Website Home   or   Forum Home

Riverside Info » About Riverside

1. ChrisHajer
   Member

   I found several interesting tidbits of information in this document, the minutes from the Committee of the Whole meeting April 3, 2006.

   http://tinyurl.com/yfxdfc (I sure hate those long URLs)

   "Ms. Rush said TIF dollars could be used to purchase private property for planned use."

   "Trustee Grace is reluctant to include as much residential area in the boundaries as is
   outlined in the presented map and would prefer the boundary stay within the B2 zone."

   "Mr. Richard Wilson, from URS Corp. ... discussed marketing, promotion and tourism to
   support business investments, opportunity sites, mixed use redevelopment, parking
   structures, a community center, intelligent traffic management, additional pedestrian
   circulation, PACE bus service, signage programs for walking tours, Centennial Park
   improvements, river front enhancements, railscape improvements."

   I wonder where the PACE bus would run?

   Posted Wednesday Dec 13, 2006 01:27 #

2. Catherine
   Member

   Oh boy.  Thanks for posting this Chris.  When I hear them say "improvements", I groan outwardly.  Just what are they planning for Centennial Park?   PACE SERVICE?  That's classy.  Can anyone say crime rate? I cannot understand why the parents of Central and St Mary's school are silent on the issue of the impossible rate of traffic that is being contemplated for this area.  It is bedlam there twice a day now as it is.  I won't even drive through that intersection anymore.
    
   A new employee just to overlook this project?  We are running at a high deficit now, and 62% of the budget goes for personnel.  I note the Village Manager has an assistant.  Who left in the corporate or professional world has an assistant save senior executives?
    
   It's nice to know Grace is thinking about the quality of life of people in the TIF district.  I guess we are not part of the "Village" whose quality of life the rest of them seek to improve.

   Posted Wednesday Dec 13, 2006 11:57 #

3. ChrisHajer
   Member

   I don't think the parents of Central School are silent: I'm a Central parent, as are Kim and Holly who organized this site. I think a lot of the opposition to the proposed TIF is coming from parents of school-aged kids, but the focus was on the potential revenue that would be lost to the school district, not the increase of traffic. Doug Pollock (also a Central parent) mentioned that the village could exempt District 96 from having their money frozen at a pre-TIF level, but that does not eliminate the traffic concern. It's a good point.

   Posted Wednesday Dec 13, 2006 13:29 #

4. Catherine
   Member

   Yes, Chris, after reading the news article, I realized Holly was a Central parent. I don't have children, but I cringe when I see them at that intersection. I also heard the very loud crash recently of someone plowing into St. Mary's with schoolchildren about. I don't know what that was all about.

   Posted Wednesday Dec 13, 2006 15:39 #

5. corbi328
   Member

   Nobody has any intention of having Pace service come through town. Let's get real people. Everybody in this debate lives in town and nobody believes pace service is needed or wanted. That was just a comment made by a consultant who was being thorough.

   As far as the comment made about Ms. Rush's assistant, I don't think you people really appreciate how many responsibilities that woman has and how much time she spends on Village business. As a member of the EDC, I have had the opportunity to view this first hand and frankly I don't know how she does it. Sometimes I think she has cloned herself. If you want to disagree with her on the TIF, fine, but don't insinuate she is being cavalier with Village funds because she has an assitant. The reality is that she probably would be justified in asking for more help.

   Posted Friday Dec 15, 2006 15:27 #

6. Catherine
   Member

   I know Ms Rush has a lot of work. So do all people in the private sector, whose "increased productivity" in the last several years means they are doing the work of 3 people. Everyone would like to have more help, but it is not forthcoming. I am merely pointing out here and elsewhere that local government often does not keep up with the private sector. The village is offering an office position to new employees with pension benefits that private sector employees do not get. For many years, lawyers, consultants, senior managers, etc. have all had to give up their assistants and do such work themselves. I am sure I am not alone in observing this. Indeed the Village is proposing to hire a full time person just to cope with the issue at hand, the CBD, the TOD, the TIF, and we have paid tens of thousands to consultants and attorney on the issue as well, all for something that there is no evidence anybody wants. That money could have been spent on personnel, and personnel is over 62% of budget now. I would rather have more police or landscape managers myself.

   I have no knowledge of who has control over taxpayer funds, so I do not insinuate she or anyone is cavalier. I do know the village itself has found ways to cut employees, and I agree with attempts to do that. I or anyone in town has a taxpayer's right to inquire about budget items without being accused of insinuating anything. I am sure you realize there is a large budget deficit, and that we are trying to figure out how to raise money without borrowing or assuming hidden costs. If anyone is undercompensated for services rendered, the free market is there to remedy that.

   Posted Friday Dec 15, 2006 15:58 #

7. corbi328
   Member

   I work in the private sector and I can tell that I have seen very few senior executives be as busy or spend as much time at their job as Katie Rush does. You are right in scrutinizing expenditures by the public sector (I agree with you on the pension issue) because this sector has proven to be inefficient, but in trying to find areas to cut, believe me when I say you are barking up the wrong tree by focusing Katie Rush and her assistant.

   Posted Friday Dec 15, 2006 16:09 #

8. Catherine
   Member

   I am not focusing on Ms Rush. I was just surprised when I called her and was informed that I was addressing her assistant (who I have no doubt is very able and busy; that was not my point.) I knew only that and the other position. I have thought I would have a look at a line item view of the budget but haven't done so yet.

   (It is my good fortune, I guess, not to know such senior executives, but - yes - in days of yore, WSJ until 10 was often to be seen.)

   Posted Friday Dec 15, 2006 16:28 #

9. ChrisHajer
   Member

   corbi328: you are right about this:

   Nobody has any intention of having Pace service come through town. Let's get real people. Everybody in this debate lives in town and nobody believes pace service is needed or wanted. That was just a comment made by a consultant who was being thorough.

   In the TOD they specifically mention alternatives to running PACE buses through town, a trolley and some sort of PACE van program. I was just quoting from the meeting minutes, and to be fair "discussed" doesn't mean "recommended." It is discussed in the TOD and they are not advocating a PACE bus route to the Metra station. Sorry for the misrepresentation.

   Posted Friday Dec 15, 2006 16:37 #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.