Public Watchdog.org

The Stench Of Council’s Rush To Billboard Deal

11.09.09

Tomorrow night the City’s Planning and Zoning Commission (“P&Z”) will be considering text amendments to the City’s Zoning Ordinance to allow billboards that are now prohibited.  Those amendments are desired by Lombard-based The Generation Group, Inc. (“GGI”)[pdf], and the aroma coming from this amendment process is a lot closer to week-old catfish than to rose petals.

Carrying the water for GGI in this matter is 4th Ward Ald. Jim Allegretti, who seems hell-bent on changing City ordinances to enable the City Council to trump P&Z decisions about billboards.  And he appears to be “gaming” the process by getting the City to be the applicant rather than GGI, which allows GGI to avoid the disclosure requirements under the City’s ethics ordinance [pdf] that were adopted at the April 2, 2007 City Council meeting [pdf] in the face of accusations by then-mayor (and Allegretti puppeteer) Howard Frimark that more-stringent disclosures were “motivated by politics rather than integrity.”

[We pause for a moment of “pot calling the kettle black” contemplative silence]

Allegretti’s walk on the billboard wild side started back in June when the attorney, agent and possibly owner of GGI, Joseph J. Loss, sent a letter to Allegretti [pdf] requesting four special use permits for four billboards proposed for the Renaissance Office Center properties.

Leaping into action, at the July 13, 2009, City Council Committee of the Whole (“COW”) meeting [pdf], Allegretti successfully advanced both the process whereby the City Council (rather than GGI) would submit the billboard text amendment request to P&Z, and the process whereby the City Council could over-ride any P&Z decision on amendment requests by simple majority vote rather than super-majority vote – and, for good measure, City Clerk Betty Hennemann once again sanitizing the minutes to conceal the identities of who voted how on those two issues.

Allegretti next got formal Council approval for the City to be the applicant for the billboard amendments by misrepresenting the relevant law by (as reported in the August 17 minutes [pdf]) stating that private-party applicants like GGI “would have no recourse” to challenge an application denial by P&Z – even though he attended the April 27, 2009 meeting [pdf] where City Attorney “Buzz” Hill stated unequivocally that an applicant denied by P&Z “always has the right to appeal” that denial to the Circuit Court of Cook County.

And just last Monday night, Allegretti led the 4-3 (Allegretti, Bach, Carey and Ryan) approval of the first reading of the zoning text amendments that would let the Council trump decisions by P&Z on this billboard issue.

Which takes us to tomorrow night’s P&Z meeting where that commission will get to consider the City Council’s request to make billboards legal.

As noted in the November 10, 2009 memo [pdf] of the City’s Community Preservation & Development Director Carrie Davis, GGI is now represented by prominent Park Ridge attorney and consummate “insider,” Jack Owens – who is aggressivley lobbying P&Z for GGI’s billboards even though all GGI has to do is watch Allegretti and the City Council do GGI’s bidding.

If the odor from all of this rigmarole isn’t dank and pungent enough in its own right, we direct your attention to two articles published in the Des Plaines Journal & Topics: one from September 2004 [pdf] that links convicted felon and allegedly mobbed-up former Cook County under-sheriff James Dvorak to another billboard company with ties to GGI’s Mr. Loss that won billboard rights in Des Plaines; and the other from January 2008 [pdf] which identifies Loss as the attorney for yet another billboard company that got a favorable ordinance change from the Village of Deerfield [pdf].

We’re not quite sure exactly what to make of all this, but we do wonder exactly what is motivating Allegretti’s (and Owens’) full-court press to drive the City Council into neutering P&Z in order to give GGI its billboards.  And it creates an impression that there is more to this deal than meets the eye.

Even if it can’t escape the nose.

28 comments so far

If you really think that this started in June, perhaps we might think back to Mr. Frimarks campaign website that clearly stated in some of his babble regarding “billboards” and target area 4 etc.

These dealings were well in the works long before June. Do we think that Mr. Loss stumbled onto Mr. Alegretti’s name on the City’s website who’s ward by the way is no where near the proposed billboard site. Or might we think that he was directed there by none other than Mr. Frimark himself?

I’ve read some of the material about Mr. Loss and his business croanies and in one case noticed that they don’t stray very far from their delivery and proposals. Even though it’s 5 years later, they are proposing an almost identical plan to P.R as they did to DesPlaines right down to the $2,400.00 inspection fee per sign per year.

I also noticed that in previous communities, Mr. Loss went through THE PROPER proceedures and DID NOT hire addtional “local” atty. So why did they feel the need to go the extra steps here? Bypass Planning and Zoning, bypass being the applicant, and hire a local zoning lawer, where they were successful in other communities doing their own bidding and going through those communities processes.

Hmmmmmm.

Something just doesn’t fit here.

Anonymous 10:30 makes some good points that I hadn’t thought of. I hate to keep on thinking of Frimark’s continuing role in any of this, but he did appoint a flunky like Allegretti to fill his alderman seat, so who knows?

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck…

Welcome to the smaller, more efficient city council.

How’s that working for everybody?

As with any previous administrations, elected or employeed, there is always a little bit of “residue” left behind.

By simply replacing administrations, elected or employeed doesn’t make things already set into motion disappear. It’s up to current administrations to correct them with the best interest of the community in mind when doing so. In essence scrape the residue from the bottom of our shoes.

“Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.” ~ H.L. Mencken

Did people think that because a different Mayor got elected things would change?

Take a close look at last Monday and what all these politicians did.

There’s no residue. There’s only different politicians playing the same games.

The fighting is over who gets to give what to their friends and get away with it without looking worse than the other guy.

Same games. Different names.

Cynic:

Schmidt totally screwed up last Monday with his no-prosecution vote and his lame pound-of-flesh explanation. But he wasn’t the unethical scam artist trying to dodge being prosecuted for violating the city ordinance.

So far Schmidt hasn’t done much, but he also hasn’t been running around cutting deals for himself and his buddies with our money, so saying its the same games, different names is stupid.

The only different players are the Mayor (elected) and the City Manager (employeed). All the other players remain the same (for now). Which means that ANY “old business” set in motion
will remain in motion until the rug gets pulled out from under it.

Clearly there is no shaming those who intend to continue to carry on with “old business” as they clearly have no interest in looking out for “our” interest. I would however like to know exactly “who’s” interest they are looking out for.

Following proper proceedure, is in “our” interest.
Circumventing proper proceedure, NOT in “our” interest
Maintaining checks and balances via Boards, Committes, and Comissions, in “our” interest
Taking powers away from those, NOT in “our” interest.

Getting angry at residents who actually have the nerve to ask questions and then lashing out by yelling at them at a public meeting. NOT in anyones best interest.

3:30,

I understand if you want to support the Mayor and look past the evidence that he was being nothing but a politician.

It is not a happy thought to think the reformer you voted for isn’t reforming anything.

I also understand the people who want to look at it as a isolated incident so they don’t lose their hope.

I am going to stand by my statement that all these politicians are the same at the end of the day. Same games. Different names.

What someone said above is true. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it’s a duck.

anonymous on 11.09.09 3:30 pm Said —
So far Schmidt hasn’t done much, but he also hasn’t been running around cutting deals for himself and his buddies with our money, so saying its the same games, different names is stupid.

Actually it is not stupid but a rather insightful and astute observation made by Cynic.

Consider What deals mayor Schmidt has already cut:

Schmidt appointed a friend to the council seat he vacated. Now Alderman Sweeny is $1200 richer a year thanks to the taxpayer. Did Sweeney contribute to the Schmidt campaign in any way? Start Disclosing Sweeny boy!

Schmidt \”donates\” a portion of his mayoral salary to the videotaping effort. What amount is he providing Charlie Meledosian who owns a company that does this. Those funds are taxpayer dollars originally, sooooo –start disclosing Mayor Transparency and UpChucK Malordorus. Did Chuckie boy contribute to your campaign —Oh yeah–he ran and still runs Schmidt\’s website. And now he has a virtual monopoly on the camera thing.

Schmidt pushed through his campaign contributer anna dudzyk\’s Polish Fest project which cost the taxpayers some money to provide security –not that there was much to secure from the lame attempt at a fest. Really –no polish business owners in Park Ridge supported or provided any of the offerings –all seemed to be from out of town–kind of funny to call it a Park Ridge polish fest when not one of the polish businesses in Park Ridge was involved. Who actually did get the money from the event…Schmidt won\’t say..even though he is listed on the polish fest website as the organizer. By the way, you gotta love the company the mayor keeps. Anna Dudzyk was convicted of criminal activity in 2003 (public records indicate) and was again charged this august for theft. WOW –JUST WOW!!!

There is so much crap this new mayor is involved in it boggles the mind. I won\’t even mention the multiple citizens who are in the process of filing criminal charges against him as well as numerous jurisdictions from local to state and federal who are in the process of investigating him. (Some of you won\’t believe it, but it is based on fact –to disclose the source would jepordize a state law official –so this will have to suffice)

So like cynic Said..

Same games. Different names.

Facts Truth, facts. Otherwise it’s all bullshit.

Dear TRUTH – Charlie Melidosian here.

I do appreciate your desire to add to the discussion here. A few things you stated above are indeed the TRUTH. I did contribute to Mayor Schmidt’s campaign, I do maintain his website, http://www.parkridgemayor.com, and I do help ensure the public meetings are videotaped and are available to the community to view over the Internet. But for the record, I have in no way profited from the above non paying volunteer efforts nor do I have a video taping company. The videos are taped by a non paid volunteer, the videos are uploaded to the Internet via a non paid volunteer and the videos are hosted by a third party company out of New York called motionbox.com…whom I think was paid about $39/year to host these videos and has no known connection to the Mayor or any of the Mayor’s volunteers.

Rather than banter back any more allegations against the Melidosian family name, please feel free to give me a call at home for any further TRUTH you want to know.

Charlie
847-698-1000

Be careful of getting forced off track by diversions.

Anyone willing to start trowing trash at the Mayor or any of his supporters (Charlie) clearly is looking to divert your attention away from the content of todays post.

Power grabbing and favors for special interest groups flashing $$$ toward the City in liue of special favors via City Council proposed text amendments is the matter at hand.

Campaign tactics are tacky and WAY off subject but nice try.

So “truth” who or what are you trying to pull our attention away from……and why?!?!

Thanks for all you do, Charlie.

It appears that “Truth” is nothing but fiction:

1. In a written memo by Schmidt to the City Council dated May 28, 2009, announcing the appointment of Sweeney as his aldermanic successor, Schmidt disclosed that Sweeney had contributed $150 to his campaign. That’s a major and documented difference between Frimark and Schmidt, because Frimark accepted $300 from Allegretti BEFORE he appointed Allegretti as his successor 4th Ward alderman and, true to form, neither Frimark nor Allegretti had the integrity to disclose that contribution, even during Allegretti’s confirmation hearing.

2. According to Mr. Melidosian’s comments (above), “Truth” is off-base on his/her allegations about Melidosian’s activities.  And there is no “monopoly on the camera thing” because anybody can video the meetings if they choose. Schmidt has been the only mayor to do something about it – by donating the camera and recruiting Mr. Melidosian and Mr. George Kirkland to volunteer their time to make it happen.

3. We can’t even find a Park Ridge “Polish Fest” website, nor can we find any evidence that Schmidt did anything to push through Polish Fest – unlike Frimark’s documented orchestration of Taste of Park Ridge being handed over to a bunch of Frimark cronies at the June 6, 2005 City Council meeting without any requirement that they be accountable to the City or the taxpayers for the $250,000 of annual revenues. 

4. While we saw the news brief about Ms. Dudzyk’s arrest, an arrest is not a conviction; and we can find no “public records” or any other evidence of any “criminal activity in 2003.”

5. As for all the unspecified “crap” that “Truth” accuses Schmidt of being involved in, we can’t find a shred of evidence to support it – which is not surprising, given “Truth’s” track record for of misinformation.

So it appears that “Truth” is anything but.

just saying said:
\”So “truth” who or what are you trying to pull our attention away from……and why?!?! \”

Not trying to pull attention away but rather pull attention towards the Truth about how the current mayor is playing political games like any politician does. I am giving facts to support Cynic\’s assertion of \”Same Games, Different Names\”.

The TRUTH is Schmidt has used his position to appoint his favored few to feed at the public trough.

The TRUTH is that because of pending or potential investigations and legal action at various levels – Local, County, State, and Federal, what was mentioned has to suffice for now –only because the mayor is entitled, as any citizen is, to due process of law and the ability to mount a defense when needed to. He is and will be facing some major stuff and should be allowed to let the process progress in its rightful manner.

After all, ethical conduct is the mantra of the transperancy regime — hypocrisy wrapped in irony should prove more than enough truth for all to handle.

Keep watching.. It should get quite interesting.

Public Watchdog said…

>>3. We can’t even find a Park Ridge “Polish Fest” website, nor can we find any evidence that Schmidt did anything to push through Polish Fest – unlike Frimark’s documented orchestration of Taste of Park Ridge being handed over to a bunch of Frimark cronies at the June 6, 2005 City Council meeting without any requirement that they be accountable to the City or the taxpayers for the $250,000 of annual revenues.>

First…here is the link to the Polish Art Festival… http://www.polishartfestival.com/about_us.htm

Second…here are the relevant portion of the minutes from the meeting you cited…

Mayor Frimark asked senior Alderman DiPietro to take his place as Chairman of the Council meeting.

Mayor Frimark discussed the possibility of another Taste of Park Ridge event on July 15, 16, and 17. The Taste has been enjoyable but unfortunately unprofitable, however, many residents have said they would like to volunteer and see the City do it again. He proposed the City sponsor the event but that it be run by volunteers through a management committee. He presented a budget and felt that the event could be run without a loss. He asked for approval and authority to take the $20,000 in the City budget that was allocated to the Chamber of Commerce, and move the money to an account for the Treasurer of the Chamber. He also asked for an additional $3,000 which was also in the budget, designated for special events.

Ald. Parker was supportive of the idea but felt that there was more time needed to plan the event and an event planner was needed to put it together before July 15, 2005. He was concerned about the time frame.

He asked who could coordinate the events.

The Mayor named 10 individuals.

Ald. Cox asked if the City created an Ad Hoc Committee is it then subject to the Open Meetings Act.

City Attorney Hill answered if we create the committee it is.

Ald. Crampton asked if sponsorship by the City would incur liability.

City Attorney Hill answered yes.

Mayor Frimark said it is only community volunteers coming together to run the Taste. After speaking with Finance Director Lembesis she felt the City could sponsor it even though the work would be done by others.

Ald. Anderson did not understand why the additional $3,000 was needed.

Mayor Frimark said the $3,000 has been designated in the budget for signature events such as this, it could be used, and that is why he was asking for the additional money.

Ald. Bateman felt that there should be some control of the money by the City. The City should not just give the money to the Chamber.

Mayor Frimark stated the expenditures for the event would be reviewed periodically, and a report will be completed 30 days after the event.

Ald. Wsol asked for assurance that the total cost obligation to the City would be no more than $23,000. He asked if there is a surplus at the end of the event does that come back to the City?

Mayor Frimark answered the total request would be no more than $23,000 and if there is a surplus of funds, it will come back to the City.

Ald. Crampton felt any left over money should be segregated and in the future be obligated to be used for signature event purposes.

Ald. Cox expressed his concern for a self-perpetuating fund. He questioned the Chamber running the beer tent at the event, and asked why the revenue was not shared at that tent. He also confirmed that the beer tent requires a temporary liquor license.

Ald. Radermacher suggested a special per item tax on beer sales to generate additional revenue at this type of event.

Ald. Parker suggested a long-range plan and strategy for the Taste after the event. He also suggested a formal funding plan.

The Aldermen discussed the Chamber and the sharing of profits. They questioned that if we put the event under the City’s insurance policy, does it constitute sponsorship and financial responsibility?

Attorney Hill answered yes.

Ald. Bateman suggested that while the City might sponsor the event it was not contracting with the vendors. The Chamber was therefore responsible for the debts.

Ald. Ryan felt it should be the City, some temporary corporation, or the Chamber. There needs to be a real entity handling the checkbook. She said she would feel better if there was one point person responsible.

Mayor Frimark conveyed his confidence in the volunteer committee.

City Manager Schuenke suggested a special Ad Hoc Committee be appointed at the next meeting to oversee the revenues and expenditures. There are processes currently in place that can control the expenses.

Ald. Anderson felt that this might take up too much staff time.

Mayor Frimark added that there are communities that fund their events 100% and they use their own manpower.

Ald. Crampton moved the City Council release the approximate amount of $20,000 that is segregated in the Chamber of Commerce account to support the 2005 Taste of Park Ridge.
Seconded by Ald. Bateman.

Ald. Wsol requested a friendly amendment naming who the City was releasing the money to.

Ald. Crampton accepted the friendly amendment.

Ald. Radermacher asked the Mayor if he thought he could make this event work on this budget.

Mayor Frimark answered yes.

On Roll Call Vote:
AYES: Ald. Cox, Wsol, Crampton, Machon, DiPietro, Markech, Bateman, Jones, Radermacher, Allegretti, Anderson, Baldi, Parker, Ryan
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
There being 14 favorable votes, the motion carried

Ald. Crampton moved that the City Council approve the expenditure of $3,000 to the 2005 Taste of Park Ridge.
Seconded by Ald. Machon.

Ald. Wsol moved to amend the motion to indicate the words “not to exceed $3,000”.
Seconded by Ald. Anderson.

Ald. DiPietro asked for a vote in favor of the amendment.
On voice vote the motion was amended.

Ald. Bateman, Cox and Crampton said they would be voting against this and felt this extra money could be used for another event.

Ald. Baldi suggested that the City terminate the Memorandum of Understanding with the Chamber of Commerce. If this comes up again next year, it should be with a new entity.

On Roll Call Vote:
AYES: Ald. Ryan, Wsol, Machon, DiPietro, Radermacher, Allegretti, Baldi, Parker
NAYS: Ald. Cox, Crampton, Markech, Bateman, Jones, Anderson
ABSENT: None
There being 8 favorable votes, the motion carried

Ald. Wsol moved that should there be a positive net result of financial nature from the 2005 Taste of Park Ridge, those funds be returned to the City of Park Ridge and not be retained by the Treasurer of the Chamber of Commerce.
Seconded by Ald. Cox.

Ald. Ryan made the motion to reconsider the first motion of $20,000 to include that suggestion.
Seconded by Ald. Wsol.

Lloyd Godfrey 1318 Elliott, Park Ridge, IL asked if we even want this signature event in Park Ridge, and if so, how does the City go about getting it? What is the easiest way to make it happen? He felt the City was compounding the issue.

Ald. DiPietro asked for a voice vote to reconsider the motion.
On voice vote the motion passed.

Ald. DiPietro clarified the motion on the floor consistent with that wording “not to exceed $3,000 for the Taste of Park Ridge 2005”.

Ald. Baldi offered an amendment to the motion adding an additional provision that within 30 days of the conclusion of the event, the committee would provide the City Council with an accounting of income and expense and to the extent that there are any funds remaining, the funds will be returned to the city after all expenses are paid.
Seconded by Ald. Wsol.

Discussion continued.

Ald. Cox called the question.
On voice vote the motion passed.

Ald. DiPietro clarified that the motion before the Council is the amendment to the main motion which was that within 30 days of the conclusion of the Taste of Park Ridge, and after all expenses have been paid, any excess funds would be returned to the City of Park Ridge.

On voice vote the motion passed.

Ald. DiPietro asked for a vote for the motion as amended which was to contribute $3,000 to the Taste of Park Ridge with the amendment that within 30 days of the conclusion of the accounting of expenses, any funds that are left over would be returned to the City of Park Ridge.

On Roll Call Vote:
AYES: Ald. Wsol, Crampton, Machon, DiPietro, Radermacher, Allegretti, Baldi, Parker, Ryan, Anderson
NAYS: Ald. Markech, Bateman, Jones, Cox
ABSENT: None
There being 10 favorable votes, the motion carried

Mayor Frimark asked if the Ad Hoc committee could be covered under the insurance policy.

City Manager Schuenke answered yes.

Mayor Frimark resumed the Chair.

I knew when I ran for mayor that there would be people like Truth out there who had an agenda and would try to impugn my character. I accepted that risk and will survive just fine, because most people will recognize the political nature of his/her comments.

However, I must respond to the completely unfair attacks on three individuals who have done nothing but volunteer and serve the city, and have asked for and received nothing in return.

The Melidosian family is widely known in town for charitable and volunteer endeavors. Charlie helped me buy the City’s camera and along with George Kirkland figured out a way for us to publicly post the videos of the meetings at little or no cost. Whatever cost there has been so far, HE HAS PAID OUT OF HIS OWN POCKET. Neither he nor George receive a dime for the hours they put in to providing these videos to the City’s residents. Truth should be ashamed of himself/herself for making such a scandalous and baseless accusation.

Anya Dudzik has been active in the Polish community in Park Ridge and wants to bring that community into the mainstream of the town. She worked with the Park District and city staff to pull off the event. Given the fact she had only three months to plan the event from the ground up, it was quite an achievement. As far as I can tell, there was no money to be made there. It was a unique civic event on which she spent countless volunteer hours.

Finally, Joe Sweeney has done nothing since moving to town except serve his adopted community. He is active in the Citizens Patrol, served honorably as a Commissioner on the Zoning Board of Appeals and now is doing his best to be a good alderman. He is a friend, and for that I am grateful. Not mentioned by Truth is the fact that Joe contributed to Frimark’s campaign as well as mine, and that his relationship with me was disclosed BEFORE the City Council unanimously voted to confirm his appointment.

So Truth, if you want to denigrate me, go ahead. I can take it. But don’t you dare impugn the character of people who deserve nothing but praise for the time and effort they have given to the community.

Dear Guess Who at 11:18–you have way too much time on your hands!

Here’s the best line “Schmidt appointed a friend to the council seat he vacated. Now Alderman Sweeny is $1200 richer a year thanks to the taxpayer.”

$1200? $1200?

$1200 to go to at least four meetings a month lasting several hours each. To spend hours every weekend reviewing documents before each meeting. For taking calls, on your personel phone, from residents answering questions and hearing complaints. Giving up numerous hours with their families. And best of all going to City Council meetings and listen to idiots like you who think they are doing it because of the $100 per month.

Truth… you may want to check out today’s paper or Google “Hipcheck16” and consider any future statements or claims you make here in this public fourm.

Fraud (a/k/a “Truth”):

Nice job working the Joseph Goebbels “Big Lie” theory, but it’s not going to work because we all learned what shyster government is under Frimark. Schmidt couldn’t be that slimy even on a bad day.

I agree with one of the other posters who thinks this attack on Schmidt is a diversion to distract people from the scam that Allegretti is trying to pull with these billboards. I sure hope those Planning and Zoning board members hold their ground on his smelly scheme.

Who gives a flying f#%& about our poor aldermen who only get a measly $1,200 but have all this work to do? That was Allegretti’s bitch at the city council meeting last week as he was defending that weasel Frimark and berating the woman who asked about his campaign contributions. It sounded no better then than it does now about Sweeney.

If Sweeney (or Allegretti) didn’t want the job, they shouldn’t have taken it. The pay was $1,200 going in, and that’s what it remains. Both of those guys got appointed to their posts, without even having to make the effort or spend the money to run in an election, it was just handed to them. They and every other alderman should just shut the blank up and do the job, or do themselves and the rest of us a favor and QUIT!

And the same goes for those other “volunteers” who spend more time patting each other on the back and whining about not getting the love they deserve (like those Taste of Park Ridge guys) than they do actually getting the job done.

Anon 8:47 AM,

You forgot the elected official/bureaucrat mutual admiration society and back-patting brigade, as described in yesterday’s Advocate article about District 64 saluting its school board members as part of…GET THIS!…”School Board Members Day” on November 15!

Does the Uptown Hallmark store stock cards for this?

Sally Pryor calls them “the voice of the community, ensuring that decisions about local public schools are made by those who are most familiar with the needs of the community’s children and families.” Yeah, like the need to pay Sally Pryor way more than she has ever been worth, which has bumped her pension up to the level that most of us can’t even dream about.

Well done, board.

anonymous on 11.10.09 5:15 am,

You’re probably right. But I also have some ability and available resources too and, lucky you, I’m willing to share.

From those minutes it looks like the city and council did make an attempt to see to it city expenses could/would be reimbursed. But it looks as if the ethics ordinance isn’t the only thing the city and council have failed to enforce.

Guess Who:

From those minutes it looks like Frimark bamboozled the aldermen with his proposal that “10 individuals” (whose names didn’t quite make it into Betty Hennemann’s fairy tale) run Taste, and his b.s. that “the expenditures for the event would be reviewed periodically, and a report will be completed 30 days after the event.”

And since it was well-known for the past few years that the Taste boys were Howard’s guys, nobody did anything to hold them accountable. “Report? What report?”

anonymous on 11.10.09 1:22 pm,

All the more reason the Taste of Park Ridge committee should disclose their financial arrangements, including their vendor list.

At the very least, you would think these wonderful communinity volunteers would seek to distance themselves from the appearance of bamboozling and the great bamboozler, Howard P. Frimark.



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>