Another Turkey Trot Tonight!

Our City Council is set to meet again tonight at City Hall -- the agenda (.pdf) contains a number of items we hope our faithful PRU readers will be paying attention to.

Under the City Managers report, the following agenda item appears -- Adjourn to Closed Session to discuss the acquisition of property, pursuant to Chapter 5, Act 120, Section 2(c)(5) of the Illinois Compiled Statutes, which allows an exception to the required openness of the open meetings act, explaining public bodies may choose to go into closed session to discuss "(5) The purchase or lease of real property for the use of the public body, including meetings held for the purpose of discussing whether a particular parcel should be acquired."

The behind-closed-doors discussion, inspired by the request of the 5th ward's Benedict Alderman Ryan, will be about whether or not the City should purchase the property known as the Fairview parking lot. The PRU Crew knows the property as the Scharringhausen parking lot, which the owner recently placed on the market for the tidy sum of $724,000. The lucky listing agent is the infamous Owen J. Hayes, II who was officially reprimanded by the State of Illinois for his conduct in trying to sell 515 Busse Hwy. to the City of Park Ridge for use as a new police station, without disclosing his ownership interest in the property. Mr. Hayes, II was also lucky enough to hold the position of treasurer for Benedict Ald. Ryan's aldermanic campaign, a factual tidbit Benedict Ald. Ryan apparently felt he didn't need to disclose at an open meeting.

Mr. Hayes, II has an uncanny tendency to be found in the middle of many local real estate deals. The PRU Crew is beginning to think of Mr. Hayes, II as being a real lucky Pierre --

Under reports of Boards and Commissions we find two items of interest --

O’Hare Airport Commission – Ald. Bach

a. Discussion of independent telephone conversations of the Council with Steve Tauber
b. Discussion of hiring legal counsel regarding O’Hare

Can you say plausible deniability? We knew you could. And plausible deniability is the only reason we can figure the CAL law firm would be too demure for public discussion of litigation strategy but not object to private discussions with individual Aldermorons who then publicly discuss litigation strategy per the private one-on-one discussions held with the CAL law firm -- any misunderstandings, miscommunications, or misstatements by the Aldermorons can be denied by the CAL law firm.

Or maybe the CAL law firm just really really really likes to play the telephone game, a.k.a. Chinese whispers to the Brits!

Under Standing Committees, which should not be confused with understanding committees, the following appears under Procedures and Regulations --

b. Move the City Council approve a Resolution providing for and requiring the submission of a non-binding advisory public question concerning whether the City of Park Ridge shall support the efforts to stop the expansion of O’Hare Airport to appear on the ballot of the electors of such city at the Consolidated Election to be held on Tuesday, November 2, 2010

We hope the City Hall air conditioner is working, since we expect a lot of hot air will be produced during this particular discussion!

Enjoy the show!

You Don't Have To Join The Army!

Part of baby boomer babble was the phrase "Join the army. See the world." But as it turns out, you don't have to join the army to see the world, especially if you're lucky enough to be an administrator in East Maine School District #63!

The Butterly on Education blog has been having a good old time discussing the subject of school administrators seeing the world, courtesy of taxpayers.


On a related travel note --

The PRU Crew would be more than happy to help foot the bill for sending anybody to Colorado for three weeks -- as long as they came back determined to reform teacher tenure rules.


On another unrelated travel note --

For those who've asked, we're told the discussion about many of the issues surrounding the PROAC resolution about O'Hare expansion seemed to fizzle at last night's City Council COW meeting. When the City completes the task of uploading the video, we'll post it here for our faithful readers to review.


On a final tangent travel note --

Last night's City Council COW meeting was jam packed with parking related issues. We're told the 5th ward's Benedict Alderman Ryan has asked the Council to consider purchase of property for future development and parking. Aside from the rank budgetary stupidity, tsk, tsk Ald. Ryan -- did you forget to disclose something?

A Thursday Twofer!

A quickie twofer for our faithful PRU readers!

allposters.com
Some of you may have noticed a new link we've added to our link list on the right -- the Sin Bin blog. We received an email from blogger Michael Sebastian letting us know "Your readers may have noticed some lights and cameras this week in Park Ridge. That's because there's a movie shooting in town. It's called Sin Bin and the writer and director are both from Park Ridge."

Mr. Sebastian has been given access to the behind-the-scenes production of the film and he writes, "The filmmakers--my childhood pals--gave me unfettered access to the set, the crew, the actors, the catering--basically anything I see or hear while they're filming.

The movie is about growing up, set in a suburb of Chicago. The main character owns a van called the Sin Bin --

And since the PRU Crew has a decided fondness for independents, we thought we'd give this film crew and Mr. Sebastian some attention and promotion!


Our faithful PRU readers who took the time to wend their way through yesterday's video of what is supposed to pass for the practice of democracy during local Council debate and discussion may have taken note of the 5th ward's Benedict Alderman Ryan saying he did not recall voting to approve an increase in vehicle sticker fees for the purpose of funding the Park Ridge O'Hare Airport Commission's requests.

In yesterday's video, discussion of the increase in vehicle stickers begins at the 1:50:08 mark. In response to a question raised by the 7th ward's Ald. assWsol, at the 1:51:10 mark, Ryan can be heard saying, "That wasn't the intent." And again at the 1:52:33 mark Ryan states, "This was not put in there for community groups" and goes on to ask, "Can we check the record?"

Yoohoo -- Benedict Ryan! You're in luck! The City posts videos of your meetings on your City web site, in case you don't get around to reading the minutes of the meetings prepared for your reviewing pleasure, before you vote to approve those minutes!

If you check out the video of the 7 p.m. City Council Budget Workshop for Wednesday 3-31-10 on the City web site -- or the second video we embedded here -- you will hear at the 2:38:43 mark, the 3rd ward's Ald. Don Bachtard say, while discussing funding for the PROAC, "I do have a suggestion as to how this is going to be paid for. That's my very next motion." And at the 2:50:50 mark Ald. Bachtard motions to increase the cost of vehicle stickers.

So, Benedict Ryan, there is a record available for your review and that record does reflect the intent behind the increase in vehicle sticker fees.

While the Lord of the Manor tried to clarify the process and procedure of increasing vehicle sticker fees, and while a member of the audience commented on the problem of doing so, it seems clear to the PRU Crew that the intent of the vehicle sticker increase was, in fact, to fund the PROAC request.

Of course now it will be left up to the municipal fund accounting wizards to cover the Council's asses for again not knowing what the hell they are doing.

Business as usual at 505 Butler Place.

Freewheeling -- 2/24/10!

At Monday night's City Council meeting, there were a number of interesting discussions. The PRU Crew feels anyone interested in highlighting any of the low lights from the meeting should feel free to do so here.

For our part, we found the discussion about reinstating the position of City Treasurer to be extremely entertaining. The City Cluck, Betty Henneman, never fails to provide a laugh on the rare occasions she decides to open her mouth.

But 3rd ward Aldermoron Bachtard was his usual idiot self as well and we laaaaauuuuughed! Did Ald. Bachtard really say he thinks "another set of eyes" watching the City budget could be "a benefit?" Why yes, yes he did. Someone should ask Ald. Bachtard if maybe 7 more "sets of eyes" could be "a benefit?" But we're told Ald. Bachtard previously said in a letter published in the local rags a few years ago that he didn't feel there are enough "quality individuals" in Park Ridge to accomplish such a task. And that opinion would seem to make populating a Finance Commission a rather difficult task, no? Or, has Ald. Bachtard changed his mind about the "quality individuals" who populate Park Ridge? Or maybe Ald. Bachtard only feels there aren't enough "quality individuals" worthy of holding elected office and having an actual vote on public policy issues and the City budget?

Today's Pub-dog post deftly addresses the comedic musings the 5th ward's Benedict Ald. Ryan offered at Monday night's meeting. We hate to break the bad news to Benedict Ald. Ryan, but not everyone moves to Park Ridge for the schools -- the Park Ridge population with school-age kids remains a distinct minority. The Park Ridge population apparently has enough "quality individuals" to offer financial advice to the School District 64 Board though. And it would also appear the Park Ridge population has enough "quality individuals" to actually vote yes to increasing their own property taxes in support of School District 64. We're guessing Benedict Ald. Ryan forgot that part of the financial equation.

For his part, Mayor Schmidtzkrieg didn't seem to grasp the idea that he and the Council are the representatives of the people and are the very same people who are supposed to be "the people's eyes and ears for financial matters." Mayor Schmidtzkrieg also seems unaware that former City Treasurer Brauweiler wasn't much of a set of "eyes and ears" -- at least not when it came to protecting the $650,000.00 Peotone investment. How many relief sewers or sewer liners could that have purchased? How many sidewalk squares could that have paid to replace? How many trees for reforestation could that have paid to plant? The list of possibilities is endless really. Heckuva job, Brauwy!

Mayor Schmidtzkrieg seems to be reaching through the dark -- or taking highly questionable advice from somewhere -- in looking for ways to get the City Council to do their jobs. If the City Council won't listen to him, or the City Manager, or the former City Finance Director, then by God, they'll have to listen to a newly appointed or elected City Treasurer, right? Place your bets ladies and gentlemen...

All in, as we said in our Monday post -- on the Finance and Budget front, business as usual at 505 Butler Pl.

Moooooommy, he's being a big meanie!

We have to laugh.

If you've taken the time to review the videos from Monday night's COW meeting, you undoubtedly saw 5th ward Benedict Alderman Ryan respond to Mayor Schmidtzkrieg's State of the City address during the new business portion of the agenda.

If you haven't, or don't want to sit through the whole second video, you can use this link to review only Benedict Alderman Ryan's cry baby response.

Benedict Alderman Ryan's entire whine can be summed up thusly -- "Whaaaaa, don't make us feel bad! Whaaaaa, don't ask us to do anything! Whaaaaa, tell us what to do!"
Typical.

The PRU Crew has witnessed Benedict Ryan ask for direction so many times we sincerely wonder if this guy has ever had an original thought in his whole life! What really makes us laugh is that Mayor Schmidtzkrieg has given the Council direction -- specifically on water rates! But apparently Benedict Ryan didn't get the directions to the direction! We also wonder who dresses Benedict Ryan every morning.

Democracy paging Benedict Ryan! Democracy paging Benedict Ryan!

Figuring out what to cut, what to raise, and what to do to manage the City budget IS THE FIRST AND MOST BASIC JOB OF ELECTED OFFICIALS! But we have to assume Benedict Ryan didn't get "the memo" on that either so he doesn't know what his job is! Are there such things as public policy garanimals for Aldermorons? Benedict Ryan could sure use the easy-to-match directions!

Other elected officials, specifically the 3rd ward's Ald. Bachtard and the 2nd ward's Lord of the Manor, also whined their responses to the address in an online article in the Herald-Advocate -- with Bachtard under the particular delusion that criticism of aldermanic action and inaction is "politicking." We don't call him Ald. Bachtard for no reason!

Mayor Schmidtzkrieg's State of the City address may have been lacking in some areas, but the Crew thought the overall message was spot on. And the City Council provided more evidence at Monday night's meeting as to exactly what Mayor Schmidtzkrieg was addressing as this Council's failure to act in the best interests of the taxpayers of Park Ridge.

Below are the videos from Monday's COW. The first video begins with a discussion of the water fund rates -- how do you feel these idiots performed?

video #00000.MTS PRCOW 2/8/10



video #00001.MTS PRCOW 2/8/10



For a more expansive editorial on Benedict Ryan's whine, hop on over to the Pub-dog's website.

On The Loose!

Original from -- www.devilstowertradingpost.com

There's a Council meeting tonight! The agenda (.pdf) looks interesting, to say the least!

Finance & Budget Committee item c looks very interesting! Our sources inside the City tell us this little gem is the brainstorm of 7th Ward Alderman Frank assWsol.

Our sources have also told us, because Ald. assWsol hasn't provided any documentation for publication on the City's website, this will be a discussion about --

"-- rebates to owners of “existing” single family homes up to a maximum of a $2,500.00 rebate based on 25% of the actual cost of the verifiable construction of flood mitigation/prevention projects performed on a single-family residence, dating back to January 1, 2008. All new construction is required to meet all appropriate building codes and is specifically excluded from this program. The goal of the program is to provide Park Ridge homeowners of existing single family residences who have had flood mitigation/prevention construction work performed on their dwelling or those adopting such improvements an opportunity to address the new issue of “100 year flooding” rainfall that has become all too “normal.” Only existing single-family homes (and town homes) will be eligible whether owner occupied or not. Landlords may apply. Projects covered by the program will include improvements for: overhead sewers; backwater valves in basements or yards; lift stations in yards; glass block basement windows in cases where a home is subject to flooding through window wells; drain tile with sump pumps; backup battery sump pumps; emergency generators for flood control systems, “French drains” which can demonstrate their effectiveness at retaining significant rainwater that causes home flooding and sump pump connections to storm sewers. The type of projects not covered include maintenance items such as normal plumbing repairs, sump pump replacements, valve replacements, sewer clean-outs and repairs. Funding for this program will be from General Fund property tax reserves."

We are indebted to our brave source for this information. And, if Ald. assWsol gets his way, the entire City budget and Park Ridge taxpayers will be even further "indebted."

The current City budget is in the red by $2million and counting.

Last year's City budget was in the red by $2.5million.

Property taxes and fees have been raised.

City staff has been asked to take salary freezes.

The City Council increased funding for community groups beyond the original budget.

And Ald. assWsol wants to enact legislation to subsidize private home improvements, retroactive to January 1, 2008, before the City's consultants and Flooding Task Force determine any definitive causes of flooding and make recommendations for courses of action.

While the 5th Ward's Benedict Alderman Robert Ryan wants to make sure there is the likelihood of adding even more residential density to the Uptown area, and more housing units to the already depressed real estate housing market.

B.O.H.I.C.A!

No PRU recap tomorrow. We'll provide a post for any reader reports of the meeting.

Benedict Alderman Ryan, Illustrated Again!

For your reading pleasure, we've copied and posted 5th Ward Benedict Alderman Ryan's latest communication to constituents.

We feel strongly that if Benedict Alderman Ryan believes 1st Ward Alderman Dave Schmidt has done something illegal then Benedict Alderman Ryan should file a complaint with the proper authorities. Enforcement of the law is one of the responsibilities of elected officials.



As for the rest of Benedict Alderman Ryan's letter -- we'll leave it to PRU readers to comment.

Nothing To See Here -- Council Recap.

Good morning PRU readers! There isn't much of anything to recap from the City Council meeting last night. They went through the usual opening drills, then approved the consent agenda and the Volunteer Month resolution.

Benedict Alderman Robert Ryan (5th ward) did offer a proposal under new business that the Napleton parking lot at Northwest Highway and Meacham be rezoned to transitional residential. The PRU Crew would not be surprised if this proposal under new business is as far as Benedict Ryan goes in representing 5th ward area residents on this issue, but we're willing to take a wait and see approach.

The City Council adjourned the meeting by 7:50 pm.

As one commenter noted this morning,

February 3, 2009 9:46 AM

Anonymous said...

"I suspect that all the meetings between now and the election will be short, so that Howard has less opportunities to say something wrong, and so that residents have less opportunity to speak up on agenda items.

Get out the rubber stamp, bacause we are just being efficient here.

Nothing to see

Move along folks

Go back home and bake an apple pie or something"

So if you are searching for something more informative than a City Council meeting, you may want to visit the Herald-Advocate website today. Their online update, Sheriff's office describes gang presence in township, is pretty good and worth your time.

Reader Soapbox!

Today we read in the Park Ridge Herald that Alderman Ryan has asked for costs involving potential design/construction of a new police station.

I for one am for this and congratulate the city fathers once and for all.

But , recently we have seen the posted statements by our new city manager Mr. James Hock who stated that we are currently operating a city budget that is in the "red ".

Therefore, if we are already in the hole - why would we go forward with this proposal ?

Did we miss something here ?

A letter was submitted ( respectfully ) with suggestions as to how we can cut the fat from the budget. Such as :

- Stop the use of take home city cars for those non-emergency personnel.

- Stop all paid overtime with time due being substitute until funds are available.

- Salary cuts and start from the top down on a volunteer basis - first.

We are in tough financial times and have seen other cities cut very deep such as the city of Naperville in cutting three officers and two fire fighters from their budget.

The city of Hoffman estates had decided not to fill the five vacancies from their police department also due to the budget.

We certainly hope that this will not be the case here in Park Ridge but if we don't get tough and stop the spending and make some revisions within the city - we could see the above nightmare in loosing highly trained city department personnel being laid off.

I'm sure this is not what the city and the residents want.
Less coverage and more spending.

Its like the current rear wheel squad cars that we have patrolling the streets - when the heavy snow comes - our wheels will only spin.

We need some traction with our budget and those who protect us deserve only the best. Let's not let them or the residents down before its too late.

Thank you.
Gene Spanos
Park Ridge Resident

Avast, mateys!

The PRU Crew missed "Talk Like A Pirate Day" but decided to go marauding anyway. Our discussion today is an idea we pillaged from a comment we read in a post on the Pub-dog's blog.

Our regular readers may recall one of our early posts on the subjects of Journeys from PADS to Hope, HUD funding, and the State of Illinois' plans for affordable housing; we titled our post "The HUDdled Masses and More." In that discussion we told readers that --

"In a 2004 report released by the Illinois Housing Development Authority, Park Ridge was listed as one of the affordable housing community slackers (.pdf), right there on page 4. But what caught the PRU Crew's attention in that report was the section:

Local Control is Maintained

“One of the important provisions of the law is that local decisions remain with the local government and that all developments must meet the standards of the local community,” explained Dibble. “The community can tailor its own plan for its own needs and concerns. And once they have their plan in place, the community is in charge of its own destiny.”

"Communities also have the option of choosing one of three planning goals. They can adopt a plan that requires 15% of all new developments to be affordable; a plan whereby the community will increase its overall percentage of affordable housing by three percentage points; or a plan whereby communities will increase their overall percentage of affordable housing to 10%."

"The type of development – rental or for sale – as well as the type of buildings – detached single family, attached townhomes, condos, etc. – are all completely under the control of the municipality. Also, the population that the community intends to address is completely flexible and under the control of the municipality. Communities with aging populations may consider rental developments for seniors, but others may plan for a homeownership program for teachers, hospital workers, or other municipal employees. Still others may develop a program to retain the young families who grew up in the community, who are otherwise forced to find homes in other communities."

And that right there, our dear fellow Park Ridgians, means developers. Campaign contributing developers, along with whatever else those developers may deign to bestow upon a politician who may then look favorably on a new development.

Because what will happen is that any developer required to set aside some portion of a development for "affordable housing" purposes will then have a substantial reason to ask for......can you guess......that's right......increased density. Density. Density. Density."

What caught the PRU Crew's attention in the comment on the Pub-dog's website was a link to a pioneer press article and a reference to an Arlington Hts. task force, known as "ACT, an acronym for the Appropriate Conduct Task Force." Arlington Heights Village Manager Bill Dixon is quoted in the article as saying the task force has been asked to, "make sure our village resources are being used to the best they can be" and "He expects the task force to report its findings by the end of the year." And we were reminded of our cautions about how we here in the City of Park Ridge could find ourselves dealing with issues surrounding low income housing and a host of tangent issues and fallout from that.

So we went looking to find the promised "ACT" report on the Village of Arlington Hts. website. We couldn't find the full report, but we did find a set of village board meeting minutes.pdf (item #6 on the agenda) that discusses cameras at the Arlington Hts. train station and also some of the findings of the "ACT" report. It appears to us that considerable time, effort, and expense is being spent by the village of Arlington Hts. on the issue surrounding homeless loitering, though we note with general amusement each board members careful avoidance of actually mentioning homeless loitering as a problem. We also note Village President Mulder's references to seeking grant money.

We also found that the Village of Arlington Hts. has a Housing Commission and "Multi-Family Affordable Housing Policy" which demands "Developers of multi-family residential housing must now submit information to the Village concerning how they intend to address the Village Board's goal to promote affordable housing in the Village. The provision of affordable housing will be one of the issues examined when deciding whether to grant new Planned Unit Development of amendments to Planned Unit Development for multi-family residential housing."

The PRU Crew is wondering if the very visible homeless population that likes to hang out in Arlington Hts. has had anything to do with why the Village so eagerly promoted and adopted the "Metropolitan Mayors Caucus’ “Housing Endorsement Criteria” that include promoting transit oriented and pedestrian-friendly development projects, encouraging an array of quality housing options throughout the community including housing at various price points, giving preference to mixed-income developments, promoting good design in order to ensure the long-term contribution to the improvement of neighborhoods." We're willing to bet that any inquiry to Village President, Arlene Mulder, would be met with some variation of, "We simply responded to a community need that we saw. The PADS programs run by our churches have never been a problem."

But we all know, this is Park Ridge, our elected officials would never bow to developer demands for zoning variances for height and density just because developers cry poor-mouth. And our elected officials would never bow to those demands because developers may cry poor-mouth about being required in the future to set aside a portion of their developments for low income and subsidized housing. No way. That will never happen here.

We're sure there's no connection or correlation whatsoever between homeless shelters, increased numbers of homeless people, adoption of affordable (read low income and subsidized) housing policies, and developers. And surely there's no connection or correlation whatsoever between politicians and campaign contributions from developers. No way. That only happens in Chicago.

And as Benedict Alderman Robert Ryan (5th Ward) offered in his statement read by Mayor Howard at the last City Council C.O.W., "there is a need in the Park Ridge community" for homeless shelters.

It must be like being high all the time!

In our last post, we hoped PRU readers would "critically consider" what was published in last week's Herald-Advocate.

If you read the Herald-Advocate, then you may have read their article What should be on the Napleton Cadillac site, about a meeting between approximately 50 residents and 5th Ward Benedict Alderman Robert Ryan. If you read that article, the following paragraphs may have struck you as something to critically consider:

Residents asked Ryan what they could do to get the land rezoned for townhouses or condominiums which are recommended in the 2002 Uptown comprehensive plan. Ryan said he did not know and would need to ask staff.

Acting Director of Community Development Carrie Davis told the Park Ridge Herald-Advocate that a request to rezone property can only be made by the property's owner.

"The owner is the only party that has the ability to bring forth the request for a zoning change," she said.

Davis also clarified that the Uptown plan's recommendations are not absolute: "It is not something that says, 'this is something that has to happen.' It is something the city uses as guidelines for determining the future land uses," she said.

Apparently Ryan wasn't fully aware of the residents' concerns, at least not enough to have consulted the City's Zoning Ordinance before attending the meeting. It has been reported that Ryan carried with him to the meeting a copy of the City's Uptown plan-.pdf, instead of a copy of the City's Zoning Ordinance.

News Flash for Ald. Ryan!!! Your constituents are already aware of what is contained in the Uptown plan. Didn't you think maybe they would want to know about the Zoning Ordinance too?

But o.k., we know Ald. Ryan is a busy guy with not enough time to show up to all required meetings, let alone look up local zoning laws. So when in doubt, ask a city staffer. And that's what the reporter for the Herald-Advocate did, which brings us to Ms. Carrie Davis, acting Director of Community Development. As noted above, Ms. Davis said, "a request to rezone property can only be made by the property's owner." (emphasis added)

We would like to now take the opportunity to introduce Ms. Davis -- and Ald. Ryan -- to the City's Zoning Ordinance-.pdf. It is a useful tool when conducting the job of Director of Community Development -- or Alderman -- in either a real or merely "acting" capacity.

A quick search of the Zoning Ordinance may even lead someone to the following:

4.8 ZONING AMENDMENT

A. Purpose

The regulations imposed and the districts created by this Ordinance may be amended from time to time in accordance with this Section. This process for amending the Zoning Ordinance text or the Zoning Map is intended to permit modifications in response to changed conditions or changes in City policy. Amendments are not intended to relieve particular hardships or confer special privileges or rights upon any person or party.

B. Initiation

An owner of any property in the City or the City may propose text or map amendments.

Does that say what we think it says? Does that say that an owner or the City may propose text or map amendments? Are "text or map amendments" the same thing as the "zoning change" Ms. Davis talked about?

The last paragraph of the Herald-Advocate article says:

Ryan promised residents he would support their desire to make the properties residential. "I think it's important to follow our [Uptown] plan," he said.

No time like the present to keep that promise, Ald. Ryan.

As for Ms. Davis, by our count she's 0 and 2 in knowing the critical information available in the Zoning Ordinance, and providing that information to those with questions about a zoning issue.

And finally for residents with concerns about zoning issues or anything else...as one of our more friendly correspondents likes to quote, "Trust, but verify."

Taking Attendance! Great Idea!

In last week's Park Ridge Herald-Advocate there were two items covering the attendance of Aldermen at City Council and committee meetings, while today's Pub-dog piece is also about Benedict Alderman Ryan's need for an attitude adjustment.

The PRU Crew is going to give ourselves a big old pat on the backs for getting people to pay attention to the issue of attendance.

And you're all very welcome.

A Quickie Council Recap!

Unlike James Patterson's 384 pages of 'The Quickie', ours is going to be much shorter.

In yesterday's post, Busy Bees!, we highlighted six items of interest on the City Council agenda that we hoped would get attention from the Park Ridge populace. We hear some items drew a lot of attention, while other items were referred to committees or ignored entirely.

Below is our quickie recap of those six agenda items:

1) A City Council discussion of off street parking (.pdf) for a property at 14 Main St. -- this item is on the agenda at the request of Benedict Alderman Robert Ryan (5th Ward); it seems Ald. Ryan is always eager to see to it the Real Estate company of his campaign treasurer, Owen Hayes, gets plenty of special attention.

While Benedict Alderman Robert Ryan (5th Ward) attempted, weakly, to speak in general terms about the zoning code requirements and process for requesting a zoning code variance for properties that remain vacant for 180 days or more, it was fairly clear to those present and familiar with Ald. Ryan's nonsense that his goal was to provide assistance to a particular property, 14 Main Street, that just happens to be a commercial property listing out of the McClennan Real Estate office; the same real estate office from which Ald. Ryan's campaign manager, Owen Hayes, operates. Mr. Hayes also has a listing, 104 Main Street, which is said to have off street parking issues as well.

The issue of the City's zoning code requirements for off street parking was referred to committee for review.

2) Under the City Manager's report, a discussion of the proposed extension of Cumberland Ave. (.pdf) under the train tracks; this isn't the worst idea we've heard come out of City government, but couple it further with a proposal to close Greenwood at the train tracks, and it becomes perhaps the most boneheaded proposal we've heard come out of City government.

Alderman Dave Schmidt (1st Ward) offered that he could immediately save the City the cost of consulting fees by letting everyone know that the idea of extending Cumberland Ave. under the train tracks and then closing Greenwood at the tracks was considered insanity by everyone he's heard from on this issue. Several residents also addressed the Council and expressed their displeasure with this idea.

However, our sources tell us this item provided the highlight of the evening when those in attendance were given a glimpse into the void, otherwise known as the mind of Mayor Howard Frimark. Mayor Howard let everyone know that the money spent to study the extension of Cumberland Ave. is not "our money" but rather it is "Federal money". The PRU Crew isn't sure about Mayor Howard, but Crew members recall recently reviewing some very large amounts of "our money" going into the Federal coffers.

Mayor Howard's mindset reminded us of the District 64 School Board thinking on money matters related to the City's offer to buy their district headquarters building.

Mayor Howard also let everyone know that he is unfamiliar with the area North of the train tracks because during the 30 years he's lived in Park Ridge he "doesn't go that way".

3) Also under the City Manager's report we see that an amendment to the separation agreement with former Chief of Police, Jeff Caudill, is up for discussion. We're going to bet this has something to do with the Pension Board's denial of a portion of the compensation package Caudill received.

A motion was made to set aside this issue until Ekl Williams could confirm for the City that former Chief Caudill had cooperated with the internal investigation of the police department. Ald. Ryan offered that doing such a thing seemed like "negotiating after the fact." Ald. Schmidt offered his agreement and this matter was referred to the Finance and Budget committee for number crunching.

4) Under Planning and Zoning is a first reading of the rather extensive changes to the year-old zoning ordinance that includes language we believe allows for more development of R-5 projects (.pdf); the densest and tallest residential projects that can be built. We're also wondering how much the City has paid out in consulting fees on the zoning re-write and why these changes weren't recommended or corrected by the consultant during the re-write process.

This item was referred to committee for discussion of language concerning the B-4 area of the central business district; the hope is to determine language that would define the B-4 business district as a geographic area, then assign the R-5 zoning code to that area.

This item was also referred to committee to determine whether it is the City Council or the Planning and Zoning commission that has the authority to determine procedures and policies. The PRU Crew feels elected officials on the City Council should determine procedures and policies, but we know there are commissions out there that would prefer to operate freely and not be subject to the scrutiny of elected officials.

5) Under the Procedures and Regulations Committee report, the City Council is set to give a first reading to a new ordinance (.pdf) allowing Mayor Howard to control all appointments of the City Council.

To the PRU Crew's surprise, this item was referred back to the Procedures and Regulations committee for further discussion. It is our hope that committee and council members choose democracy over dictatorship, but we're not holding our breath.

6) Finally, under the Finance and Budget Committee report, we read that the City Council plans to authorize Mayor Howard to sign a lease agreement (.pdf) for parking spaces at 20 S. Fairview Ave. We are pleased to see that the City will pass through all parking space rental costs to those leasing the spaces, but we do wonder why the City will be providing bookkeeping and secretarial services to SCH Real Estate LLC, free of charge. We also wonder why the City's required disclosure of ownership (.pdf) documents have not been provided by SCH Real Estate LLC in accordance with the City's ordinance.

Finally, the City Council adopted the lease agreement for the parking spaces at 20 S. Fairview, and will now be providing SCH Real Estate LLC with free bookkeeping and secretarial services.

A member of the audience asked Mayor Howard if the long rumored participation of his wife, Nancy Frimark, as a beneficiary in the trust and/or SCH Real Estate LLC that holds title to this property is true. Mayor Howard stated that the rumor is "absolutely false." Certainly, Mayor Howard wouldn't lie about such a thing.

We look forward to seeing the required disclosure of ownership documents for this agreement; the City law is very clear -- disclosure of ownership interest is required.

There you go folks! A quickie recap of 1,137 words for your reading enjoyment!

Benedict Alderman Ryan, Illustrated!

Benedict Alderman Robert Ryan (5th ward) has penned a letter in today's edition of the Park Ridge Herald-Advocate. We decided to illustrate his missive here.

Finding right solution that all can embrace

I would to thank the Ministerial Association and St. Mary's for holding a public open house Monday, April 28 about the proposed PADS site suggested at St. Mary's, and for all the work that St Mary's has put into the proposed PADS program.

I believe that almost everyone would like to help the homeless -- help give them a better chance in life, help them while they are down, and give them courage. Such generosity and compassion have long been the cornerstones of this community.

However, it is critical that we as a community find a location that all can embrace. Such a positive outcome requires dialogue in the context of a process that explores all options available. To that end, I encourage the Ministerial Association to:

• Form a subcommittee to consider other sites in Park Ridge; this committee should include residents as well as PADS representatives.



• Agree upfront on a set of 4 to 5 key criteria for an optimum location.

• Hold another public meeting in three months or so to share their findings, including a comparison of sites using the St. Mary's site as the "base condition" for comparison purposes.

Perhaps this dialogue will prove that St. Mary's is the best site, but this dialogue is critical and should take place to ensure the final site is the optimum location.

I would rather delay the opening of a PADS site for six months than select a site that has been identified without exploring other options and before the concerns of neighbors and community members have been addressed.

Robert Ryan, Alderman, 5th Ward

Boxed-In Bob.

At last Monday's City Council meeting, Aldermen voted to move forward with a Request for Proposal (.pdf) for an "audit" of the Park Ridge Police Department. "Audit" is the preferred term being used by city insiders to describe what is, in fact, supposed to be an independently conducted investigation into purported problems with our police department.

There is a ton of back-story to each of the items on the audit list. But because these matters involve personnel below the level of Department head, and because the PRU Crew would like to see this investigation conducted with something resembling integrity (though we aren't holding our breath), we are only going to discuss list item "g" at this time.

Last week an article in the Journal & Topics reported, Council Requests Bids for Police Investigation. In that article it is noted that, "The land purchase item spurred some discussion among council members. Ald Don Bach (3d) said, 'I don't see how this is going to make the police department better.' Ald. Robert Ryan (5th) also questioned the land purchase activity listing. 'I do not see where (the listing) fits in here,' he said. 'I think it should be struck'."

We can't explain Ald. DreadBach's opposition, but we do view him as generally dim-witted and uninformed. But Benedict Alderman Ryan won't be getting a pass from the Crew, because we believe we know exactly why he wanted the item "struck" from the list.

As many regular PRU readers may remember, Park Ridge almost had a new police station back in 2004. We posted a link to PublicWatchdog.org for their article: The Park Ridge Police Station That Almost Was.

In the Pub-dogs piece we are told about a local realtor who tried to make a quick buck off the backs of his friends and neighbors, Park Ridge taxpayers. He got caught and was eventually disciplined for his "dishonorable, unethical, or unprofessional conduct of a character likely to deceive, defraud, or harm the public" by the State of Illinois' Department of Financial and Professional Regulation.

That local realtor is Owen J. Hayes, II who was also the treasurer for Benedict Ald. Ryan’s 5th Ward campaign. Mr. Hayes has also been one of Mayor Howard's campaign contributors.

As we said, we believe we know exactly why Benedict Ald. Ryan wanted the item struck from the investigation list. We believe Benedict Ald. Ryan was trying to cover up for his buddy, or at the least, not allow the subject of his campaign treasurer's unethical conduct to be raised anew. Alderman Wsooooolman boxed Ryan into a corner by responding, "If there is nothing there, what are we afraid of?" Again, Prudos to Ald. Wsooooolman for being unafraid to confront the truth.

Benedict Alderman Ryan also wasn't keen on the idea of citizen input. Is he ever?

Whatever the investigation produces, we hope it is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. And we hope the powers that be at 505 Butler Place are willing to tell that truth to the Park Ridge public. Really, we can handle it.

The Banty Cock Crows!

Shortly before the Holidays, the citizens of Park Ridge were treated to another round in the continuing saga of Kemerer v. Schmidt (Pub-dogs post 12-20-07)

Mr. David Kemerer, known 'round PRU as the self-titled "Cousin Dave", wrote yet another letter to the local rags; this time, defending all things Benedict Alderman Ryan (5th Ward). The PRU Crew is beginning to think Ryan may be as illiterate as Mayor Frimark, since he hasn't taken the time to write any of his own letters, communicating his own position and defending his own vote before the citizens of Park Ridge - many of whom believe Ryan is doing everything EXCEPT representing them.

The Pub-dogs note that Ryan did indeed hold private discussions with one (or more) of the investors in Norwood's Park Ridge 2004 LLC, whose request was then pending before the council. We believe that investor was Mr. John Chipman, who was eager to have Ryan's affirmative vote for approval of the density variance Norwood was seeking for their condo project at Executive Office Plaza. And Chipman eventually got that affirmative vote.

Mr. Kemerer has spent considerable time on the subject of Executive Office Plaza, as well as considerable time on researching and discussing the issue of a recall ordinance for local elected officials that has been proposed by Alderman Dave Schmidtzkrieg (1st Ward).

Mr. Kemerer treated PRU readers to some lengthy discussion of the topic of a recall in his "Cousin Dave" comments (#21, #24, #27) in our Worse Than Kool-aid! post. Noting specifically in one comment that we had better "buckle our seat belts" because he had to "throw a little law" at everybody.

And now it appears we may know why Mr. Kemerer has had so much valuable attorney time to dedicate to stumping for Norwood, defending the "honor" of Benedict Alderman Ryan, and attempting to provide Alderman Schmidtzkrieg with etiquette lessons...


ARDC Lawyer Search Results

The ARDC's website notes:

REMOVAL FROM AND REINSTATEMENT TO THE MASTER ROLL OF ATTORNEYS

Supreme Court Rule 756 provides that on February 1 of each year, the ARDC must remove from the master roll the name of any lawyer who has not registered for that year. The rule also provides that any lawyer who practices law while not on the master roll engages in the unauthorized practice of law and may be held in contempt. ARDC sends a Final Registration Notice in January, warning unregistered attorneys that they will be removed from the master roll if they do not register. Shortly after the removal, ARDC sends notice of an attorney's removal to the attorney and to the Chief Judges and Clerks of the circuit courts in which the removed attorney was registered.

If you have been removed from the master roll for failure to register, you can be reinstated by registering and paying the registration fee and any penalty due.

Mr. Kemerer may we suggest, the next time you "throw a little law" at anybody, that you make sure you are authorized to do so? Or give folks a heads up about your lapsed registration status? After all, you must know that those hearing and reading your words are doing so under the presumption that you are an attorney, authorized to practice law. Letting folks know you, in fact, are not seems like the polite thing to do.

Thanks.

Worse Than Kool-aid!

The games have begun! In today's issue of the Journal & Topics, we read two interesting items. The first is an article about the amazing disappearing council agenda item regarding council decorum:


click on above photo for larger view

It seems the city council has more than one whiny cry baby occupying a seat. It appears the 5th Ward's Benedict-Alderman Ryan went running to the Mayor to wail about a personal email from the 1st Ward's Alderman Schmidtzkrieg that he didn't like, and the Mayor was willing to place the item on the city council agenda for public discussion. We understand that Benedict-Alderman Ryan isn't used to being strongly challenged either publicly or privately, but we had no idea he was such a remarkable cry baby.

According to Mayor Fri-nocchio, he pulled the item from the council agenda because he was afraid the meeting would last too long. Since that entire city council meeting was about 30 minutes in length, we feel Mayor Fri-nocchio must have pulled the agenda item for other reasons. And we are digging in to find out why.

The second item of interest is a letter from 1st Ward resident Dave Kemerer:


click on above photo for larger view

Mr. Kemerer accuses Alderman Schmidtzkrieg of having a "penchant for loose rhetoric." It appears to us that Mr. Kemerer has a penchant for "loose truths." As an attorney, Mr. Kemerer should know better than to declare something unconstitutional before a court has declared something unconstitutional. But we feel the crux of the matter for Mr. Kemerer is not necessarily the truth involved with the constitutionality of a recall ordinance as much as it may be his desire to spin the message and provide his pals with cover.

It appears to us that Mr. Kemerer isn't any better with numbers than he is with his treatment of the truth. The final vote to approve the density variance for Norwood's condominium project was 4 to 3. Schmidtzkrieg was joined in voting "no" by Aldermen Wsooooolman and DreadBach. So, in fact, "the rest of the council" did not "conclude" that the density variance was justified.

Mr. Kemerer also seems extremely concerned that Alderman Schmidtzkrieg may run for mayor - something Schmidtzkrieg himself has said he is not doing, much to the PRU Crew's disappointment.

We wonder what Mr. Kemerer is "running" for?

In any case, what is going on here is that the Usual Suspects Club is cranking up the smear and spin machine. It's of vital importance that a representative with populist appeal gets knocked down and dragged around so that the politically connected can have their way with public policy.

It's nothing more than absolute bullshit.

It Ain't Over Til...

As we expected, last night the city council voted 4 (Allspaghetti, Benedict Ryan, Lord of the Manor and Carey the Unfriendly Ghost) to 3 (Schmidtzkrieg, Wsoooool man, DreadBach) in favor of giving Norwood's Park Ridge 2004 LLC the density variance for the 8 additional condo units.

Again, it was Aldermen Schmidt and Wsol who led the effort to not only keep the development within the parameters of the new and more lenient zoning code, but also tighten up the language on the ordinance regarding the "senior housing" component and ensure that the city not get handed the final bill for the water retention.

The language in the ordinance remains full of loopholes "big enough to drive a condo through", largely due to the parliamentary maneuverings of the Lord of the Manor and the stupidity of his fellow Aldermorons.

There were 13 comments from the gallery; 4 of those comments were in support of the project. Again, Carla Owen addressed the council and "updated" the petitions she and her Berry Pky. neighbors have been collecting in opposition to the code variances for the Norwood project. Those petition signers now number around 500.

To no avail.

The preferences and will of the majority of residents in the immediate area of Executive Office Plaza and throughout the city have been ignored.

Get used to it.

Bob "the Builder" Ryan!

Tonight's city council meeting may be the end to the Norwood-EOP Space Odyssey. Once the council gets their parliamentary act together, motioning to substitute one PUD ordinance for another or offer amendments as they feel necessary, we hear the final vote count will probably end up 4 to 3 in favor of granting Norwood's Park Ridge 2004 LLC their density variance.

For those of you who don't think 8 extra units and a sham "senior housing" component are good for Park Ridge, you may want to contact the 4 likely "yes" votes: Rich DiPietro (2nd Ward), Jim Allegretti (4th Ward), Bob "the Builder" Ryan (5th Ward) and Tom Carey (6th Ward).

Fifth ward alderman, Bob "the Builder" Ryan, is purported to have privately negotiated with Norwood and then lobbied his fellow aldermen in favor of granting Norwood's request. We're not sure exactly what he "negotiated", but we strongly urge him to remain in the field of traffic engineering, since the plan that is probably going to be approved this evening isn't much of a deal for the residents of Park Ridge.

Smile for the Camera!

As we discussed earlier this week, the city council Finance and Budget committee is considering the feasibility of broadcasting city council and committee meetings.

We had expected the topic to be covered in the local rags this week, but if they did cover it, we can't find it.

Our sources tell us there may be two city staffers who are still walking around upright! They've done some excellent research into the costs, technical requirements, and scope of televising city council and committee meetings. We are shocked, SHOCKED, at this revelation! No we're not. We are aware of these two particular city staffers, and we shall protect their identities by not naming them here because we would hate to see their good work rewarded with more work.

From the research that has been conducted, we hear the cost may be less than originally estimated; original estimates were in the $70,000.00 - $75,000.00 range, but the staffers proposal is in the $50,000.00 range. And, the scope of coverage may be greater than mere broadcasting of meetings; not only can the city council chamber be wired, but also the mayor's conference room, the public works service center and the fire department.

Broadcasting could include city council and committee meetings, and the city could broadcast emergency messages or something arty, like local concerts.

The recorderings would be archived on the city's website so that the 1o people in Park Ridge suspected of being interested in city doings could access the tapes. The broadcasts could be searchable through a menu option.

There are two aldermorons said to be less than enthusiastic about the idea. Care to guess who they are? Yes, Benedict-Alderman Robert Ryan (5th), and Thomas Carey the Unfriendly Ghost (6th). Their concerns are purported to be about the cost and how few (or how many?) Park Ridge citizens may actually watch.

While the roughly $50,000,000.00 city budget is always a matter for concern, because there isn't anything politicians and bureaucrats like better than spending the taxpayer's money, we feel the estimated $50,000.00 would be worth the expenditure for what appears to be available in the scope of this project.

Come on city council! Give the residents of Park Ridge the gift of learning what it is you do every couple of weeks!