Over the course of many years of living in this relatively homogenous community, we have observed (anecdotally, not scientifically) that the vast majority of disagreements on public issues seem to occur not because of differences in values or concerns, but because of differences in the amount and quality of the information used to inform the conflicting viewpoints. 

In other words, we have met the enemy and it is misinformation. 

Which brings us to the letter in this week’s Park Ridge Herald-Advocate by resident Jack Spatafora (“Lean on landlords for retail relief,” August 12), an oft-published letter writer whose subjects tend toward puppies, the smell of newly-mowed grass, and general nostalgia.  Kind of like a cross between Andy Rooney and Garrison Keillor. 

But this week Mr. Spatafora left his comfort zone and strayed into the world of local government, complaining about how our community is losing retail businesses because of rent-gouging landlords and an unresponsive City government that let’s them get away with it.  

That’s a topic worthy of discussion and debate; and it has been a topic we have addressed in various ways over the past couple of years.

Our bone to pick with Mr. Spatafora, however, involves the factual inaccuracies which permeate his letter – starting with his opening sentence of  “[e]ver since the new Mayor and new council members took office” and continuing with his reference to “the new regime in City Hall.” 

Now, we know about “regimes” in City Hall. Over the past two years when we wrote about former mayor Howard Frimark, his guarantied four-member Council majority (Alderpuppets Allegretti, Bach, Carey and Ryan) and the two other alderpuppet reserves (DiPietro and Wsol), we regularly referred to the “Frimark Administration” at City Hall, although we could just as easily, and accurately, have called it the “Frimark regime.” 

But Spatafora seems oblivious to the fact that no “new” aldermen have been elected since 2007.  And its pretty hard for new Mayor Dave Schmidt to have a “regime” in City Hall when five of the current aldermen not only regularly opposed positions taken by then-Ald. Schmidt during the past two years, but they also voted for an official “condemnation” of Schmidt’s lawful release of information about their and Frimark’s closed session dealings – and then they contributed to Frimark’s campaign against Schmidt to the cumulative tune of over $3,800: Allegretti ($1,500), Bach ($400), Carey ($500), DiPietro ($565 in-kind from his business, Cross-Tech Communications) and Ryan ($864.51).  

Spatafora must even have missed the first Park Ridge mayoral veto in at least 20+ years, when Schmidt vetoed the Council’s appropriation of $39,000 in extra handouts to private community groups even though the City budget is already $2.5 million-plus in deficit – a veto the Council promptly over-rode. 

With “regimes” like that, who needs enemies? 

But putting aside Spatafora’s ignorance of who’s who and what’s what at City Hall, his substantive arguments display a troubling view of government and market economics when he advocates for the City meddling in the local real estate market by applying “pressure other city governments have exerted” on landlords to keep rents where they are. 

Hey, Jack…we miss Johnny’s Place, too.  But as far as we can tell, “rent controls” has never been the right answer to any question other than: “What’s one way to screw up the retail market?”  

Spatafora also wants the City to do something about “generating more retail trade” for our local retailers, because “City Hall keeps attracting new retail competition more than retail trade.”  We’re not quite sure what he means by those comments.  But we’ve got a City government that can’t come within $2 million of balancing a budget.  Do we really want those folks trying to micro-manage the local retail market? 

Finally, Spatafora wants Park Ridge to display the same kind of “progress” he sees in Des Plaines and Rosemont.  

We think that statement says it all.