The Common Sense Chief. With the often mindless “nanny state” mentality encroaching into our daily lives with increasing frequency, we want to give a big Watchdog bark-out to Park Ridge Police Chief Frank Kaminski for his common-sense approach to the problem known as “distracted driving.” 

Chief K was asked to look into whether a hands-free cell phone ordinance like the one the demented midget who runs Chicago instituted might be worth enacting here.  Instead of blindly jumping on that misguided bandwagon, Chief K wisely noted in his memo [pdf] that such an ordinance would pose compliance/enforcement problems.  But where we give him extra credit is for his recognition that “the data also proves that this [distraction] occurs whether cell phones are hand-held or hands free” – not unlike it occurs for those nitwits who apply makeup or shave while driving.

Good call, Chief!

Just Do Your Job.  During Monday night’s City Council discussion of zero-based budgeting, Fifth Ward Ald. Robert Ryan suggested the formation of a citizens task force to help the Council (and Staff?) figure out ways to balance the City budget after yet another multi-million dollar deficit that Ryan voted for.  

Sorry, alderman, but formulating a balanced budget is something that City Staff is being well-paid to do, and competently overseeing that effort is something you and your fellow alder-critters signed on for when you ran for your seats around The Horseshoe.  Since we don’t recall any of you professing fiscal incompetence when you were running for office, don’t now try to push your responsibilities off on people who neither sought, nor have taken the oath of, your offices.

If the Staff and/or the Council can’t or won’t do the jobs they signed on for, then we need to find that out sooner rather than later and take appropriate steps to replace them.  What we don’t need are private citizens being conscripted to effectively serve as enablers and concealers of City governmental incompetence.

It’s Coming!  Next Wednesday (December 16) night the Gene Spanos/Joe Karaganis traveling road show is coming to the South Park Field House, as flyers [pdf] in this week’s Park Ridge Journal are announcing.  According to those flyers, the meeting will address “our next step toward a class action lawsuit for all who are impacted by the negative side effects of the ORD re-configuration – 2014 O’Hare Plan.”

We strongly encourage a big turnout for this meeting so that as many Park Ridge residents as possible – from all areas of town – are present to hear about what we suspect will be a grand and glorious plan to take on all comers in a litigation death match: the City of Chicago, the FAA, the EPA, the airlines, the ONCC, etc.  And we hope questions are asked about how much that plan is going to cost, and how it’s going to be paid for.

It’s Unanimous!  Maine South’s University of Indiana-bound running back Matt Perez recently made it unanimous when the Chicago Tribune concurred with the Chicago Sun-Times’ selection of him as the Player of the Year in high school football.  Perez not only excelled while running and catching the ball, but he also was a defensive standout and special teams force for the Hawk’s repeat state championship squad.

Over the past two years that he has played a starring role in his team’s achievements, we repeatedly have heard about his dedication and work ethic.  So it’s great to see how he has successfully turned all that hard work into such outstanding performance that it earned the recognition he is receiving. 

Well done, Matt!

Monday night the Park Ridge City Council had its first close encounter with the concept of zero-based budgeting (“ZBB”).  And as best we could judge from the video and commentary at Park Ridge Underground, it wasn’t exactly love at first sight.

Mayor Dave Schmidt raised ZBB as part of the “Mayor’s Report” because he claimed he wanted the topic discussed in a public forum rather than in private between himself and the City Manager.  After four years of behind-the-scenes wheeling and dealing by former mayor Howard Frimark, that kind of transparency is refreshing – even if it appears just a tad disingenuous by Schmidt, given his admission that he decided not to veto a recent amendment to the zoning ordinance after having private discussions with some members of the City’s Planning & Zoning Commission.

But progress toward open government, however incremental or inconsistent, is still progress.

Not surprisingly, City Manager Jim Hock expressed more than a few reservations about ZBB as an alternative to budgetary business-as-usual.  We can understand that, even if we don’t agree with it: No bureaucrat likes the idea of having to reinvent his/her particular “wheel,” and much less so when the “wheel” is one he inherited – with several spokes missing – from the mismanagement team of Frimark and former city manager Tim Schuenke a little over a year ago.  It also doesn’t help that Hock’s finance director is exiting, stage left, after the first of the year.

We’re not counting Ald. Frank Wsol (7th Ward) among ZBB’s staunchest proponents, either.  With the faux-ness of his “fiscal conservatism” having been revealed by his successful (so far) opposition to passing through increased water costs to water users, and by his unsuccessful (mirabile dictu) efforts to saddle us with a big new $16 million-plus cop shop, Wsol’s tepid endorsement of a “modified” ZBB was no surprise.

Fifth Ward Ald. Robert Ryan admitted that he doesn’t understand the concept of ZBB, so he shouldn’t be counted on for a “yes” vote, either.  And Ald. James Allegretti was MIA so his view on the matter could not be ascertained.  But given his track record of fiscal irresponsibility and plain boneheadedness, we’ll pencil him in for a “No” vote until further notice.

We were surprised by what sounded like an unqualified endorsement of ZBB by Third Ward Ald. Don “Air Marshall” Bach, who claims he wants a “business case” done for each significant City expenditure.  We can’t tell if Bach is just blowing smoke or if he has become a born-again fiscal conservative, but we’re not complaining – at least not for the time being.

Alds. Joe Sweeney (1st Ward) and Tom Carey (6th Ward) seemed to be in favor of the concept, but Ald. Rich DiPietro (2nd Ward) gave it his customary non-committal treatment, so he could be the swing vote on this issue.

Separating the wheat from the chaff is required for ZBB to be a success, which means cold-heartedly determining what City government ought to be doing with the taxpayers’ money and then coldheartedly prioritizing those tasks.  The key is to make sure we can pay for the things we truly need before we even think about things we merely want.

At the top of the “need” list has to be public safety, a/k/a police and fire.  But just because they are No. 1 on the hit parade doesn’t mean that those departments can skate through without cuts, or even systemic changes, to make them operate more cost-effectively.  In addition to police and fire, however, “public safety” is also provided by certain types of City Code enforcement, inspections, permits and licensing.

Next comes water and sewer.  Anything less than a 100% pass through of all water costs to consumers – on a usage basis – will be a clear indication that City Staff and/or the Council are not serious about ZBB or balancing the budget.  And given how sewer maintenance appears to have been neglected, just keeping that system up and running is likely to be an expensive proposition that may require the sacrifice of other services.

After that comes streets and sidewalks, the repair and replacement of which also have been put on a slower track over the years as money was diverted to other uses.  Part of that cost also relates to things like snow plowing and salting, which not only make it safer to drive on our roadways but also may have some effect on the rate at which those roadway surfaces deteriorate. 

Beyond that are a variety of services to keep the City functioning, including flood control and even tree trimming – especially where overgrowth poses a threat to power lines.  Determining how many, and to what extent, such services can survive given the City’s current revenues will be a challenge for Staff and the Council.

And for ZBB to be truly effective, in addition to justifying every dollar spent, those justified expenditures also should be measured against the price that those particular services could be purchased from the private sector or otherwise outsourced.  That way we can get a better sense of whether the City’s cost structure is lean or padded.

As with any reform of a program or system, the success of ZBB will depend primarily on the strength and tenacity of the leadership promoting it.  That means no compromises and no free passes given to any department or department head, or else ZBB will look like empty rhetoric that can be ignored.  And that also means each department head must be forced to take ownership – and personal accountability – for every ZBB recommendation and decision he/she makes.

Implementation of ZBB can bring a “New Age” of cost-effective management to City government, or it can be a worthless boondoggle.  Which outcome prevails will depend upon the folks at 505 Butler Place.

On tonight’s City Council agenda is an innocuous-looking item under the “Mayor’s Report” titled “Zero-based budgeting.”  But it might just prove to be the key to whether our community thrives and prospers in coming years, or whether it staggers along under more deficit budgets, decreasing services and, ultimately, much higher taxes.

For as long as we can remember the City of Park Ridge – and our other local governmental bodies as well – have formulated their budgets based on some percentage of increase (or, theoretically, decrease) over the previous year’s budget.  Which means that rarely, if ever, has anybody looked with a keen eye and a sharp knife at the way things are operating before automatically tacking on a fractional request for more funds. 

“Zero-based budgeting” (“ZBB”) is different.  It begins with the assumption that nothing will be spent on each of the functions for which a particular department is responsible.  Rather than simply using what that department’s manager is already spending as the baseline for additional spending, ZBB requires each manager to review his/her department’s budget and perform a cost-benefit analysis of each task assigned to that department, including performance measures and alternatives.

The bottom line: each manager is required to justify every dollar of what he/she is requesting, no matter for how many years something or other has been done without question.

With years of deficit budgets having jeopardized the City’s financial well-being and the services to which we have grown accustomed, and with no let-up in sight, we think ZBB is an idea whose time has definitely come.   And Mayor Dave Schmidt appears to share that opinion, as we understand that the ZBB agenda item is there at his insistence.

While we strongly support the concept of ZBB, our research indicates that it is not practical for every department every year, due to its labor-intensive nature and the cost.  But it can be used effectively on a rotating basis so that no department does ZBB more than once every X number of years to enforce budgetary restraint and reduce the “entitlement” mentality that promotes inefficiency and spending.

Unfortunately, just because the mayor is proposing it doesn’t mean ZBB is going to be adopted. 

As we’ve repeatedly seen over recent years, and more often since former Mayor Howard Frimark led the referendum to cut the City Council in half and then install a majority of his Alderpuppets in the 7 chairs remaining, we’ve got a Council that seems incapable of controlling spending – as shown by how it increased spending last year even as it was staring at a $2 million budget deficit. 

And if that’s not crazy enough, try this one on for size: After the Council, at the insistence of Ald. Frank “RINO” (Republican In Name Only) Wsol, rejected the fiscally-responsible pass-through of increased water costs to water users, the City is now looking at an approximately $900,000 operating deficit in the water fund this year, even as the City increasingly relies on that water fund to help cover other expense obligations, like payroll.

We also can’t expect support for ZBB from City Staff, because government bureaucrats are no fans figuring out what to cut and what to fund in what amounts.  That’s hard work…and it carries the risk of accountability for those decisions if they turn out to be wrong.  Which is why we wonder whether the prospect of ZBB may be responsible for City Finance Director Diane Lembesis reportedly exiting for Gurnee.

ZBB will clearly be a test of Schmidt’s leadership and an indication of whether the City Council and/or City Staff care one whit about Park Ridge’s long-term fiscal health and its viability as an upscale residential community.  

We’re keeping our fingers crossed.

It has been a year since the opening of new O’Hare runway 9L27R began bringing planes over an area of Park Ridge previously unaffected by – and, hence, relatively unconcerned about – that huge airport to the west.  The newly-harassed residents in that area were outraged but, truth be told, many residents in the Northeast and Northwest sections of town were relieved as their air traffic decreased.

According to a page-one story in yesterday’s edition of the Park Ridge Journal (“Record Own Noise Levels,” December 2), however, the Park Ridge O’Hare Airport Commission may be looking to the City to come up with $24,000 to buy its own noise study from a company that formerly did such studies for the defunct Suburban O’Hare Commission (“SOC”).

This proposed noise study, endorsed by Park Ridge Ald. Don “Air Marshall” Bach, appears to be focused more on soundproofing our homes, schools, etc. than on getting planes out of Park Ridge airspace.  According to the Journal article, “Bach hopes to present the [noise] information to congressional representatives and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in an attempt to garner additional sound proofing money for Park Ridge.”   

But at first glance, the plan being endorsed by Bach and the Commission seems far more likely to put some quick cash in the pocket of S&V Solutions, Inc., the former SOC noise consultant that clearly needs a new gig now that SOC is no more, than to put soundproofing money in the City treasury.

Just the fact that the $24,000 proposal involves only one noise monitor to be placed in an as-yet undetermined location suggests that whatever data it produces will be too localized and incomplete to justify any kind of comprehensive relief for our entire community.  That means the likelihood either of more monitors or neighborhood pitted against neighborhood. 

Worse yet, this “plan” seems to put the cart before the horse…again.

For any airport noise plan to have a decent chance of success, City representatives need to go to those congressional representatives and the FAA first – before expending resources on things that may end up being totally worthless – and find out directly from those officials: (1) what relief is available, and (2) exactly what it will take for us to get it.  Simply acquiring and assembling data is idiotic – as idiotic as the City’s throwing away $650,000 on a SOC-brained scheme to build a Peotone airport several years ago.

We need to face the hard cold fact that unless somebody with provable federal clout is willing to commit to going to bat for us in a clearly-defined way based on clearly-defined objectives and clearly-identified standards, we are just chasing our tails.

And wasting tax dollars that are already in too short supply.

One of the things that (in our opinion) has eroded the quality of performance and commitment in our society, especially for our children, is the “self-esteem” movement.  Or, more accurately, the false self-esteem movement, where praise is thrown around like confetti irrespective of effort, achievement or outcome.

So leave it to the Maine South Hawks football team to provide an object lesson in real, hard-earned self-esteem – with their dominating state championship victory Saturday night over Marist High School.  Repeat state championships, especially in the top class of the tournament structure, are rare due to things like player graduations and the hackneyed, but true, concept that anybody can beat anybody else on any given day.

But Coach Dave Inserra and his staff obviously have taught their kids what it takes to be successful.  And we suspect that many of these young champions may have started learning those lessons even before they got to Maine South, from the coaches of the highly-successful Falcons feeder program.

What can be said about Matt Perez that isn’t already encompassed in the words “Player of the Year”?  If he hadn’t already earned that award prior to Saturday night, he would have locked it up beyond a doubt with his almost-unbelievable performance in the championship game – “almost-unbelievable” only because we’ve seen too many similar ones from him to be surprised or to question.

And senior Tyler Benz – who could have been the starting quarterback at most schools for 2 or 3 years – ran the offense, and the ball, with the confidence of a college QB.

Our list of raves could go on and on.  But we think that the attitude which best describes what Maine South football is all about – and why the self-esteem those kids feel is genuine rather than false – was voiced by senior safety Mike Divito (as quoted in one of the local newspapers) after last week’s semi-final victory over Loyola Academy, in response to being asked to explain how well his under-rated defensive unit performed:

“I’d say it’s mostly heart,” DiVito said. “I’ve probably had about a total of six weeks off from football the past two years, and that’s the way it is for all of us. We wouldn’t want it any other way. Football is our passion, and on defense we truly believe that defense wins championships.”

Passion and commitment.  Two of the qualities most essential to both individual and team success.

So congratulations to the Hawks!  Once again, you’ve earned the right to call yourselves “champions.”  

For those of us fortunate enough to live in an upscale community like Park Ridge, almost by definition we have plenty to be thankful for – far more than we could list in today’s post.

But since our focus is on local government and politics, we want to take this opportunity to express our gratitude to a few people who have contributed more to the cause of good government in our community than anyone or anything else we can think of.

First off, we thank Mayor Dave Schmidt for donating a video camera and recruiting volunteers to videotape City Council and other City government meetings so that residents unable to attend those meetings can still see – up close and personal – exactly what is going on, in ways that our local newspapers and local blogs can’t quite capture with the printed word. 

Frankly, it’s a travesty that we need a mayor to forego any part of his modest mayoral salary ($12,000) in order to get videotapes of City meetings.  But what’s an even bigger travesty is the fact that the bureaucrats in City Hall, over a year ago, came up with a cockamamie-bordering-on-fraudulent proposal of almost $130,000 to videotape City meetings – which, in retrospect, looks like nothing more than a way for those bureaucrats to avoid the kind of scrutiny that videotaped meetings provide.

Our second “thank you” goes to intrepid volunteers George Kirkland and Charles Melidosian, who without any fanfare have donated countless hours of their time to videotape and up-load the videos of City meetings so that residents can watch and learn.  Unlike the shameless self-promotors at Taste of Park Ridge NFP (“Taste Inc.”) – who incessantly tell everyone within earshot just how wonderful and self-sacrificing they are, even as they secretly and unaccountably rake in a quarter million dollars a year from their monopoly of the City’s signature 4-day “special event” at the taxpayers’ expense – Kirkland and Melidosian just do the job, quietly and unassumingly, week in and week out. 

And last, but far from least, are the folks at Park Ridge Underground, the “Pru Crew,” who laboriously take the Kirkland/Melidosian videos and provide an index – often accompanied by amusing commentary – that allows viewers to cut to the chase of whatever might interest them, rather than having to themselves slog through hours of the often incomprehensible sausage-making that regularly passes for “government” at City Hall.

Keep up the good work, folks, and take a modest bow because you deserve it.  

It was less than a month ago that the City’s ethics ordinance – which was enacted to prevent (or at least deter) unscrupulous public officials from cashing in on their public officeholding – received a unanimous and unceremonious stab in the back from the City Council when the it voted not to prosecute former mayor Howard “Let’s Make A Deal” Frimark.

Of course, we never expected that Frimark would actually be prosecuted for what the City Attorney correctly found to be an ethics violation: Frimark’s effort to rake in the commissions from selling insurance for the Uptown condominium development to which the City is obligated to contribute some of the premium.  With a Council majority composed of five of Frimark’s former Alderpuppets who contributed a total of almost $4,000 to Frimark’s unsuccessful re-election campaign, we figured that was five votes against prosecution right there.

But we were surprised to see the ethics ordinance kicked to the curb by Mayor Dave Schmidt who, after instigating the City Attorney’s investigation and prosecution recommendation, subjected Frimark to a 2-hour “show trial” – and even argued in support of the City Attorney’s findings of a violation – before stating that he would not vote for prosecution. 

And at last night’s Committee of the Whole (“COW”) meeting Frimark’s lap-dog and principal ethics-probe defender, Alderpuppet Jim Allegretti (4th Ward), did his best to get the Council to support a nuking of the ethics ordinance’s 2-year restriction on former public officials representing parties in doing business with the City, along with making it easier for the Council to quash future ethics investigations.    

Allegretti went so far as to have the City Attorney – without prior Council approval – draft revisions to the ethics ordinance [pdf] according to Allegretti’s dictates, which ran him afoul of fellow Alderpuppet Rich DiPietro (2nd Ward), albeit only on procedural grounds because Richie D didn’t like Allegretti’s chewing up City Attorney time.

Whether Allegretti’s attempt to neuter the ethics ordinance are as successful as his efforts to neuter the Planning & Zoning Commission (“P&Z”) remain to be seen.  In addition to DiPietro’s procedural objection, only Ald. Frank Wsol (7th Ward) and Ald. Robert Ryan (5th Ward) spoke against changing the 2-year restriction, so we have no idea where Ald. Don Bach (3rd Ward) and Ald. Tom Carey (6th Ward) – or the missing Ald. Joe Sweeney – are on the issue.

Given all the ethically-challenged public officials who inhabit the governments of the City of Daley, the County of Crook, and the State of Corruption, there is no reason to think that Park Ridge government possesses some unique kind of immunity from grafters and schemers.   So the last thing the honest and decent residents of this community need is to see its already modest ethical restrictions watered down.

But Allegretti can be a determined guy, as we saw with the way he was able to get his Council allies to stiff-arm P&Z in favor of the billboard people.  And with the Alderpuppets still dominating the Council it’s not like getting a simple majority is all that tough for Jimmy A. 

We can’t help but wonder, however, whether the guy who can’t seem to stop whining about how much work it is to be an alderman for that measly $100/month stipend is already making moves in preparation for life after his Council term is up in 2011.  

Park Ridge Alderman James Allegretti and the consummate Park Ridge insider, prominent local attorney Jack Owens, are leading the charge for a billboard company that wants to put four 80-foot billboards on the west end of Park Ridge, along Interstate 294.

Whether that’s a good or a bad idea is a matter of opinion.  In the case of Park Ridge City government, the “opinion” that matters historically has been that of the members of the City’s Planning & Zoning Commission (“P&Z”).  But Allegretti and a majority of his Council chums are trying to change that.  And “Mr. Insider” Owens is more than happy to help them.

Presumably, Owens is being well paid to change the City zoning ordinance for his client, billboard company Generation Group, Inc.  And as Allegretti constantly reminds us, he is poorly-paid to represent the residents of Park Ridge’s 4th Ward. 

But if Allegretti is going to keep on accepting his $100/month to sit in one of those nice chairs around the City Council horseshoe, we would expect him to be something more than a lackey for special interests like Generation Group.

Or was it just a coincidence that Generation Group, Inc. contacted Allegretti directly, rather than going to P&Z, when it made its initial pitch for a text amendment to the City’s zoning code so that its billboards would be allowed?  And was it just a coincidence that Allegretti has led the charge to have the City be identified as the applicant – as Generation Group’s stooge surrogate – for the pro-billboard text amendment?

This week’s Herald-Advocate (“Zoning panel’s message: Don’t place your ad here,” Nov. 17), reports that P&Z commissioner Anita Rifkind criticized the “subterfuge by the City Council to take over the application for Generation,” only to be upbraided by Allegretti.

“It’s truly a pet peeve of mine that with virtually everything the City Council is asked to do, someone says we’re in somebody’s pocket — or potentially in somebody’s pocket — and somehow getting a campaign contribution from them,” Allegretti reportedly complained.

Gee, Jimbo, how would anybody ever get the idea that you would be questioned about your motives when acting as a public official?

Could it have anything to do with the fact that he contributed $300 [pdf] to Howard Frimark’s election campaign in March, 2005, but made no mention of that fact during his rather lengthy confirmation hearing as Frimark’s hand-picked aldermanic successor in June of that year – before Frimark’s campaign disclosure report made that contribution a matter of public record?  Or could it have anything to do with the fact that he contributed $200 [pdf] more to Frimark’s campaign in July 2005, just a few weeks after he got his aldermanic seat? 

Even at the paltry $100/mo aldermanic salary he whines about, Allegretti still made back that entire $500 contribution by the end of his first year in office.  And by the time his appointed term was through in 2007, he had picked up more than enough to also fund that $1,500 he contributed [pdf] to Frimark’s recent, unsuccessful re-election campaign. 

But if Allegretti really cares about dispelling the notion that he or anybody else on the Council is “in somebody’s pocket” on this issue, what he and his Council colleagues should do is immediately move for reconsideration of last Monday (Nov. 16) night’s Council vote by which they gave themselves final say over all P&Z decisions by “super-majority” vote.  Instead, they should require a unanimous vote to over-ride any P&Z decision.

That way, the public can be assured that if the Council is trumping a P&Z decision, it’s only because every single alderman is willing to go on record as saying that the P&Z decision was wrong.

But we’re not going to hold our breath for that to happen.  Allegretti and Owens have P&Z right where they want it: neutered.

As best as we can tell, nobody who lives in Park Ridge likes airplane noise.  Most of us are also concerned about whatever pollutants from those planes might be contaminating our air.

But last week we received information about yet another effort at doing something, anything, about O’Hare.  Unfortunately, that effort could end up being more damaging to our community than O’Hare itself – something that not only will be ineffective and expensive, but that will also publicly brand Park Ridge as an unsafe and unhealthy place to live.

Included with one of the e-mails we received was a flyer [pdf] with Gene Spanos and Tom Math referenced as the contact persons.  We don’t know anything about Mr. Math, but Mr. Spanos has been an outspoken and relentless critic of O’Hare expansion.  From the sound of things he is looking to get us into class action litigation – and appears to have already made some kind of commitment in that regard, as suggested by reference to “our next step toward a class action lawsuit.” 

That would also explain why the guest speaker is none other than “Mr. Joseph Karaganis – Attorney at Law,” who served for more than a decade as the lead litigation attorney for what we understand is the now-defunct Suburban O’Hare Commission (“SOC”) and whose firm reportedly made a bundle in legal fees from litigating over O’Hare. 

Now, maybe litigation is the only chance we have left to get some relief after all of us (including our elected and appointed officials) were too busy with other things – our kids’ soccer practices, Market Days, purple ribbons, school variety shows, the PADS shelter, Uptown redevelopment, etc. – to have paid close enough attention while the O’Hare Modernization Plan (“OMP”) and the new runways were being discussed, planned, budgeted, approved and built over the past eight years.  

But before we allow ourselves to get stampeded by Spanos and friends into a briar patch of litigation over OMP, we should stop and think about what we can expect to achieve from litigation…other than running up huge legal bills.

First of all, what are our chances of winning – whatever “winning” means in the grand scheme of things?  Has any single community (like Park Ridge) ever “won” in a fight with a particular airport, the FAA, the airlines, and all the other players who want the OMP and who have already invested hundreds of millions of dollars just to get it to its current stage?

Second, just what does “winning” mean?  As we’ve written before, after spending one-half billion dollars on the newest runway at O’Hare, we don’t see a chance in hell for that runway to not be used as much as possible.  And even if we could get a cut-back on use of 9L/27R, that just means that those flights will be re-routed to 22R and 22L, which run right over the Maine East and Country Club neighborhoods, thereby pitting neighbor against neighbor.

We can’t imagine those folks in the 1st and 2nd wards wanting to spend tax dollars on that option, and we can’t blame them.  That’s bad government and bad politics, plain and simple.  And with Karaganis’ track record on behalf of Bensenville and Elk Grove Village, it could be just plain dumb.

But if anybody out there thinks they’re going to get a financial windfall in the nature of “reparations” for the loss of their property values, guess what?  Before somebody writes you a nice big check, you will have to successfully plead, argue and prove that your home lost all that value.  In other words, you will have to establish that Park Ridge is a terrible and unsafe place to live.

That sure sounds irresponsible to us, unless the proponents of this misbegotten “strategy” are hoping to get some quick cash and then get out ahead of the rest of us, before all property values start sinking even more because we have tarred and feathered the quality of life in our own community.  Then it’s not irresponsible, it’s reprehensible.
 
As the “Ty Webb” character in “Caddyshack” would say: “Thank you very little.”

Over the years, District 64 has been a test site for a number of academic and administrative “pilot” programs, many of which never got off the ground or which crashed and burned shortly after becoming airborne.

But Monday’s edition of the Chicago Tribune carried an article about a kind of “pilot” program (“School districts retooling how they evaluate teachers,” by John Keilman) that should be a must-read for the school board members and administrators at Park Ridge-Niles School District 64 – but, given the District’s track in matters like this, probably won’t be.

According to that article, Evanston-Skokie School District 65 has embarked on a program of evaluating teachers using a two-part process that will include an appraisal of classroom teaching style and an examination of the test scores of the children taught by that teacher.  The test-score portion is based on the difference between test scores at the beginning and at the end of the school year.

For a teacher to earn an “excellent” rating on a scale of “excellent,” “satisfactory” or “unsatisfactory,” he/she is expected to enable no less than one low-scoring child to improve one grade level, while also enabling the rest of the class to gain a full year’s worth of educational growth irrespective of the level at which the child started the year.  And to be fair to the teacher, a child’s test scores can be discounted for appropriate cause – for example, if the child missed a significant portion of school due to illness. 

In order to receive a “merit” pay increase, the teacher must receive at least one “excellent” rating over a period of several years.  That sounds a little like an escape clause, but we can’t tell for sure.

One impetus for such performance-based teacher evaluation is coming from the New Teacher Project, a non-profit group based in Brooklyn, N.Y. which focuses on improving teacher quality.  In a recently-released study, it found that administrators tend to give top ratings to teachers even at schools with miserable test results.  Consequently, teachers are rarely fired, and merit-pay rarely is based on true “merit.”

Ah, yes, the insanity of “tenure” (a/k/a “guaranteed lifetime employment”) for elementary and high school teachers.

Obviously, a change like this will be neither simple or easy, especially when dealing with an industry – and, make no mistake about it, public education is an “industry” which, in Park Ridge, consumes almost two-thirds of our property tax dollars when both elementary and high school are included – that has virtually institutionalized non-accountability of teachers, administrators and the school board itself.

But perhaps one small benefit of the current economic crisis is that such sacred cows as ever-increasing teacher and administrator pay, pensions, etc. are being held just a tad less sacred.

Given the relatively mediocre performance of District 64 students on the ISAT tests which, rightly or wrongly, get the most attention from parents and the media, we think the District owes it to its students and the taxpayers to give a serious look at “piloting” this kind of teacher evaluation – and a program of merit pay based on such evaluations.

Because with homes on the brink or going into foreclosure at record levels and residents hurting financially to an extent not seen in decades, District 64’s business-as-usual just isn’t cutting it anymore.

P.S.:  We want to give a big Watchdog bark-out to Dist. 207 Supt. Ken Wallace for foregoing a $26,950 merit-based pay raise as a symbol of his commitment to reduce District 207’s $17 million “structural deficit.”  He joins Park Ridge Mayor Dave Schmidt, who has foresworn his entire $12,000 annual mayoral salary, as two local government leaders who are at least showing some recognition for real-world employment insecurity and fiscal responsibility, two things about which the pandering politicians, bureaucrats and lifetime government employees too often seem oblivious.

Well done, Mr. Wallace!