Website Home   or   Forum Home

Riverside Info » About Riverside

1. Catherine
   Member

   Now that we, like the Chicago Olympic Committee, have made it to the semifinals, it is not too soon for us either to prepare to win in 2009, if necessary.

   In the unlikely event that any trustee holding his or her seat with less votes than were cast to vote down the TIF presumes to vote for the TIF, we will know what to do. Do you think that amongst those 80% of voters who voted down the TIF, we can find a few "quality" candidates, as the caucus calls them, to work the will of the taxpayers. I think so. And anything started in 2007 can be stopped in 2009.

   What is the duty of a trustee? If one appoints a trustee to act for one's child, say, would one not expect that trustee to act prudently to protect the child's assets and not, say, engage in real estate speculation with them?

   Posted Wednesday Apr 18, 2007 16:57 #

2. KimJ
   Member

   Although the trustees do not have a "legal" obligation to listen to the voters regarding the TIF issue, they most definitely NOW have a MORAL obligation.

   More people voted NO to TIF than voted for Shields and Smith combined (1574 total.)
   More people voted NO to TIF than voted for Grace and Wiaduck combined (1606 total.)

   In addition, over 600 people voted on the TIF issue and cast NO ballot for caucus candidates.

   The people have spoken NO TIF, 1,758 of them!

   THANK YOU to EVERYONE for putting yourself out yesterday. You have been heard, loud and clear!

   Posted Wednesday Apr 18, 2007 18:07 #

3. Catherine
   Member

   Yes, the law is meant to cover the lowest common denominator. We can take that for granted.

   But who dares to override the votes of the majority? Well, people who think they get their orders from God perhaps.

   Posted Wednesday Apr 18, 2007 19:05 #

4. spatny
   Member

   To repeat:
   More people voted NO to TIF than voted for Shields and Smith combined (1574 total.)
   More people voted NO to TIF than voted for Grace and Wiaduck combined (1606 total.)

   In addition, over 600 people voted on the TIF issue and cast NO ballot for caucus candidates.

   The people have spoken NO TIF, 1,758 of them!

   Steps should be taken to stop this inititive completely at the next Board meeting. You have only been heard and your vote respected when they drop this thing. Make no mistake, until that is done, and this nightmare is finally over, they are holding us all in contempt.

   Posted Wednesday Apr 18, 2007 20:18 #

5. spatny
   Member

   Here's an unsolicited comment I received today from an RBHS Class of '58 grad that lives in Inverness and is writing about Palatine.

   "The TIFs are absolutely hated around here because they contribute nothing to the schools for 23 years or so. The villages voted out those who supported them. Frankly I hate the way Palatine looks. I love our church. Remember how it is one story. We expanded it horizontally to twice its size and a friend of the mayor (coincidence) built a huge condo across the street that's six floors high. Parking is now a huge problem downtown. We're going to have to get a shuttle system for church. All of the condos and townshouses recently built are short of parking. The residents park in the basements of the buildings, but have no facilities for guests, visitors to retail shops, etc."

   Does this sound familiar? I like the part about "voted out those who supported them."

   Posted Thursday Apr 19, 2007 10:53 #

6. Catherine
   Member

   That is interesting because I am sure it adversely impacted property values in Palatine. I wouldn't want to live there.

   I'm sure those "retired" officials are sitting back congratulating themselves on how they sacrified themselves for "progress" and the greater good of Palatine, which the poor childish citizens were too shortsighted to know.

   Yes, no one who votes for the TIF will be left standing, obviously.

   Posted Friday Apr 20, 2007 09:34 #

7. spatny
   Member

   When you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change. Hopefully the Trustees will open their eyes and see that people here don't want the downtown packed with condos or traffic and thus didn't swallow their party line. I would imagine that most of them would be very reluctant to put their own judgement ahead of the will of the voters for the sake of such a dubious and ill-conceived risk venture. One of them will, of course, refuse to consider any one else's view but his own. I think Mae West said it best: "His mother should have thrown away the baby and kept the stork."

   Posted Friday Apr 20, 2007 10:16 #

8. spatny
   Member

   "Some cause happiness wherever they go; others, whenever they go." -- Oscar Wilde

   Posted Friday Apr 20, 2007 10:18 #

9. Catherine
   Member

   I think the trouble lies with Shields.

   Posted Friday Apr 20, 2007 11:16 #

10. Catherine
    Member

    So, up for re-election in 2009, should they be inclined to stand:

    Grace
    Shields
    Smith
    Wiaduck

    and sitting with whomever wins will be

    Sells
    Scully
    Sussman

    and a 4/3 vote is required to prevail on matters.

    Posted Friday Apr 20, 2007 16:20 #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.