Weak, very weak PWD! You’re obviously standing up for your buddy the mayor and that’s fine, but there’s an old saying “live by sword, die by the sword”. What’s happened with this year’s poor snow removal is the direct result of constant cutting and squeeezing by the mayor’s fiscal policy which btw has also taken it’s toll on the morale of City employees which is poor to say the least with no sign of improving. You’re naive, if you think the poor morale isn’t catching up to the mayor or isn’t in some way to blame for the snow removal effort this year.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Don’t think you’re kidding anybody with your “morale” argument, because when these employees negotiate their contracts they don’t ask for pizza parties and a birthday card from the mayor and the Council. They want more cash and less work. “Poor morale” is just another way of saying “We’re not making as much money as we want.”

Any employee – be he/she in the public or private sector – can deal with “poor morale” at one job by quitting and going to another. But guess what? Nobody quits City jobs because: (a) they are getting paid well enough for the effort they are putting in; (b) they have security from a job that can’t move to Indiana or Mexico; and (c) the pension they get beats anything in the private sector.

I think people are ridiculous to complain about the streets not being plowed to their exacting standards. The snow and extreme cold was so atypical that it’s hard for me to imagine anyone expecting the same results they’d see after a few inches in more typical temperatures.

Here’s a thought — instead of lamenting about not having dry streets immediately how about driving a bit more cautiously for a few days? It’s called common sense.

EDITOR’S NOTE: “Common sense”? If most people had that, we wouldn’t need half our laws. And if we got rid of greed and unenlightened self-interest, we’d probably be down to a quarter of them.

Disappointed in this article.
So now, we have LESS plowing on the table? Yes, in a subtle way, that is what was laid out above. How many people have landed in a ditch on Devon and Dee? A main street. It’s like one a snow storm because they wait forever to do salt.
There is a documented snow route, why wasn’t this executed? Where are the supervisors? Where are the alderman?
I’m not going to feel bad because I expect the fricken streets to be plowed and salted.

It’s a bit frustrating to look up on every issue and have it suggested that there should be a reduction of service. Not one person on the other board faulted public works for Monday or Tuesday. The comments were on THURSDAY when it was warmer and DAYS have passed. There were streets that were never cleared until the rain came. That’s a shame and a DISSERVICE to taxpayers.

I attribute this to ALDERMEN who don’t give a damn about their wards. Are some of our elected officials that REMEDIAL that they can’t even think to go to bat for us? They are the ones that campaigned to represent us, but of course after election season the message to residents is to “go complain on Monday Night”.

A couple aldermen will argue over $20 for an hour during city council, but they can’t hop in the car and check out their own ward where real money & services are being spent?

Also, every Alderman reads this blog and should know that their job is to take care of their ward. How about this, go legislate and do your job tonight.

If the city can’t do its basic job, then it needs to increase taxes. Would I really care if I paid $10 more a month? No. But, the problem is this council is so hell bent on their ideology we get a crappy town with no library on Sundays in summer and unplowed streets.

“Back in Black”? I guess the streets are only when it rains and clears the snow.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Disappointed in this comment.

If you’ve got a beef about not enough plowing or not enough salt, show up tonight and complain about it. Ask Wayne Zingsheim if he agrees with your assessment, or whether he’s been told not to plow or not to salt. Tell him what streets (which you fail to name) “were never cleared until the rain came” and see what he says.

It’s easy to hide in the weeds and anonymously throw rocks on this blog, but the people whom you are criticizing wwould LOVE to hear from you. How about TONIGHT – the newspapers will be there to report it, and the videotape will record it so that your fellow citizens can benefit from your insight.

“If the city can’t do its basic job, then it needs to increase taxes.” Outstanding! Show up tonight and tell them that, too!

Holy s$&t did the pub dog see that in a statement alderman Millissis is advocating for over $16 MILLION in bonds to protect a small section from 100 year floods? He then advocated for another $2.3 million for another street.
He mocks the ideas of SSA’s or going to referendum.

Can we expect the same uproar about this as the parks got and still are getting?

Sorry to be off topic but I’d love a write up on this one. This is some serious long term cash and OPM.

EDITOR’S NOTE: If you’d “love a write up on this one,” feel free to submit a post with your name on it and we will publish it.

One more time: the City Council did NOT lay off PW employees, tell the PW Department to make do with less salt, restrict overtime, refuse any requests for new trucks or plows or any of the other dastardly deeds being attributed to it. In a weather event, staff and PW pretty much have free reign to do what it takes to get the job done.

The lack of curb to curb plowing in the aftermath of the deep freeze was the result of a conscious decision by the PW Director to let the rain and expected warm front finish the job. Whether that was the right decision can certainly be discussed. But to say it was the result of cost-cutting is just flat out wrong.

Get Snow Job! how about we issue every Aldernan a four wheel drive vehicle and a snow plow!!!
And then maybe a trunk full if sump pumps for when it rains…

Maybe a gun and an axe too to augment the PD and FD.

What else can we have them do??

Let the rain and Mother Nature to PW’s job? Aren’t they getting paid to work not sit around and wait for rain and warmer temps? (Yes there were broken water mains to repair which takes priproty over snow removal). As a result, when the rain came the poorly plowed streets were turned to sheets of ice which creates an unsafe driving and walking situation. That was a terrible decision by the PW director. In addition, if PW had been “salting like crazy” then these streets identified in a previous post would not have been sheets of ice when the rain came.

Also not sure why good snow plowing costs more money than mediocre snow plowing. The PW employees get paid either way but since they are long serving union employees all we can expect is mediocrity?

A serious discussion by the city council of banning all street parking for 24 to 48 hours after the snow stops should take place. Get cars out of the way so the PW employees can do their job.

I did contact my alderman on this issue and he replied. Do I still need to go sit at a meeting?

One more comment-perhaps this mayor and council has not cut back at PWs. However, not that long ago the PW employees with seniority voted to take a pay raise and lay off PW staff with low seniority rather than no pay raise and everyone keeps their job. As a result, some services were cut by PW-weekly brush pick up during the spring, summer and fall was one service cut. Were these staff ever replaced?

EDITOR’S NOTE: Sounds like you still have some unresolved beefs about PW’s snow removal and salting, so you probably should attend: You can’t count on all the other anonymouses to do it for you.

Nothing is as simple as it seems. I learned a lot about plowing and salting the past couple weeks. I was told that the streets became icy during the rain last week, not because of residual snow, but because the rain was freezing on the pavement since the pavement, itself, was still below freezing from the sub zero temps a couple days before. According to the PW Director, salting at that time would have been a waste of salt (and money and time), because the rain would have washed the salt off the street into the sewer system and the roads would simply have re-frozen. I am not an expert, but it makes sense to me.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Sorry, Mr. Mayor, but that “makes sense” argument isn’t going to get you any farther than Anonymous 01.13.14 @ 7:59 am’s “common sense” argument got him/her. This is about not enough plowing and not enough salting. Hopefully you folks will take these matters up during the Public Works segment of tonight’s COW – let’s see how many of your and the PW Dept.’s inquisitors show up.

Mr. Editor-

I am not disagreeing with you on the plowing issue. I am saying, however, that the salting explanation makes sense to me, because if you salt while it’s raining, the logical result would be that the salt runs off the street into the sewers. If the temperature of the pavement is still below freezing, then the rain on the pavement simply re-freezes and you need to keep putting down salt which just gets washed away again. I do not know enough to say that is accurate, but that is the explanation which was given to me.

I am sure we will hear more about it tonight.

EDITOR’S NOTE: And since its also a Public Safety Committee COW, perhaps the Council can address how many tickets (or tows) there were of the improperly-parked cars that impeded the plowing effort, since that appears to have contributed significantly to plowing issues.

And the damage is done ….herald advocate reporting 14 storm related accidents between 5th-9th.

Wow, just in time for the meeting tonight.

Anon 1058- shhhh don’t wake the aldermen, we don’t want to bother them with conditions of their ward. God forbid they tour their own ward.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Be sure to show up and ask the assembled elected and appointed/employed officials how they could let such a catastrophic situation occur…and what it would take to prevent it from occurring again.

I’m looking at this comment: “the PW employees with seniority voted to take a pay raise and lay off PW staff with low seniority rather than no pay raise and everyone keeps their job. As a result, some services were cut by PW-weekly brush pick up during the spring, summer and fall was one service cut.” So if you factor in the “greed” of these well-paid employees who would rather reduce services than share the gelt with their underlings, and add to that the fact that, Wayne Z. is no genius but he knows his raise depends on conforming to the current no-spend-nohow-no way ideology, it’s easy to see why things didn’t get done as needed. Please try not to forget that virtually every household in Park Ridge has at least one member in it who HAS to get to work, come hell or high water, in order to pay taxes and live here. Or do you thihnk those without a personal helipad in their backyard or the freedom to work at home should just move to Norridge or someplace?

EDITOR’S NOTE: If you found any Park Ridge City streets – the ones Park Ridge, not the State, is responsible for plowing – IMPASSABLE at any time over the past 2 weeks, by all means show up tonight at City Hall and recount your horror story with all the gory details. Because this editor made a special effort to drive around Park Ridge at various times throughout the snowstorm and afterwards, and found no roads impassable – even to a front-wheel drive Honda Accord.

Enjoying how one comment lambastes the aldermen for not caring about their wards and the next excoriates Ald. Milissis for wanting to bond $16 million to help a small number of residents. What are the odds that these residents are in his ward? Appears that what’s pork to one elected official is Providence to another. As with ALL things economic and political, where you stand is mostly dependent on where you sit.

Mayor Dave:

Are you a little concerned how you look on this issue?? My god you did everything but deny you ordered the closure of the bridge!!

By the way, you can cut the Mr. Editor crap. Everyone knows you know his name, and that there is a “relationship” there.

EDITOR’S NOTE: What goes on here is “between the lines” – mayor and editor, not friend and friend. And the same holds true for every other elected official we write about. That sometimes annoys the hell out of those officials, but as Harry Truman said: “”If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.”

Anon 1.13

Is Norridge any better.

Other nearby towns I’ve driven though are not that much better with their snow plowing.

The idea, or the suggestion, or even the passion reference of “the heat being too hot” related to your treatment of Mayor Dave over the last 5 years is utterly preposterous.

EDITOR’S NOTE: What can we say: almost everthing the guy does we happen to agree with – just like almost everything Frimark did we happened to disagree with. C’est la vie.

Man I hope the Mayor and the council are talking about SSA’s for snow removal. If people don’t think their street is clear enough they should have to pay extra. The Mayor likes the idea of user fees. Let’s try that!!

How about this. Let’s cut the library tax levy and move the money over to plowing!! We could have the library be open only on Mondays.

EDITOR’S NOTE: With nonsensical comments like that, you are justified in remaining anonymous.

Interesting how blame is shifting to Zingsheim when he is only playing the cards he’s dealt. Make no mistake, the snow removal disaster falls squarely on the shoulders of the council and mayor in particular. The council can’t only take credit for anything positive, they also need to be accountable when things go wrong instead of passing the buck. I do not want to be compared to Norridge, or any other community for that fact! I pay more for Park Ridge (which I don’t mind) but I with many other residents expect better!

EDITOR’S NOTE: The mayor and the aldermen don’t plow or salt the streets, they don’t manage the plowing and salting, and they don’t draw up the plowing and salting budget for Public Works. Mr. Zingsheim and his subordinates do all that.

So unless and until Mr. Zingsheim says that any failure of plowing and salting is because the mayor and the Council tied his hands – which we haven’t heard him say – it’s his baby. Which is why he’s a full-time employee making around $130K while the mayor and the aldermen aren’t even “employees” and make $12K and $1,200 a year, respectively.

Guess you must have been too busy or too shy to show up at last night’s meeting and question Mr. Zingsheim, the mayor and the aldermen about the Norridge-quality service you’re getting.

Blame Canada!

EDITOR’S NOTE: Or…SATAN!

9:12:

“…….the snow removal disaster falls squarely on the shoulders of the council and mayor in particular”…….OH MY GOD!!!!!! Who are these people???

Disaster?!?!?!?! Really?!?!?! Give me a break!! Of all the overblown whiny crap.

If you think things are good just wait a few minutes. Someone in PR will find something to bitch about.

As PD stated, I too drove, walked and ran all over town during the storm(s) of the last few weeks and did not experience a single problem and I live on a side street that had plowed in parked cars. Unlike PD, who at least has front wheel drive, my car is RWD.

As Mayor Dave (who I regularly disagree with) stated, I think most PR people would give PW high marks. SO 9:12, you are completely off base!

EDITOR’S NOTE: Any time some special interest or another needs a “hook” to make up for no intelligent, factually-demonstrable position on an issue, “safety” is it. Somebody – preferably a kid, or an old person, because 30 and 40 year olds just don’t have the same cachet – will die if we don’t do this or that RIGHT AWAY! And the fact that NOBODY has died for the past 40-50-60 years from whatever real or imagined threat just means the odds are now really stacked against us.

Oh, yeah…and when they die, the City will be SUED!!!

Editor, you can add “Park Ridge character” to the favored cliches as well.

One of the best ones was in the memo yesterday from the City Manager yesterday.
That “character” would cost $48 mil to fix.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Only if we pay retail.

Late but thinking you might find this of interest.

http://www.parkridge.us/faq/default.aspx#245

Note the Snow Plan Priority List.

At last night’s City Council meeting when asked if a plan existed this is what the Public Works Director pointed the inquiring Alderman to.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Great reference – thanks.

Is it safe to assume that the questions may have been directed to compliance with the plan rather than the sufficiency of the plan itself?

Here’s the other side of the coin. On north Prospect the plows come by so many times that I no sooner get my apron clean, and they plow me back in. Not several times, but several several times. And they don’t just “push” the snow, they “throw” it. I have a photo that shows it 22 feet from curb, over the sidewalk, onto the back of my car (which I prudently(?) parked close enough to just get out in the morning. And it’s not really snow any more at that point – it’s black, heavy, slushy, icy muck. Did I mention it’s heavy? Very heavy.

Maybe I should have shown up at the COW with my complaint. But rather than get “snowballed” out to the lobby, I just shut up and shovel. And shovel and shovel.

PS: I did call once to complain about how far they throw the snow, but my only satisfaction is that hopefully the plowers go home to plowed in drives too.

The question was asked and Zingshiem and Hamilton both commented about the fact that there was a Snow Plan and that it’s what they followed.
Zingshiem then proceeded to almost recite it as if he had it committed to memory.

So I think the answer is that it’s what they said was used during this past storm and as to its sufficiency I can’t say they really commented other than it was a challenging storm and they struggled to stay up with it.

EDITOR’S NOTE: So then maybe that’s THE answer – and if that doesn’t work for some folks, they may need to buy a four-wheel drive SUV/Hummer-style vehicle for those few days a year when the plows get overwhelmed.

Sounds like they should plow more….and then when they get to the address of the guy on N. Prospect simply lift up the plows and drive by!!

I will repeat what I said earlier. If you think all is well just wait 15 min. Someone in PR will find something to bitch about.

EDITOR’S NOTE: We don’t mind people bitching if it’s a legitimate beef rather than a purely political one. Otherwise you get complacency from the public and complacency from our public officials and paid staff.

Just read the post in the Herald-Advocate about last night’s council meeting and Wayne explaining that his dept. just gives the council information and the council makes the decision. If my company ran like that, the division heads making a half million a year would be deferring to the board of directors. That’s nuts, people.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Hey, staff reports and the Council decides. And if you don’t make any recommendations that go awry, there’s less of a chance that you make a bad one and lose your half-million dollar (or $130,000) job.

I am not averse to having a good bitch session. I am also positive that there are things that I would bitch about that others could give a rats a$% about and vice versa.

But trying to look at the plowing issue in an “open minded” way and considering the length of the consistent snow (hard to keep up with) followed by double digit below zero temperatures (salt does not work) in concert with the normal parked cars plowed in on side streets, I find it difficult to call some of the comments a “legitimate beef”. Based on my own experience during the storm I do not think there was a crisis and I am not sure what all those above would have done differently.

I would also say that (while I often disagree with the Mayor) when I see someone post “…..disaster falls squarely on the shoulders of the council and mayor in particular” I find it hard not to see it as a “purely political one”.

I read in the Sun-Times yesterday that some Chicago aldermen are calling out the whiners in Chicago who want their streets cleaned and salted no matter what the cost. It sounded almost exactly like this discussion, with one alderman saying people need to be more reasonable in their demands. That argument could be made with all the whiners on this blog who sound like unless the streets are plowed curb to curb and salted down to the bare pavement its a catastrophe. Screw them. So long as the roads are passable and reasonably safe with the exercise of some additional care, I’d rather see our tsx dollars used for more permanent public needs.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Sounds just about right to us.

6:24-Chicago main streets are done quickly and frequently. It’s no comparison to Park Ridge. In fact, for anyone that drives through, you will know when you enter Chicago, because the streets are cleared/salted quicker at any time of day/night.

As far as the side streets, that’s revisionist history. Side streets in the city have curb to curb cars and no ordinance against that. I’m sure you are aware that people shovel out spots then put chairs there to hold their spots. The side streets in the city are known to be done late, just before the alleys (if they are done.) I find it funny for suburban people to comment on Chicago services they know nothing about.

Park Ridge isn’t Chicago.
Now back to Park Ridge, the comments were:
* Some streets weren’t cleared as of Thursday/Friday, well after the snow and cold.
* There were comments about the cost we are paying vs the service we are getting
* The plows weren’t able to keep up with snow, even on some of the main streets as even mentioned in the meeting.

If you call that “b**tching, then I guess you don’t understand that we pay for these services and expect delivery of them. If not, please tell us what it will cost to have them done to our expectation.

Do you complain when your cable goes out that you pay for or just say “eh, poor cable guys, I’ll give them a few days” If your garbage pick-up came on Friday, instead of Tuesday, is that a crisis or just a failed service that we should expect more from?

No one said it was a “crisis” that is the spin attacking the commenters. Don’t be so sensitive, you can support the mayor and still question what’s going on. Settle down, there is no election in sight locally.

EDITOR’S NOTE: “[W]e pay for these services and expect delivery of them.” How often have we heard that!

Exactly HOW MUCH of your City property tax bill – not the whole bill you pay twice a year, but just the “City” portion of it – goes toward paying for PLOWING and SALTING? $1? $10? $100? If you’re only paying $1 do you have the right to demand as much plowing and salting as if you’re paying $100?

Not surprisingly, so far nobody has shown up at a City Council meeting voicing any of the complaints they have been been voicing here anonymously. Like yourself, they must be so busy or so shy that they don’t want to actually show up at City Hall and identify themselves as part of presenting their comments. Too bad.

Mr Zingheim confirmed what commentors said

The city did not have budgeted enough salt to provide the level of salt needed for side streets. So there you go.
We are also almost out of salt. When the council scrimped everywhere then any bumps will cause problems

Also $120,000 so far in OT this year? Doesn’t sound like we are staffed enough.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Not so fast, Slick.

What we heard Mr. Zingsheim say is that while they previously had a lot of salt on hand, they used a lot of it on this storm – as did everybody else. So Park Ridge and numerous other local communities have tons on order but delivery is slow because so many other communities are short, and because the weather slowed the deliveries. None of this appears tied to budget cuts.

The budget for OT was $108,000 or so, and the City already has spent $120,000, with much of it coming from this storm’s lengthy duration. But it would be monumentally stupid for the City to staff for these occasional major snow storms (or 100-year floods), as that would add regular and permanent pay and benefits not needed the vast majority of the year.

Who wants to join me in sending Ms. Van de Carr $5 to raise the $25,000 needed to reinstate Sunday summer afternoon Library hours? If a third of households in Park Ridge — 5,000 of us — send in $5, that’s $25K right there.

EDITOR’S NOTE: You can put this editor down for $5. Heck, make it $10.

But we suggest you take pledges first and then, when you reach $25K, make sure you have a quid pro quo Library Board resolution so that the money gets lawfully allocated for the intended purpose.

And your fine idea presupposes that 5,000 households use and/or care about Library summer Sundays enough to contribute – a fact not yet in evidence by any other measure.

I think the city did a good job of taking care of the snow, given the extreme temps. One complaint I do have is that the areas near the school were plowed 2-3 feet from the curb (inexperienced plow drivers I would say) This caused 2 way streets to become only clear enough for 1 car at a time. Granted it’s for a short time, both before and after school. It did seem to be a dangerous condition for the children and parents. I also have never seen a car ticketed for not moving on the North side of the street (for days) during the snow.

11:04’s idea is noble but have we really reached the point where we need residents to raise the money to keep the library open on Sundays? That sounds more like the m.o. of a tiny rural township than of an affluent suburb of a major city. This goes back to the city council. They could allocate more tax dollars to the library but they don’t. It’s a shame they — and you — don’t place as much value on it as many do. I’m sure the library won’t say no to donations but to truly run properly they can’t rely on the kindness of a few residents to bail them out.

EDITOR’S NOTE: The Library Board and Library Staff shouldn’t NEED the City Council to bail them out, especially when they could simply start charging fees for such amenities as computer usage and programs which would easily generate enough revenue to save summer Sundays. But since the Board and Staff appears more concerned with keeping certain freeloading users happy, the Sunday patrons end up getting screwed.

And if the Library really is as popular with the taxpayers as the Board majority and Staff insist it is, then they should have no hesitation about going to referendum in November and asking THE TAXPAYERS to vote to raise the Library’s levy, making any future begging at City Hall as unnecessary as it is unsuccessful.

Yes, but what about the projects for the second ward? Isn’t it about time the city pays attention to us?

We’ve been ignored for far too long. Our current alderman has put his foot to the floor to spend for these projects?

Why does he have no support?

EDITOR’S NOTE: The City has been “paying attention” to the flood victims in the Second Ward for the past few years, which is why it already has spent what we understand is close to $1 million on consultants to come up with ways to address Second Ward flooding problems.

It seems that you may be confusing “paying attention” with rolling over and giving you whatever you want, irrespective of the cost and irrespective of how that might hogtie the City financially for decades after it already has been hogtied by the Uptown TIF.

Editor,
Are you planning a write-up on Drowings reference from yesterday?
Would it qualify as the most expensive project in Park Ridge’s history?

I’ll say this about Monday’s meeting. It does speak to your comment about “showing up” to meetings, but that doesn’t mean good policy will come of it.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Most likely.

As we understand the current price-tags, Mayfield Estates AND Northwest Park, together, might not hit the cost level of the Uptown TIF. But if the City were to include the Country Club/Greenwood project, even at the current 10-year flood level, it WOULD be the new record. And doing CC/Greenwood to a 100-year level might turn it into the equivalent of Joe DiMaggio’s 56-game hitting streak.

Unfortunately, when it comes to spending OPM, the vast majority of the show-ups are the spenders, not the payors.

Drowning, we did more than just hire a consultant for the Second Ward. A major flood control project was completed this past summer in the Burton/Fenton area. And we tried to get approval for a North Park project but were rebuffed a couple years ago by local residents.

It is wrong to say the Second Ward has been ignored. To the contrary, it has probably received the most attention since I took office.

And the second ward got a $600,000 flood retention wall years ago!

I am drowning too. In taxes.

I don’t live in the 2nd Ward, and my home no longer floods. Why? Because I spent my own money to put in a check valve, a sump pump, and a french drain.

Water in their streets? Better than water in their homes.

I’m drowning too.

EDITOR’S NOTE: You should have been at City Hall Monday night, to hear a number of people say one or another variant of “Money’s no object” (“Don’t look at it in dollars and cents”; “Money’s not the issue”; “The money will come from God”)

But to be fair, the water that’s in the streets also apparently ends up in their homes.

The show that 2nd Ward Alderman Millissis put on was not worthy of his job or an elected official. He called names many times of elected officials. Even the 2nd Ward taxpayers were “indignant” to use Millissis word. He also called an Alderman a “coward”.

Mayfield Estates chose “character” over sewers. Why in the hell should I pay for them to bring them up? There are many areas that do not have curbs or paved alleys/streets in Park Ridge, because that was the deal when signed.

What was most disconcerting, was the scoffing at the idea of Special Service Areas or a referendum. So, SPEND SPEND SPEND, as long as the 2nd Ward doesn’t have to pitch in.

Dan Knight was a leader yesterday of common sense. Maloney also did a great job deal with that circus of people wanting our money.

EDITOR’S NOTE: This editor has helped relatives deal with Mayfield Estates flooding on a couple of occasions, and it ain’t a pretty sight – even after the torrents have ended. So we can understand the strong feelings of those residents and their representative. That being said, at what calculates out to approx. $100K per home, that’s one very big expense for THE CITY’S taxpayers that still appears to benefit only those residents. Which is why we think an SSA is worth considering, especially if the City undertakes some of the expense and the residents – who bought into a neighborhood knowing that there were no street sewers – put some extra skin in the game in return for the significant increase in property values this project is likely to create if successful.

And, yes, Ald. Maloney did a commendably great job under difficult circumstances.

Actually, Alderman Maloney DID do a great job. And it was under difficult circumstances. Credit should go to Ald. Maloney for getting the COW to come to exactly the right decision despite the antics of some of his colleagues and the behavior of the public.

My favorite comment on this thread is….”If not, please tell us what it will cost to have them done to our expectation”. Gee 8:58, who exactly do you include in “our”?? You act as if there is some huge community backlash about plowing. Speaking for me (see I do not presume to speak for everyone) I understand the sixze of the storm and I have realistic expectations.

The thing I find fascinating is that, for all the bitching and whining and complaining, I defy anyone to quantify how the snow plowing (and the pot hole situation for that matter) is in any worse (or better for that matter) than it has been in the past 10 years.

There is no difference. None. Nada. Zippo. Zilch. Bupkis.

When a storm is bigger, with more snow and cold temps, it tends to be more difficult to clear the roads. If we have more bad weather we tend to have more pot holes…….DUH!!!!

Drowning:

Mayor Dave states “a major flood control project was completed this past summer in the Burton/Fenton area”. I am guessing (or maybe hoping) that there has been some heavy rains since the project was completed. Can you share some on the street, or in the water, reporting??

Did you notice any difference in the area mentioned by the Mayor?

The Mayor states further….”it (2nd Ward) has probably received the most attention since I took office”. I would seem (based on your post) all this attention has not made a significant dent in the flooding issue in your ward, true??

Nice try Anon 5:04pm. Let’s attack the alderman that’s advocating for his ward because you don’t want the city to do its job and protect its citizens. According to the trib Milissis said “By debating the potential for lawsuits or breaking down project costs on a per house basis, “we sound like paper-pushing cowards who don’t want to face the facts,” Milissis said.” It doesn’t sound to me like he attacked any particular alderman. He called out the others on what they were doing in an underhanded manner. Trying to stop any further consideration of these projects. Mazuca and Knight were talking out of both sides of their mouths saying they need more information and in the same sentence saying they wanted to stop any further consideration of the projects and go back to the drawing board. Schubert was the true voice of reason at the end. He gave succinct and highly logical comments in favor of continuing consideration of the two projects. As far as SSA’s go and in the interest of fairness, why isn’t anyone talking about going back and applying them retroactively to every other flood remediation project around town that has already been completed. Why are the 2nd warders the pariahs all of a sudden? Because they dared expect the city to carry through the same way it did with other areas?

EDITOR’S NOTE: “[B]reaking down project costs on a per house basis” is a perfectly legitimate way, and even a preferred way, of assessing the cost-benefit of projects, especially those funded by the taxpayers. Anyone who considers that as being “underhanded” should be equally concerned about any public official who downplays or conceals such information, especially when costs start running in the $100,000 per residence range.

We think consideration should continue to be given to these projects, but we strongly disagree with those who view those projects’ COSTS as being of “no object” and not worthy of consideration – a sentiment almost unanimously expressed by the folks who spoke in favor of these projects Monday night.

As far as “going back and applying [SSA’s] retroactively to every other flood remediation project around town that has already been completed,” that would clearly be unfair to those affected people because they weren’t given any chance to weigh in on that type of cost sharing BEFORE those costs were incurred. While that may have been a mistake by the City, it doesn’t mean that the City should keep making that same mistake going forward.

Snow plowing wasn’t great but it wasn’t bad. As Watchdog often asks, are we getting full plowing value for what we are paying? I can’t say yes or no, which probably means that we might not be but we’re not getting ripped off either.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Not an unreasonable view.

Anonymous 9:56pm- Please re-watch the video, he was pretty clear in calling Mazzuca a “paper-pushing coward”. Mazzuca even acknowledged it.
But your side was full of deceit and name calling so it probably didn’t seem strange. How about the guy who said only “3 alderman” were paying attention. Who is this guy to come up and judge how people listen? Gross display of beggars/demanders for OPM.

Mayfield Estates chose annexation without sewers. When you bought your house, you knew that. Why should the city retroactively reward people for the CHEAP (or character or whatever) decision? Screw that. My sewers suck as well and we aren’t even mentioned at city council. But, Nick Millissis says “oh we will come around for everyone”, out of one side of his mouth while saying it would be “Utopia” to have a city-wide sewer plan.

If there is not a referendum or SSA, there will be backlash at everyone who votes for it.

Dan Knight wants to know how much to tell his ward that their taxes are going up, and you fricken object to that? But, I guess “God” will provide us the money? Or is it that “cost doesn’t matter”? Or one of the other doozies.

Nick Millissis, if you are trying to have your ward get millions of dollars, why the heck didn’t you ask how we would pay for it? Instead, he had a tantrum. Legislating is a skill.

Where’s my 100-year flood control?

EDITOR’S NOTE: Indignant, we must take issue with “Legislating is a skill” – if only because most of the times when that “skill” is required we end up with BAD bills loaded with all sorts of log-rolling, quid pro quo deals, earmarks, etc. tacked onto them to garner enough votes from feckless and/or conniving legislators to pass them.

9:56:

Sorry to sound unsympathetic but you were/are naïve. You heard the Mayor say……”The infrastructure – e.g., the water supply, sewage, utilities, roadways, traffic control, etc. – should be our top priority because it represents the most essential of city services and has the greatest impact on the daily life of our residents.

For example, our inadequate storm sewer system has caused many residents to lose thousands, and even tens of thousands, of dollars of possessions, including such irreplaceable things as family photos and mementoes. It also has increased the cost of their insurance and caused them a lot of time, effort and drudgery related to clean-up and repairs…”….and assumed that it meant something (as did many others I am sure)

The truth is that there never was any chance that the city was going to put together and pay for projects that would make any significant dent in the flooding issue. NEVER EVER!! If you have ever looked out your window in PR during a “100 year rain” this issue is all over town. The dollars to fix this issue are astronomical. That is what I did shortly after I move to PR and my basement flooded. While not an engineer, I walked to the center of the intersection near my house and the water was up to my knees. The water was about 18in from my front porch. I knew if I wanted a dry basement I had to fix it, not count on the city to do so. I got a flood control system and have been dry ever since.

Do you think that a majority would vote to spend that kind of cash on areas that will not even affect them?? Sorry but we live in a town where there are some folks who are celebrating the savings from closing the library on Sunday. DO you honestly think PR would pay 9 figures for flood relief??

It is entirely possible that the Mayor believed that more could be done when he made those comments (I am not sure why), but he and his supporters are clearly looking for an off ramp at this point. Can you imagine being someone waiting for the Mayor to ride in on his white horse and now being “sold” on the idea of SSA’s??? That is where this is heading.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Because infrastructure had been neglected for so long, when Schmidt became mayor NOBODY appears to have had a comprehensive sense of its condition; and NOBODY had any idea what it would cost to make meaningful inroads into the flooding problem. It took years of work by the Flood Control Task Force and expensive studies by Burke Engineering just to get us to the point that we know it will cost over $100 million for less than 1/4 of the City – and that doesn’t even ensure 100-year flood protection for the area west of the Park Ridge Country Club.

PD is even back pedaling. It was not that long ago that he defended the cost of those already completed projects as infrastructure benefiting the whole community. Now he implies that even these projects should have been SSA’s. He now says they should not make the same mistake going forward.

EDITOR’S NOTE: We don’t think we’re “back pedaling” because these are apples and oranges projects.

If relief sewers like what have already been installed for that first $5.2 million were all that was needed to address the problems in the Mayfield Estates, NW Park and/or the Country Club/Greenwood areas, this discussion would have an entirely different dynamic because – at least as we understand it – those completed projects did not run anywhere near $100,000 per home.

But if it increases your self-esteem to think you have won a “Gotcha!” game with us, knock yourself out.

Thank you, dear Editor, for your commitment of $10 toward keeping the Library open on Sundays this summer. Stay tuned; it may come to naught but at this point I am SO not kidding about trying.We may not be the avid readers pore folks in New England hamlets are, with their bookstores on every corner, but we are not total Phillistines here, either.

5:39:

I will double PD’s $10.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Okay, we’ll go $50…but not a penny more.

If SSAs are handled as they were for alley paving I believe that would mean that a certain percentage of owners on a given block would have to agree to the SSA being created. I’ve already taken care of my house, so what’s my incentive to agree to additional costs to me for those around me who have not taken care of their flooding issues? And if the majority of owners on my block have taken care of their houses and don’t agree to an SSA wouldn’t the SSA fail? So are SSAs the answer? I’m not sure there is a one size fits all solution to the problem. We’re at the point where my wish for a magic wand has increased dramatically!

Thank you, Anon 1-16 9:19! And thank you, dear PubDog, for upping your contribution to $50. You’re a prince!

EDITOR’S NOTE: Thanks, although we feel more like a pauper.