this method of operating comes as a surprise to anyone? Of course Bachtard went negative on behalf of his master! That way Mayor Howard can appear to be above the fray! Look! There Goes Elvis!

The Council was also treated to citizen opinions about their conduct in failing to second Ald. Schmidtzkrieg's motion for a resolution to discuss a referendum on building a new police station. And the citizens' opinions were decidedly unhappy.

In response to a recent quote in one of the local rags, where Mayor Howard discussed the wording of the police station referendum and said, "The way Schmidt had it questioned, no one in their right mind would vote for that. It has to be a fair and honest question, " one resident challenged Mayor Howard, saying, "Come up with your own wording for the referendum question!" The PRU Crew thinks this may be the meanest thing anybody has ever said to Mayor Howard because, as most folks know, Mayor Howard can barely manage words already written for him!

Comment in the Spotlight!

Joe said...

Police station petition.

If anyone is interested in gathering signatures to place an advisory referendum on the next ballot, I have one drafted based on Alderman Schmidt's attempt to allow the taxpayers of Park Ridge decide whether or not we should spent over $24 million (includes interest but not operational and maintenance costs) in front of the City Council. I will need at least 25 volunteers that would be willing to gather at least 100 signatures each. I am researching exactly how many we would need. Time is of the essence since our City Council is afraid to ask this question. They are committed to going forward without our input. If you are interested, please email me at jjegan1@aol.com. I would also need someone to co-lead this effort.

December 3, 2008 8:54 PM

Council Recap -- SSSHHHHH!

Our sources report that last night's City Council meeting was business as usual for the forces of darkness.

After the usual beginning niceties, including congratulations for our Maine South Football Champions, Mayor Howard let everyone know he's a day late and a dollar short on chasing the O'Hare noise problem. While Mayor Howard was doing his Rip Van Winkle impression, when he wasn't voting to pull out of the Suburban O'Hare Commission, the problem of noise and the new runway configuration at O'Hare was creeping up on the citizens of Park Ridge. But now Mayor Howard, and one of his more drooling alderdogs, Don Bachtard (3rd ward), are "challenging the FAA" to provide answers to questions about the jet noise. If either of these idiots had bothered to pay attention to this issue over the last several years, they would find all the answers they're now looking for in the meeting minutes of the O'Hare Noise Compatibility Commission. Or they could have spent an afternoon in the park on the North end of Park Ridge for a taste of things that were to come.

"Challenging the FAA" -- that is very funny stuff!

Next on the council agenda was 1st ward Alderman Dave Schmidt's report and resolution request to put the issue of building a new police station to a referendum vote. In stark contrast to the treatment of every other single resolution undertaken by the council, our sources report that Mayor Howard would not allow Ald. Dave to read an opening statement to begin his report and then offer a motion to adopt the resolution. When Ald. Dave began speaking, Mayor Howard cut him off asking for a motion. Ald. Dave then read the shorter text of the referendum question and motioned the item up for discussion and debate. Mayor Howard then asked for a second to the motion, as required by Roberts Rules of Order, so that discussion and debate could begin. Our sources report that for the first time, Mayor Howard proceeded very slowly through the process of asking for a second -- asking three times if there was anyone to second the motion. All the other aldermen on the council remained silent, and the motion died -- along with the possibility of a public discussion and debate -- for lack of a second.

The PRU Crew feels that, no matter where anyone falls on the issue of building a new police station, everyone should have the guts to discuss, debate and defend their position publicly. And if you are an elected representative of the people, you are obligated to grab hold of your fortitude and tell the people of Park Ridge, in an open forum, why you don't feel they should have a direct and explicit say on the issue through a referendum vote.

We're told two members of the audience rose to address the council after bearing witness to the shenanigans, calling the council's action -- or lack of action -- "appalling" and "sorely disappointing."

The City Council then moved on to other business which included debate and discussion, in great detail, of whether or not to allow businesses to advertise that they have televisions in their establishment, and whether or not minors can play arcade games in an establishment "when accompanied by a person twenty-one years of age." We are told the discussion of keeping our local youth safe from the ills of arcade games took about 30 minutes, and the ordinance passed on a final vote of 5 (Schmidt, Bach, Allegretti, Ryan, and Carey) to 2 (DiPietro and Wsol).

We bet our readers may be wondering why the council was willing to spend a half hour on the minutia of the liquor ordinance, while foregoing any discussion on the potential expenditure of an estimated $20million dollars and a referendum vote. The PRU Crew feels anyone wondering about that should contact their alderman and the Mayor, and ask.

The final highlight in the council's actions last night was to tell PRC Partners, the development entity for Target Area 2 (Uptown), they would have to wait another two weeks before the council would again consider their request to lease space to service provider, Coldwell Banker, instead of a sales tax generating business.

We're told the discussion between the council and two of the partners for PRC began very cordially, but as it became clear the council wasn't in a mood to again give a concession to PRC, the partners became somewhat testy and said the city wasn't likely to ever see the originally promised profit sharing, and that the city should take this deal now. The partners also let it be known that every payment made to the city now, in return for the city's concessions to PRC, is included as an expense that is added to the project. What this means, people, is that PRC is adding expenses to the ledger which will almost guaranty that the city never sees a dime of profit from the project, because if the 11% target return for PRC partners isn't met, then the city is left out of the calculation for profit taking. So, is there anybody out there who would be willing to settle for an 8% return on an investment? We're betting the PRC partners will be just fine with that.

Alderman James Allspaghetti (4th ward) asked what would happen with the potential tenant if the council didn't approve the deal in a timely manner? The partners for PRC said they weren't sure what the potential tenant would do, but that it was important to approve the concession. We are told Allspaghetti then launched into one of his long winded and circular ramblings about approving the concession because the empty spaces in the new development are bad!

We are also told that a member of the audience then rose to address the council and, citing "the interest of full disclosure", said that Coldwell Banker is already leasing space in town and that if they were to move into the new development another, larger space would become vacant.

The PRU Crew has long heard that PRC Partners has spent a great deal of time trying to "canibalize" other local businesses in their efforts to fill up their development.

We give big PRUdos to the council for deferring action on this item until the costs to the city can be more fully understood. However, we're not foolish enough to believe the council will see this one through, and we think PRC will eventually get exactly what they're asking for again.

PRUdos to the Wsolman!

In a piece of City Council action that received little fanfare or attention, the 7th Ward's Alderman Frank Wsoooool man managed to get his ubiquitously ass-covering Council peers to agree to place a referendum question on the November election ballot asking voters to decide whether or not they want to stagger the election terms for Park Ridge aldermen.

Journal & Topics: Referendum to Decide On Staggered Terms

However, we do suspect that the unanimous support of the Council was given in part because it may be that some of these Aldermen believe they are guaranteed to serve the full 4-year terms to which they were elected.

It seems to us that Ald. Wsol understands not only the importance of Council experience, but also the greater importance of ensuring the election process allows the citizens of Park Ridge to benefit from that experience.

We hope that any opinion received from the State's Attorney General will allow for the staggered elections to begin in 2009. But even if that doesn't happen, we offer our PRUdos to the 7th Ward's Wsoooool man for taking the long view on the best interests of Park Ridge voters.

And we hope the voters of Park Ridge take advantage of this opportunity.

A Recall Amendment?

As most of our regular readers know, we've discussed the issue of a recall vote for local elected officials before. It is a topic that remains of interest to many Park Ridge residents.

We first spotted a report on the recall issue over on the burbcops blog --

Verbal fireworks part of Capitol recall debate

And then again on the local news last night --

House approves putting recall option on November ballot

"If a recall ever went into effect, it would apply to all the elected constitutional officers and the state legislature, no one at any local level. It's a long shot in Illinois because of the political dynamics, but definitely an embarrassment to the governor."

The bill still has to go before the Illinois Senate for a vote, and if it passes there then Illinois voters will have their chance to vote on the measure next November.

We haven't done any research on this legislation to see if it forbids local governments, especially those operating under home rule, from having a recall ordinance on their books, but we're going to bet it doesn't.

2011.

At Tuesday night's Procedures and Regulations committee meeting, aldermen discussed the adoption of a resolution that would place a referendum on the November ballot asking voters if the City of Park Ridge should stagger the election of members of the City Council.

A memo from the City Attorney explains that if the referendum is approved by the voters, staggered terms for the election of aldermen will begin with the general aldermanic election in 2011; where aldermen from even-numbered wards would be elected for two year terms, aldermen from odd-numbered wards would be elected for four year terms, and "thereafter, their successors shall be elected for terms of 4 years."

Of course, the practical effect is to ensure that Frimark's hand-picked alderpuppets are guaranteed full four year terms. And that should Mayor Howard choose to run for reelection in the next 14 months, he will then be able to concentrate his energy and money on himself, presumably with the help of his protected incumbents.

During discussion among committee members last evening, Alderman Allspaghetti (4th Ward), who was originally appointed to the council by Mayor Howard, remarked that council members expected to run for four year terms. Alderman Wsooooolman (7th Ward) reminded Allspaghetti that he, Ald. Wsooooolman, had now had to run for two four year terms. Allspaghetti seemed to have momentarily forgotten his support for the Mayor's council cutting referendum that also cut 7 aldermen's terms to two years.

As reported (without a by-line) in the Journal & Topics, City Could Bring Staggered Terms Back, Mayor Howard explained that aldermen take "a certain period of time" to become efficient in their job, and that the reason staggered terms were removed from the Mayor's referendum to cut the council was because the matter was "too complex".
In light of what we recall of Mayor Howard's criticism of the last council, and his motives for cutting that council, the PRU Crew is enjoying a hearty laugh. The guy actually says these things with a straight face!

In any event, it looks as if any residents unhappy with their current representation will have to wait a full four years, until the 2011 aldermanic election, for a chance to make their sentiments known in the voting booth.

We wonder if their will be anything left in the City's coffers by the time Frimark and his merry band get done bonding, taxing, spending, and gifting the taxpayer's money away to Friends of Frimark and other special interests.