Since “The Manor” was annexed to Park Ridge’s Second Ward, Rich DiPietro has been the only alderman it has ever had.
DiPietro, known as “Uncle Rich” to some, “Richie D” to others, and labeled “Lord of The Manor” by the authors of Park Ridge Underground, has been a member of the City Council since 1995. He was elected and re-elected as a member of the Homeowners Party, facing (to the best of our knowledge) only one opponent – in 2003, when he defeated a badly underfunded political unknown by a mere 21 votes (298 v. 277).
But don’t let his quiet grandfatherly manner and Peter Falk/“Columbo”-esque style fool you. Richie D knows exactly what he’s doing and almost always gets what he wants – as was seen this past Monday night (Nov. 5) when he and three other aldermen allegedly beholden to Mayor Howard Frimark put the final touches on a sweetheart deal for the developers of Executive Office Plaza (“EOP”).
By a 4-3 vote, DiPietro, 4th Ward Ald. Jim Allegretti, 5th Ward Ald. Robert Ryan, and 6th Ward Ald. Tom Carey gave EOP developer Park Ridge 2004 LLC, led by Frimark supporter Bruce Adreani and his Norwood Builders, 8 more condo units than the 160-unit maximum the city’s recently-rewritten zoning ordinance permits. And they did it under the guise of ensuring that the developer will make 50 of those 168 units “senior housing,” although that “senior housing” requires only 1 “senior” (55 years old or older) per unit and allows an unlimited number of non-senior residents so long as they are age 21 or over.
Termed a “travesty” by 1st Ward Ald. Dave Schmidt, who led the opposition to this end-run around the zoning laws and was joined by 3rd Ward Ald. Don Bach and 7th Ward Ald. Frank Wsol in voting “no,” the passage of this variance finally got some of the residents opposing it asking the same question about DiPietro that they had previously asked about variance cheerleaders Allegretti and Ryan: “What is he thinking?”
As with Allegretti and Ryan, we don’t claim to know. But as with Allegretti and Ryan, some clues might be gleaned from public records that provide some useful transparency concerning Richie D’s political friends and relationships.
For those of you without a scorecard, DiPietro is the owner of Cross Tech Communications, a printing and graphic services business located at 111 N. Jefferson in Chicago. Cross Tech got $2,470 of sign business from Frimark’s mayoral campaign back on 2/17/05. Was it merely a coincidence, then, that Richie D personally contributed $250 to Frimark’s campaign on 3/26/05 – and an even bigger coincidence that Cross Tech dropped $440 of “in kind” (e.g., in printing services) contribution to the Frimark campaign on 3/31/05? Cumulatively, that’s $690 in contributions for $2,470 in revenues – PDF, not a bad deal at all.
And in a similar type of coincidence, Cross Tech contributed $2,250 and got $3,281 of printing business – PDF from Citizens for Strong Schools (“CSS”), the campaign fund that supported the District 64 tax increase referendum this past April. Cross Tech’s “in kind” contribution was made on 2/15/07, with $1,958 of business coming back to Cross Tech on 3/21/07 and another $1,323 of business received on 3/23/07. That’s not quite as profitable as the contributions to Frimark’s campaign, but it clearly beats a sharp stick in the eye.
These figures also don’t include any goodwill that DiPietro or Cross Tech may have earned from rubbing (or bending) elbows with other big CSS contributors like Norwood Builders (at $1,500) and PRC Partners (at $2,000) – PDF
Not all of these relationships involve political contributions. For example, in another one of those increasingly unsurprising coincidences, DiPietro used Norwood’s EOP project architect, OKW Architects, Inc., for his own business in 2000, a fact that he disclosed at the August 20, 2007, City Council meeting – PDF after one of OKW’s principals, Park Ridge resident Andy Koglin, spoke in favor of the EOP project. And for those of you without a scorecard, OKW is also the architect for PRC LLC, the developer of the Target Area II condos and townhouses which DiPietro also supported.
Once again, we have no hard evidence that any of these transactions and relationships provided a quid pro quo for DiPietro’s “yes” vote on the EOP variance. But they reveal a direct economic relationship between DiPietro and Mayor Frimark, as well as an indirect one (through CSS) with Norwood Builders – relationships that might (and we stress might) have influenced DiPietro’s decision-making on a Norwood project like EOP that Frimark also favors; and which could influence his decisions on other matters in the future.
11 comments so far
I don’t know exactly how much this affects how our local government runs, but it sure is interesting. I wonder why none of this stuff gets disclosed in City Council meetings, or reported in our local papers?
Unfortunate to mention the nickel-and-dime contributions and revenues by/for Rich’s business. Stooping to that penny-ante stuff weakens the rest of the piece.
These may be “nickel-and-dime contributions” and revenues when compared to the boxcar numbers that are thrown around by (and to) the likes of the Daleys, Madigan, Jones, Blago, Ryan, etc., but they are big numbers for Park Ridge. For example, Cross Tech’s $2,250 “in kind” contribution to CSS was second in dollar amount only to the $2,500 contribution by the D-64 teachers union, and Cross Tech was the third largest vendor to CSS.
“Pay-to-play” can take many forms and amounts. In point of fact, both DiPietro and his corporation made contributions that exceeded the threshold amount that the law considers significant enough to require itemized reporting – and the same goes for the payments made to DiPietro’s corporation by the Frimark and CSS campaigns. That makes them significant enough for us.
To M. Anderson:
No such thing as “nickle and dime contributions” when it comes to political contributions, especially in this great State of Illinois. Where have you been? PW refers to the “pay to play” game and that ain’t about money my friend, it’s all about the power. Who has it and who can give it. In Chicago it certainly costs a bit more to wield the power. Here in lovely PR not quite as much since there aren’t as many lawns or lampposts for the signs. A few hundred or thousand goes a long way. And who’s to say the value of or what you get for a $440 in-kind contribution? You think the Illinois Board of Elections might ever check into that?
I never knew this information was available on-line. Thanks for identifying the State Board of Elections website. I think I’ll do some browsing.
I agree…pay to play is pay to play and that is what seems to be taking root in Park Ridge.
John Kass’ column in today’s (11/14) Tribune points out how two members of the “Illinois Combine” – Big Bill Cellini and Big Bob Kjellander, both identified in FBI investigations of Illinios public pension fraud – have contributed $2,300 and $2,100, respectively, to Mitt Romney’s campaign. As Kass notes: “These are not great sums. Nothing to compare to the millions Kjellander received in questionable “finders fees” on bond deals with Democratic Gov. Rod Blagojevich. And they’re nothing compared with the tens of millions Cellini has made in other questionable state deals, from gaming to hotels to development.”
By M. Anderson’s standard, Cellini’s (unindicted “Individual A”) and Kjellander’s (unindicted “Individual K”) contributions are “nickel and dime” ones.
Right. By my standard they are nickel and dime contributions. More importantly, the amount of printing business CrossTech got is practically meaningless.
Thank you, George Ryan.
If M. Anderson thinks DiPietro’s contributions and the printing business he may have gotten in return are “meaningless,” he/she should contact Sen. Dan Kotowski, Rep. Rosemary Mulligan, or any other state legislators of his/her choice and ask them to amend the Illinois Campaign Finance Act to raise those limits to an appropriate level for high rollers like him/herself.
And if it really was so meaningless, why did DiPietro make it and take it?
This was a long time ago, but I was involved in CSS and I would like to point out two things. First, it often happens that someone with a useful service will step up to offer that service for a good cause. Everyone knows that a business owner making this kind of offer is hoping that somehow in the future this will lead to more business. That’s not corruption, just smart business. It is also common that the service is offered “at cost” which means labor is free, but raw materials purchased are not. In the case of printing, this would mostly be paper and ink. This was the CSS agreement with CrossTech. We were charged just for the out-of-pocket expenses with no markup. This is a generous offer. Second, I would like to point out that Alderman DiPietro has grandchildren who lived in the school district. This is another possible motive for his contribution and his offer.
EDITOR’S NOTE: As we wrote in the post itself, Cross Tech contributed $2,250 in-kind to CSS on 2/15/07, and CSS purchased a total of $3,281 of printing work from Crosstech on 3/21/07 and 3/23/07. If you’ve got proof of what you claim, Constable, send it along. But until we see it, we’ll let the numbers speak for themselves.
So” from CSS”), the campaign fund that supported the District 64 tax increase referendum this past April. Cross Tech’s “in kind” contribution was made on 2/15/07, with $1,958 of business coming back to Cross Tech on 3/21/07 and another $1,323 of business received on 3/23/07. That’s not quite as profitable as the contributions to Frimark’s campaign, but it clearly beats a sharp stick in the eye.
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>