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.

We Recommend --

Lifted from salon.com/story

For those of you paying attention to City Council antics, you'll want to stock-up on some good old fashioned lubrication in preparation for the screwing you're likely to get this week from your representatives -- we use the term really really really loosely.

Tonight's City Council COW agenda (.pdf) is set to cover topics under Public Safety, Public Works and Procedures and Regulations.

Topics to be covered under Procedures and Regulations look to be particularly entertaining.

Once again it appears the 4th ward's Alderman James Allspaghetti has taken some liberty in clarifying the cover memorandum submitted for public review by the City Attorney -- Here's a link to the original cover memorandum and here's a link to the revised cover memorandum regarding Supermajority voting to override denials by the Planning and Zoning Commission.

The revised language reads --

Alderman Allegretti states that this change is only directed at the ordinance adopted November 16, 2009, which he believes misstated the intent of the Council by requiring 6 votes instead of 5 votes as intended.

Our faithful PRU readers can review the videos of the November 16, 2009 meeting here -- the subject of supermajority voting is covered in videos #3, #4, and #5. So how about it PRU readers, do you think after talking the issue of supermajority voting to death, to borrow a phrase Ald. Allspaghetti so often likes to use, can any of the Aldermorons claim to not have been clear on what they were voting for or against?

And as everyone should understand by now, the only reason this issue has come up again is because Ald. Allspaghetti is doing his incompetent best to see to it Park Ridge has the privilege of billboards being erected within our borders. And in light of the legal cites and legal history surrounding the issues of billboards, zoning and fees -- the only question remaining is what exactly is in this for Aldermoron Allspaghetti, personally, because this guy has never worked this hard for any other single piece of City legislation in his entire term in office.

Also under Procedures and Regulations is a cover memorandum (.pdf) from City Manager Jim Hock discussing the District 207 Board of Education's proposal to add nominal interest to the deferred TIF payment from the City of Park Ridge -- and as we bantered back and forth in the comments on this post, it does indeed appear the discussion between the City Manager and the Board was, in fact, interesting.

Hopefully, the videos from tonight's meeting will be available for review at some point in the future!

PRU Potluck! *Addendum*

For our faithful PRU readers who appreciate a little ADHD --


From the Humpty Dumpty file of municipal management comes the following story -- Arlington Heights development falls into foreclosure. The article opens with "(Crain’s) — A foreclosure suit seeking nearly $20 million has hit Arlington Town Square, a publicly subsidized mixed-use project that sparked a revival of the northwest suburb’s downtown."

And what's another way of saying "publicly subsidized mixed-use project?" If you said "TIF district" you would be right!

The article goes on to point out the investment group for the Arlington Town Square has been accused of fraud. However, it doesn't take accusations of fraud to cause a foreclosure filing -- missing mortgage payments is what it takes.

And as somebody once pointed out, TIF districts are no gurantee of redevelopment success -- TIF districts are as subject to economic forces and their own special problems as the rest of the real estate market.

Watch your pocketbooks and wallets, ladies and gentlemen!



Will the Park Ridge Park District Board agree to the proposed T-Mobile erection of two cell towers?

At the last Park Ridge Park District Board COW meeting, the Executive Director's discussion included a proposal for "T-Mobile Cell Towers at Northeast and South Park."

The PRU Crew has been told T-Mobile may be willing to pay a hefty sum per month to the Park District for the privilege -- perhaps as much as $20,000.00 per month year.

Cell towers aren't pretty, but considering the revenue constraints on the Park District and the fact that cell towers aren't all that different from utility poles, the Crew feels this is a revenue generating idea worth serious consideration.

We also feel cell towers don't suck as much as billboards!

The Park Ridge Park District Board will probably be discussing this issue at their next regular meeting Thursday, March 18th, beginning at 7:30 p.m. in the Board Room at the Maine Park Leisure Center, 2701 Sibley.

*Addendum* -- Anonymous said...

Cell towers do not have to be unsightly. I was fortunate to be in Colorado a few weeks ago and noticed that the cell towers were disguised as evergreen trees. They blended in quite well, and it was a local who pointed it out to me. Seems like a workable solution in our parks that we require that as well.
March 10, 2010 1:53 PM



Anon@1:53 -- You weren't joking!

We found the photo at left on the website Destination Knowlton.com

Gotta love those crazy Canucks!







In an online article published by the Herald-Advocate, we learn "a majority of the Maine Teachers Association membership voted "no" today (March 9) on a board request that the teachers open their contract, a district news release stated.

The Board and Administration had proposed salary adjustments that would have facilitated the recall of some or all of the 75 teachers laid off in response to a current and projected structural budget deficit, the release stated. "

"Salary adjustments" translated means less of a pay raise than originally contracted.

And again to the MTA rank and file we say, WTF?!?!

For those interested in an editorial analysis of the subject, check out the Pub-dog's post today -- Teachers Union Betting District 207 Blinks First.

Slogging Through the TIF Swamp!

From -- mongabay.com

We recently received an article forward by a PRU reader -- Time for TIF sunshine

The article explains "TIF districts—we'll try to make this brief—are supposed to help revitalize blighted areas that wouldn't otherwise be attractive to developers. By designating an area a TIF district, the city lays claim to the new tax dollars generated by rising property values in the district. Those dollars, some of which would otherwise go to schools, parks or county government, are theoretically plowed back into the TIF district to promote growth."

The article goes on to say that two Chicago Aldermen, Manny Flores (1st) and Scott Waguespack (32nd), "...aren't trying to shut down the TIF districts, which generated $550 million for the city in 2007. What they're worried about is accountability. Because there's so little oversight of TIF spending, those millions are basically a glorified slush fund for Mayor Richard Daley's pet projects" and that "For years, former Cook County Commissioner Mike Quigley railed about the TIF districts calling them "hidden tax increases" because they force local governments to raise taxes to offset the money siphoned off by the city."

Sound familiar?

The PRU Crew has spent much of the morning slogging through the swamp of TIF documents available for review.

We think a good place to start is by taking a look at the City's TIF district map (.pdf). The TIF district covers an area considerably larger than just the new Uptown redevelopment. All the property tax generating parcels within the TIF district are paying all incremental property tax increases, since the creation of the district, into the City's TIF fund.

We keep hearing that the Uptown redevelopment isn't yet fully "on-line" and supporting itself. O.k.

Well, what about all the other properties in the TIF district? Have those property values risen as a direct result of the Uptown redevelopment, as was promised would be the result when the TIF district was created? How much have those property values risen?

Remember people, the incremental property tax income is in addition to the millions in bond borrowing the City has done to finance the Uptown redevelopment.

Where exactly is all this money going?

We agree with the sentiments expressed in the Chicago Tribune article, it's time for some TIF sunshine.

A Quickie!

From the City Council 2/11/08 TIF Workshop minutes --

JOURNAL OF THE PROCEEDINGS
OF THE CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP OF THE
CITY OF PARK RIDGE
505 BUTLER PLACE, PARK RIDGE, ILLINOIS
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
February 11, 2008
CALLED TO ORDER BY Mayor Howard P. Frimark
at 6:33 p.m.

On Roll Call vote:
Ald. Schmidt, Ald. DiPietro, Ald. Bach, Ald. Ryan, Ald. Carey, and Ald. Wsol (arr. 6:49
p.m.)
Ald. Allegretti was absent.

City Manager explained the following:

TIF: What is it?

· Tax increment financing is a financing tool used to pay for public investment and infrastructure needed to simulate economic growth.

We guess it's better late than never for City Manager Tim Schuenke to tell the truth!

Was it good for you?



You can read the rest of the council's workshop minutes here (.pdf). We warn you, after that opener it's all downhill propaganda.

That Explains It!

In both of the local rags this past week, we got to read about Mayor Howard's views on the Napleton deal, which the Mayor's tie-breaking vote assured would give his campaign contributor, Napleton, as much as $2.4 million over the next 15 years.

The Wednesday rag ran Mayor Backs Incentive Vote, while the Thursday rag had a special "Guest Essay" under the Mayor's own name.

Members of the PRU Crew have had the dubious privilege of reading things the Mayor has actually written, and while it cannot be proved at this time, it is universally believed among the Crew that the Mayor's pen never met paper, nor did any of his fingers touch a keyboard during the production of that essay. And if you've ever heard the Mayor speak, then you are already aware that the Mayor's having dictated his thoughts is not even close to a possible reality in this lifetime - nor the next.

However, since the Mayor put his name on the "Guest Essay", we will move forward as if he really did author the thing, and we will explain to you all the things the Mayor didn't tell you in either of those pieces.

We read in the first piece that Mayor Howard said of his vote on the Napleton deal, "I'm not ashamed of my vote at all." Translation = "I'd do it again." Believe it people; he sure will.

The first article also quoted Frimark as saying, "43% of our sales tax comes from automotive: car dealers and gas stations" What the Mayor didn't tell you is that the roughly $5.9 million dollars in total sales tax revenues collected accounts for only 11% of the City's total revenue income of almost $53 million.

Property taxes ($15 million) account for about 30% of all revenue collected. All other revenue is split among 5 other sources of income. The City earns more from the sale of water ($6.5 million), and almost as much from the utility taxes it collects ($5 million) as it does in sales taxes.

Further, that 43% includes ALL automotive categories not just gas stations and car dealerships, but also car rentals and repair shops.

One of the City's greatest revenue streams comes from a category of income called "other"; about $12 million. The revenue sources for "other" include income from various fees, such as ambulance, gasoline, food and beverage taxes, etc.

It seems to us that the $200,000 in sales taxes generated by Napleton may be a 6% contribution to the City's total sales tax revenues, but it is less than .5% of the City's total income. So the PRU Crew isn't exactly sure what would be so tragic about losing the Napleton dealership to some other municipal suckers willing to bribe a car dealership to locate in their town; and that's if you are willing to believe that Napleton would high-tail it out of Park Ridge for "greener" incentive pastures.

Here's what we think: Napleton isn't going anywhere for the foreseeable future. They have already invested in their new site at Busse and Greenwood. And more significantly, Napleton has more clout in Park Ridge because of that 6% addition to the City's sales tax bottom line than they would have in any of the larger, more sales tax rich surrounding towns like Niles or Des Plaines. And Napleton is probably well aware that when it comes to generating sales tax revenues, what they are talking about generating in Park Ridge would be nothing more than a pimple on a flea’s sales tax ass in Niles or Des Plaines. Napleton knows this. Des Plaines' Mayor Arredia and Nile's Mayor Blase know this. And so do Mayor Frimark and his council bobble heads, even if they don't want to share that knowledge with you.

The Wednesday rag goes on to report that Mayor Howard said Park Ridge taxpayers, "...hear you're giving (Napleton) $400,000," he said, but he explained the town would eventually get that money back after the town homes are built and property tax starts coming in at a higher rate."

There you have it folks. You'll get the money back, as long as you are willing to tolerate more town houses being built into an already saturated and slumping housing market, not to mention the greater residential density and traffic the project will bring to Uptown and the surrounding neighborhood.

Of course, the taxpayer's of Park Ridge know that they wouldn't have to "get that money back" if it hadn't been given away. And most Park Ridge taxpayer's also seem to have a healthy respect for the idea that government should keep its nose out of private business transactions between two privately held businesses.

In the Mayor's essay, he elaborates on what he said about the use of Tax Increment Financing (TIF) funds in the news piece; that, "The agreed-to contribution of up to $400,000 will be generated by the project itself and is consistent with the intended use of TIF revenues. None of this revenue comes from the taxpayers of the city of Park Ridge."

That is such a remarkably stupid statement, we aren't sure where to begin to unravel the idiocy.

TIF funds are, in fact, revenue from the taxpayer's of the City of Park Ridge. Period. Whether the taxes are generated within the TIF district or not, ALL OF IT is taxpayer money. Those residents and businesses located within the TIF district are as much Park Ridge taxpayers as are the folks at Boardwalk, Park Ridge Point, Edison Park Homes and every other property owning and property tax paying person or business in Park Ridge.

Because TIF funds are held separately from the general City fund used to pay for services for Park Ridge residents, that DOES NOT MEAN IT ISN'T MONEY COMING FROM PARK RIDGE TAXPAYERS! And every dollar of TIF revenue given to a private interest is a dollar less that the City has to spend on infrastructure within the TIF district; or to retire the TIF debt sooner so that our local School District and Park District can realize the full benefit of Uptown redevelopment along with the rest of Park Ridge's taxpayers.

Furthermore, the longer the TIF fund takes to break even, the longer taxpayers outside the TIF district will have to cover increasing expenses for City services, including those demands for services within the TIF district. And the City's general fund is forced to advance money to the TIF district for anything not covered by the generation of enough TIF funds.

The Mayor's essay also says, "Napleton will be investing $2 million in improvements into his dealership. This will be used to help remodel the facilities at their new location on Busse and Greenwood."

What the Mayor fails to tell you is that the remodeling of Napleton's new location is required by their franchise agreement. Perhaps Napleton Cadillac would remodel their new facility anyway, without the franchise agreement. But they have to, and now the taxpayers of Park Ridge will be paying for yet another deal between private businesses: Napleton and the manufacturers for whom it serves as a dealer.

Mayor Howard's concluding remark in the Wednesday article is, "The agreement benefits both of us"

Yeah...both Mayor Howard and his campaign contributor, Napleton Cadillac.