Public Watchdog.org

An Award Winning Performance By Mayor Frimark And His Alderpuppets

12.01.08

According to Jim “Chicken Little” Allegretti, Fourth Ward Alderpuppet of Mayor Howard “Let’s Make A Deal” Frimark: “I don’t know how we can be any more open” with City government. 

Allegretti was speaking at the “strategic planning” session a couple of weekends ago, and he was referring to the perception expressed by a number of Park Ridge residents who responded to The National Citizen Survey of 566 Park Ridge residents conducted this past spring.  And as reported in last week’s Park Ridge Herald-Advocate (“Survey says residents don’t think government is open enough,” Nov. 27), Allegretti was joined in his disbelief by fellow Alderpuppets Tom Carey (6th Ward) and Don Bach (3rd Ward), the latter of whom thinks this perception of behind-the-scenes wheeling and dealing can be cured with some good old positive public relations.

But 1st Ward Ald. (and newly-announced mayoral candidate) Dave Schmidt thinks that the perception is justified.  Schmidt correctly noted that the City Council goes into closed session far more frequently than it needs to, and he has been a vocal critic of the Council exceeding the bounds of the closed session exemptions to the open meeting requirement of the Illinois Open Meetings Act when it does go into closed session.

Not surprisingly, perhaps the biggest proponent of closed Council meetings and private deal-making is Mayor Frimark himself, who has seemingly spent the better part of his current term of office meeting privately with land owners like Frimark campaign contributor Bill Napleton, real estate brokers like Frimark campaign contributor Owen Hayes, and real estate attorneys like Frimark campaign contributor Jack “Mr. Insider” Owens, in his quest to find a site for a big new Park Ridge police station at which he can throw our tax dollars. 

Frimark has also met privately with interested parties behind the scenes of other attempted or completed deals, such as the developers (and Frimark campaign contributors) of the Executive Office Plaza project when they were seeking City approval of an 8-unit zoning variance; the developer of the “Heinz” project who also sought height and density zoning variances; and representatives from the Park Ridge Ministerial Association and PADS, in connection with the one-night-per-week homeless shelter that PADS ultimately walked away from rather than accept the lawful special use zoning amendment recommended by the City’s Planning & Zoning Commission and approved by the City Council with slight modifications.

Which is why Frimark and his Alderpuppets apparently have embarked on a campaign of denial, misdirection and sniffling dismissal of the notion that there is significant public distrust of City government and that residents believe they aren’t being listened to by the City.  Part of that campaign should be on display at tonight’s City Council meeting, the agenda [pdf] for which includes Ald. Schmidt’s proposal [pdf] for the City Council to put an advisory referendum issue about a new police station on the April ballot.

The last thing Frimark and his Alderpuppets want is a public vote – even an advisory one – that might undermine their contention that we need a big new cop shop and that the taxpayers are in favor of it. 

But while it’s hard enough for those guys to deny the City’s own survey results that reveal serious resident misgivings about the openness of City government, it may be even harder for them to dismiss the award recently won by the Frimark Administration: a “Worsty,” presented on October 9th in Springfield by the Illinois Press Association (the “IPA”). 

The Worsty Awards are given to governmental bodies or public officials who ignore requirements of the Illinois Open Meetings Act (“IOMA”) or the Illinois Freedom of Information Act.  Park Ridge won the third-place Worsty – the “bronze,” if you will – in the IOMA category for scheduling a “by invitation only” City Council meeting at the Park Ridge Country Club (where Frimark is a member) for the purpose of interviewing the City Manager finalists.  Once the local press got hold of that information and questioned the City about it, however, the meeting was quickly rescheduled for City Hall.

Not surprisingly with a mayor and a majority of the City Council who like secrecy as much as the current ones do, we can’t seem to find any mention of this Worsty on the City’s website, nor have we heard Frimark crowing about it in his usual self-promotional way.  Heck, we don’t even know if somebody from the City showed up in Springfield to accept it. 

But knowing ol’ “Let’s Make A Deal” the way we do, secrecy is far too essential to the way he operates for him to be content with this year’s “bronze” Worsty.  We’re betting he’s already thinking about ways City government can “Go for the Gold” in 2009.

5 comments so far

It is true that the City Council conducts closed sessions, keeps confidential records, etc., and it is true that citizens see PR city government as less than open. There is one more piece of this triangle: the perception and reality that city government just goes ahead and does whatever it wants to do. Truth is, much of this happens right out in the open, with citizen commentary that gets ignored. My point is this: Howard or Frimark or Dave Schmidt could cut the secret meetings and backroom discussions, and that would be great, but citizens’ perceptions will change when the city government starts listening to citizens.

I agree with Persona non grata. I read on the Park Ridge Underground today that the City Council wouldn’t even consider a referendum debate on a new police station, and like Persona non grata said, this all happened right out in the open. I don’t know anybody who wants to have a new police station built with or without borrowed money and I have to think that our city government has heard this too. They refuse to listen to the citizens.

Do you really think Frimark and the six dwarfs don’t talk about this stuff behind the scenes beforehand so they can sit there like that, not ask any questions, barely raise their eyes from their desktops, and not have any discussions, just to make sure nobody seconds Schmidt’s motion.

You’re right about their refusal to listen, but that’s a response orchestrated in advance behind the scenes, not the honest and spontaneous product of vigorous debate in an open forum.

Hoover,

You’re such a cynic. I’m sure they wouldn’t do such a thing. It’s why Allegretti, Bach, and Ryan can dine comfortably together in public, after meetings. After all, they’re so keenly aware of the demands of IOMA and that three constitutes a majority of a quorum of the council. Since they are all merely volunteers, we should simply trust their judgement and that they would never discuss city business away from a public forum in violation of the open meetings act. Right?

Ms. Markech:

Your tongue-in-cheek response to Hoover really captures the bizarre mindset of a number of these people who either just fell off the turnip truck or are supporters of Frimark and his minions.



Leave a comment
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>

(required)

(optional and not displayed)