In the political cesspool known as Chicago, kinkiness in enforcement of the building code, the zoning code, and virtually every other code is a longstanding tradition.
Almost every builder, remodeler and handyman claims to have “a guy” who can do miraculous things to expedite projects and eliminate code problems. And the best of those “guys” usually work at “the Hall” – as in City Hall, until recently the ancestral home and domain of the Daleys
But naïve as we try not to be, we never thought those kinds of Chicago-style goings on happened in our sleepy little town.
At Monday night’s City Council meeting, however, 5th Ward resident Jeff Getz recounted an 11-minute tale of woe – which can be seen and heard from 1:03:45 to 1:14:55 of the Council meeting video on the City’s website – concerning his neighbor’s property at 322 Vine that has mysteriously defied or evaded numerous attempts by the City over the past 3 years to address as many as 15 building code violations.
According to Getz and other neighbors, some of those violations should have prevented occupancy, including 8 listed on an undated City “Building Inspection Report Form” reportedly issued on June 18, 2009 by City Building Administrator Steven L. Cutaia that includes the unequivocal admonition: “There shall be no occupancy until these issues are resolved.”
But June-July 2009 e-mail traffic between and among Cutaia, 322 owner/builder/resident Philip Spagnolo, P.E., John Zimmermann, P.E. of Terra Consulting Group, then-City Mgr. Jim Hock and Bernie Bono, P.E., of Bono Consulting, reveals something else. They show that the very same day Cutaia issued his written “no occupancy” decree, he also assured Spagnolo “that he will not enforce the issue” or keep Spagnolo and his family from moving in. And the day after that, Hock assured Spagnolo that the City (a/k/a, the taxpayers) “will take care of any billing from Mr. Bono” that the City apparently had initially assessed against Spagnolo.
That’s starting to sound Chicago-style kinky to us.
The 322 Vine neighbors contend that not only did Spagnolo move into that residence on the 4th of July 2009 weekend, before all the violations were corrected and an occupancy permit lawfully issued, but he has been thumbing his nose at the City and his neighbors ever since, even as flooding regularly occurs from “overland” water running off the 322 parcel that was elevated between 1 and 2 feet prior to construction of what some might call a “McMansion,” contrary to building code restrictions.
All of which may make Bono the single most intriguing figure in this saga, if only because he reputedly worked for Spagnolo before being hired by the City to advise it on the enforcement (or non-enforcement) of the 322 Vine building code violations against Spagnolo. That sounds like some sort of conflict of interest to us, but apparently it didn’t stop whoever at City Hall recommended and approved his hiring. Nor did it stop Bono from accepting the engagement.
Paging Steve Cutaia?
In a July 6, 2009 e-mail to Getz and fellow 322 Vine neighbor Cliff Kowalski, Cutaia cites “the sensitivity of this matter” as the reason “the City had hired a state licensed civil engineer to perform the final inspection” needed for the issuance of an occupancy permit. We understand that engineer was Bono, even though Cutaia was apparently keeping Bono’s identity close to his vest back then.
Almost 3 years later, however, and notwithstanding intervening citations issued to 322 Vine by the City, City Attorney Everette “Buzz” Hill sent a May 11, 2012 letter to Mr. & Mrs. Getz, advising them that, despite the fact that Spagnolo “had not made the changes that the [City’s 01.13.12 Notice of Violation] letter demanded,” he had recommended to the City that it not proceed with the prosecution of that violation.
Why? Hill had interviewed the City’s witnesses “whose testimony would be required” to prove the violation, but had determined from those interviews “that the City could not carry its burden of proof with respect to the proposed citations.”
Those witnesses? Bono and Cutaia.
As Getz disgustedly asked the City Council Monday night: “Is it my problem that the City cannot trust its own employees and consultants to testify” in support of the City’s own code enforcement?
No, it shouldn’t be. And Cutaia shouldn’t be issuing written orders while giving wink-and-nod assurances that they won’t be enforced. And these types of processes shouldn’t take 3 years to resolve, especially when the “resolution” ends up being the lawyer-written equivalent of “never mind.”
Monday night Ald. Dan Knight (5th), whose ward is the scene of this charade/farce, termed it “a 3-year travesty” while sternly admonishing City Staff to make certain it “can’t happen again.” As can be seen in e-mail traffic as recently as last month, however, Knight still was being told by Cutaia that 322 Vine lacked the “acceptable swales” that Bono claimed “existed in 2008, when he performed and approved the final drainage design”; and that City code enforcement was still proceeding.
The Mayor and the City Council should take this fiasco seriously and treat it as what it appears to be: hard evidence that something is very wrong in the City’s building department and won’t be going away on its own accord. That something makes the City’s building code a joke, at least to some people – which is why a legitimate investigation needs to be conducted.
Of course there likely will be attempts at wholesale dumping of all responsibility on the recently-departed Hock and the less-recently departed Carrie Davis, who ostensibly supervised Cutaia in the early stages of this debacle. That’s called the “empty chair” defense in legal circles, and it will be especially inviting here because Davis wae sacked by Hock, albeit belatedly and in one of his many incidents of mis-management that nevertheless earned him a new contract in late 2010 with a $120,000+ severance package. Feel free to thank Alds. Joe Sweeney and Rich DiPietro for that waste of tax dollars.
But from the looks of just the information we’ve been able to review in recent days, Getz may not have been too far off the mark when he voiced his suspicions to the Council Monday night of “back-room deals” involving City employees and consultants. Or, in Chicago parlance, the possibility that somebody may have “a guy” at “the Hall.”
Only this “Hall” is 505 Butler Place.
To read or post comments, click on title.
26 comments so far
Wow. This smells.
Why don’t one of the neighbors, you or someone else with a vested interest in this matter ask for a formal ethics investigation into the whole thing?
I’d assume if that were asked of the City Attorney or the Alderman, in case the City Attorney has to recuse himself due to his involvement, that would be a start toward getting to the bottom of this. No?
Word is this is going to be a subject of further discussion at a future Council meeting, when the City Attorney is there to defend his actions. Maybe that will start the ball rolling.
EDITOR’S NOTE: We have no interest in this situation other than the same interest all citizens have in honest, cost-effective government. We have presented the facts as they have been made available to us, but we do not claim they are all the relevant facts. That being said, the fact that we can paint this kind of picture with this amount of back-up documentation raises a disquieting number of red flags.
Are you kidding me ? Is everyone waiting til tomorrow to comment ? This is scandal, on par with our sister city, Chicago, yet no one feels the need to put their two cents in ? I am as de-senseitized as all of you, but this is an outrage ! C’mon people, ring the phones at 505 Butler and ask WTF ??????
EDITOR’S NOTE: Let’s not get carried away here. While this seems Chicago-esque, by Chicago standards of magnitude this is ham-and-egg stuff. Nevertheless, it definitely deserves investigation.
‘Green’ eggs and ham stuff, at the very least.
EDITOR’S NOTE: But not as benign as Dr. Seuss.
I would have never thought anything like this would go on in Park Ridge. Who dropped the ball?
EDITOR’S NOTE: It’s hard to say for sure, but there’s probably enough blame to go around – starting with Cutaia and Bono (even though Bono was only an outside “consultant” to the City).
We think Buzz Hill owes the Council and explanation – in open session, not the secret closed session – of exactly why he determined that after 3 years the City didn’t have enough evidence of violations to move forward with its case against the property owner. That suggests very sloppy or intentionally bad work at the Staff level.
I can’t speak to corruption per se but when we did our own renovation a few years ago, the incompetence was mind boggling, and cost us time, money and not an insignificant amount of sanity. I ended each day fully expecting to find my husband dead of a stress-related ailment.
We also weren’t novices caught off guard by the process — we had renovated two houses prior to that (in big, bad Chicago) and even built one from scratch and they were all walks in the park compared to what we went through with PR’s City Hall.
As discussed here recently re the Whole Foods project, I’ve heard over and over how “unfriendly” Park Ridge is to business. Our architect, contractor and various subs essentially said the same thing in regards to residential building projects. Perhaps our process would have been easier had we somehow tried to bypass the proper channels as the Vine team apparently did, who knows.
I wholly agree that this project stinks and merits further investigation. But even if City Hall comes out squeaky clean, competence and common sense are still sorely lacking there. While not criminal, those offenses are frustrating at best, costly at worst.
EDITOR’S NOTE: When it comes to criticism, we take a back seat to no one. But we tend to react negatively to most comments of Park Ridge being “unfriendly” to business, because that term is rarely accompanied by specific examples.
What we have seen, in the realm of home construction, is that some contractors don’t even attempt to familiarize themselves with our various codes but then beef when they do something non-compliant and then get called on it. It doesn’t mean we can’t do better but, from our experience and knowledge, “unfriendly” is more often used as an alibi by the “business” who didn’t/won’t/can’t conform to the existing rules.
This story has the same ring as my debacle with the building dept. I have spoke before the council about it and was railroaded by both Hock and Cutaia. I had a driveway replaced by Fortis Concrete/Builders. They pitched it towards my house and every time it rained my basement would take water. The city issued then a repair order and the contractor came outand made some cuts and low and behold the concrete was 3.5 inches deep in numerous areas. Code requires 4 in. minium depth. The city wrote them another ticket. The contractor stated all along that the tickets would be thrown out and I took that info to Steve Cutaia. He emailed me back stating the City will not honor any concrete less than 4 inches. The day before the hearing the tickets were dismissed. The contractor never returned to complete the job and cost me about $5,500. to have another contractor finish the job.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Sorry, Chris, but there’s a big difference between your situation and the one we describe in the post: YOU hired the incompetent contractor and then wanted the City to fight YOUR battle with the contractor for you. The folks who are flooding because of 322 Vine did nothing to cause their problem, other than trust that the City would enforce its codes honestly and competently.
The City may have let you down, but you created your own problem. The neighbors of 322 Vine didn’t.
This sounds like there could be criminal conduct involved. Who in city government is authorized to conduct criminal investigations?
EDITOR’S NOTE: If a bribe is involved, that would be criminal. At this time, however, we see nothing to prove that. Our concern at this juncture is purely administrative: how could this situation be so botched for so long, culminating in the City Attorney’s professed inability to prosecute violations because he had no competent witnesses who could offer probative testimony?
There’s one really obvious question not addressed here: Why does Spagnola get the special treatment?
Yes, I understand Bono used to work for Spagnola. Other than accepting a fee from the City, though, why should Bono help Spagnola? Did he get an additional fee from Spagnola? Regardless, why should the City cooperate? Just because Bono provided cover, why would the City go along with something so obviously out of code? Why should Buzz Hill wave it through? Put simply: What’s so important about Spagnola?
EDITOR’S NOTE: Answer: Either it’s not “special treatment” because it’s SOP for the building department, irrespective of who the homeowner is; or it’s some type of favoritism, either gratis or compensated.
If Bono had worked FOR Spagnolo, our view is that he should not have been the City’s consultant in enforcing the building code AGAINST Spagnolo. If, as we have heard, Bono worked for Spagnolo ON THIS HOUSE, then he would effectively be serving as a judge of his own work.
We know nothing about Spagnolo, so we can’t answer your question, FWT.
OMG. How could this not require a criminal investigation? Could it be possible it is illegal for municipal employees to knowingly allow laws to be broken, because the way I read it, the City attorney and Steve Cutaia have acknowledged that the code violations exist. I couldn’t believe what I was reading the first time through, but after clicking the attachments it gets even worse. At the very least, everyone involved at city hall, including the attorney, need to be investigated by an outside party.
EDITOR’S NOTE: We do not believe it is “illegal” in a criminal sense for municipal employees to permit laws to be broken, assuming no bribery or other criminal conduct is involved. But before anybody jumps the gun here, we suggest that the City conduct an internal administrative investigation to determine who at the City was responsible for any aspect of this goat rodeo – because this appears to be a whole lot of incompetent, bad and/or wasteful activity paid for by the taxpayers and detrimental to 322 Vine’s neighbors.
Seriously, who does this builder/owner have pictures of or who is he sleeping with? The codes are either broken or they are not. It appears that the building department agrees they are since they issued a citation. So what’s the problem? They just can’t change their mind. If that is what they do, then why don’t they forgive everyone violations?
EDITOR’S NOTE: The two “City” figures at the center of this appear to be Cutaia and Bono. They also appear to be the City’s “star” witnesses whose testimony was going to be so bad or incompetent that Buzz Hill recommended against putting it on. When your top people aren’t even capable of testifying about violations they were supposed to be investigating for 3 years, something is seriously wrong.
Why is this the neighbors to 322 Vine cross to bear? Not only are the suffering from the flood waters, but they have to endure the idiots at Butler Place. Isn’t there something the aldermen can do to make this right besides saying we can’t let this happen to anyone else? Why can’t they help these people?
EDITOR’S NOTE: If there are “idiots” at Butler Place, we ALL have to endure them in one way or other, even if only by paying for them.
If Mr. Hill’s legal analysis is correct – and that’s what he’s being paid for – then throwing even more taxpayer dollars at this problem with little likelihood of success is foolish and wrong. Why there is little likelihood for success after City staff and a paid outside consultant have been working on this situation for 3 years, however, is the question that needs to be answered, and answered PUBLICLY.
Where was Mr. Hill when the notice of violation was issued? Why did he only get involved after the owner of 322 refused to comply? Does he give this much special attention to every citation the building department issues, or does he only do it when they get caught screwing?
EDITOR’S NOTE: We don’t know what the protocol for these matters is, but we suspect that if a Staff person wanted to keep this matter away from Mr. Hill, it could be done – especially if the supervision of that Staff person was lax. Mr. Hill’s name does not appear on the June-July 2009 e-mails, and there’s no indication that he was brought into that loop until April/May.
I feel bad for the neighbors who have to put up with this. Nothing like an inconsiderate/arrogant neighbor to make life miserable. I’m wondering if there’s some legal action they can take against the homeowner.
EDITOR’S NOTE: That will be their call. But it’s sad when private citizens have to file lawsuits because the City may not have properly enforced its own building code.
Do the neighbors of 322 Vine have legal recourse for the damages they have incurred because of the City’s inability to enforce municipal codes?? If Mr. Hill’s stated opinion that the City’s employees lack the expertise for which they are being paid, then it would follow that the City would be reluctant to rely on those same employees if the City were forced to defend its own actions.
If the facts presented by Public Watchdog are accurate, it appears the City will never correct the damage caused by the City’s own malfeasance. Anonymous11:03 AM has a solid point. The City Council surely can ameliorate the harm being inflicted on the neighbors.
EDITOR’S NOTE: The City, like all governmental bodies, has broad immunity from suit for basic negligence – including negligently applying or enforcing its own ordinances and rules. So while the neighbors may be able to sue the owner of 322 Vine, it does not look like their chances of prevailing in a suit against the City are promising.
I would like to think the City of Park Ridge is providing honest services. It would be monumentally disappointing to learn that a City employee is functioning as someone’s “guy”.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Agreed.
Too bad the lawmaker’s don’t read your blog. This information is very unsettling.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Some do, including some who won’t admit it.
Through my years as a PR homeowner, I have largely done my own work on my home (built a garage, added onto the main house, roofing, siding, etc.) and I have usually been treated in a professional manner by city staff and inspectors. Some of the staff, former union craftsmen I was led to believe, have been helpful with suggestions as to methods and materials. And I’ve never felt pressured or in need of a “guy” at city hall. So, perhaps, the post-2000 decline is a result of retirements and poor management (read:hiring) at city hall? Plus, I went to 322 Vine expecting to see glaring height variations and more violations, but it didn’t appear to be out-of-code in any significant or obvious way.
But, “guy in city hall?” There is a property at 445 S. Northwest Highway that for a LONG time had a stop work order pasted on the front door. Then I saw work being restarted with a partially removed stop work order, plus a BLANK city work permit inside the front window. No reference to work being done. No date. No city authorization signature. And in a couple of days, all of the work seemingly completed and the garbage hauled away.
Want to guess what it takes to get a blank work permit that’ll let you do any work you want, any time you want, any way you want?
EDITOR’S NOTE: We prefer not to guess at anything if we don’t have to.
David,
Why does a violation of a city code need to be glaring if you are looking at the property from the street? Are you aware of what the property looked like before the new home was built? What the topography of the land was? A house being 3 feet taller than the max for the neighborhood or the lot being raised anywhere from 12 to 24 inches, downspouts being connected to the city sewer system, an illegally poured patio and parking pad, a finished third floor which no permit was requested or paid for, a second floor in the too tall garage which was not on the original plans, 3 airconditioning units on the south side of the property instead of in the backyard, etc etc may not be obvious as you drive by but should be glaringly obvious to city staff whose job it is to deal with this on a daily basis.
The heart of this issue as stated by many is why is the property at 322 Vine not being held to the same city code building standards as any other new construction or remodeling work on any other home in Park Ridge.
Now, because the city staff chose to ignore building codes at 322, the city finds itself in a position of having to make a choice. Do we now enforce the building codes and make 322 bring his property to code-the right thing to do-or do we just move on. The right thing to do will likely end in protracted litigation and be costly to the city. It appears that city attorney Hill has decided that the neighbors of 322 are not worth the city spending money on court costs. Perhaps Mr. Hill is trying to outlast the neighbors-hoping they will give up. It will interesting to hear what Mr. Hill’s justification is for this strategy and what legal basis he has for it.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Or perhaps Mr. Hill made a legitimate legal decision that the City representatives who were in charge of compliance and enforcement so botched the job that they would not be credible witnesses.
I have watched this mess for three years. It’s corruption and good old boy stuff that has morphed into a cover-up. The city staff involved in this should be ashamed. Our tax dollars are being wasted. Do your job or leave!
We vote BTW!
EDITOR’S NOTE: Exactly.
Anon at 5:24 is right, David, most of the violations are in the back. Take a walk down the Kowalski’s driveway, I’m sure they won’t mind, and peer over the fence. You’ll be shocked at what you see and don’t see. Most noticeable is the ski hill that run from the house straight down to one of the neighbors. Then imagine that the backyard used to be below all three neighbors and that a good amount of the concrete is not supposed to be there. What you won’t see are any of the measure that were to be installed to direct any runoff away from the neighbors.
If Mr. Hill made a legitimate legal decision that City staff so botched the job that they would not be credible witness then how does this issue end? Will the neighbors just have to live with the situation and the constant flooding of their properties do to the many code violations at 322? Do the neighbors have to hire an attorney and sue to get the city to do its job and enforce the current building codes? Can the city be sued? What is the next move because it is simply unacceptable to leave this matter at its current state and hope this never happens again as Mr. Knight said at the city council meeting Monday night. The status quo leaves the city with zero credibility on managing any future construction in town and applying and enforcing the codes.
Does 322 has a relationship with former Mayor Frimark. He was the mayor when construction started and many of the code violations occurred. The former mayor was aware of the issues as they were developing. DId he intervene with the building department staff on behalf of the 322 owner? So many questions and no one with the answers is speaking out.
EDITOR’S NOTE: The City most likely cannot be sued, so that’s a dead issue. All we can hope for is an investigation that finds out if there were any actual administrative mistakes and, if so, who should be held accountable.
And any Investigation 101 needs to start at the bottom and then see how high up the chain it goes. Who was supposed to be enforcing these codes? Did they drop the ball? Who were their supervisors? Did they drop the ball?
I know it is off topic, but I wondered if you would post a positive Park Ridge article. It’s great to see our PD get some well deserved good publicity for a change.
http://parkridge.suntimes.com/12601849-417/park-ridges-officer-of-year-faces-down-policemans-worst-nightmare.html
Let me see if I’ve got this straight. The city hired an outside consultant to review this property at 322 Vine. This same consultant did the plans for the builder. He failed the property on inspection.
The second culprit is the building administrator who I assumed is the one who actually issued the violation, but he has been caught in an email to the builder agreeing to ignore the code violations.
So despite all these conflicts of interest and indescretions, there still was a violation notice issued and no one has said that the codes aren’t in violation or that the property is in compliance with the law.
Now the city attorney is saying the city can’t carry the burden of proof, most likely because of credibility issues with the two main culprits. It also sounds here that there is a financial aspect to this, meaning that the city does not want to spend the money take the builder to court as they do with every other homeower who refuse to address violation notices because it will expose them as bumbling boobs and open themselves up to possible legal action from the neighbors who as of right now can’t sue the city because of some law that protects municipalities from themself.
So the city attorney has decided to ignore the violated codes and directly, or indirectly, support the builder once again as they have been doing for whatever nefarious reasons for 3 years, and dump on the neighbors again just as they have been doing for 3 years. In other words, for the sake of a buck, the city has chose protect the guilty and punish the innocent to hide the fact that they screwed the pooch.
Wow, that’s f*#ked up.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Yes, it sure looks that way.
After reading hyour post and your comments I’m still not sure what your saying should be done about this. Answers please?
EDITOR’S NOTE: We think this should be investigated to determine, as another commentator asked, who “screwed the pooch.” And, if the pooch was screwed: who screwed it; was it screwed intentionally or negligently; why it took 3 years; and can future pooch screwing be prevented.
As, or should I say if, this investigation you hope for goes forward, I would think they should look at the role of the Aldermen in this situation.
It would appear that these neighbors of the house in question are and were very vocal. The Alderman is the person who is supposed to represent people of his ward on just such issues. I have to assume that Alderman Knight and the prior Alderman were very much aware of this for a long time. Did they investigate this situation and dig in and ask questions?? If so what answers did they get?? Were they lied to??
Based on your write up of this cluster f%*@, it would seem like an Alderman who was looking and asking questions would have quickly found something was screwed up.
I agree that city employees and consultants appear to have “screwed the pooch”, but it also appears that these neighbors might not have been well represented by their elected officials.
EDITOR’S NOTE: You apparently didn’t read the post or the embedded documents, or didn’t understand them. Try reading them again – move your lips if you have to – and then, if you still think the neighbors weren’t “well represented by their elected officials,” tell us what specific things you believe those representatives should have done to, for example, make the testimony of the two principal City “officials” (one on the payroll, the other a paid consultant) credible enough that the City Attorney could prosecute the violations he elected not to pursue.
Is there a statute of limitations regarding any legal action? If so when would it expire?
EDITOR’S NOTE: Anyone interested in pursuing legal action should consult with the attorney of their choice.
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>