Consultant fees are safe. I never heard any single one of our Trustees question the estimate of $100,000 - more than we have already spent - to adjust the TIF District. They probably send some kid with a bunch of pin numbers to the computer to pull it out, and presumeably the artwork would just need an adaptation, but never mind - if Phil wants a $100K he gest it, because he is going to save us. And, of course, as Trustee Shields would say, it's reimburseable. Yes it is, from or own money.
Riverside Info » About Riverside
COW Tuesday, April 3, 7:30 !!!
(109 posts)-
Posted Wednesday Apr 11, 2007 15:48 #
-
VILLAGE EMPLOYEES GET FREE GAS??? FOR WHAT REASON?
Posted Wednesday Apr 11, 2007 15:52 # -
I heard somewhere that Mckenna will defend his findings in court, unlike, presumably, some of the other firms. anyone heard that?
Posted Wednesday Apr 11, 2007 22:01 # -
From his hospital bed. Very dramatic. Watch for a dramatic recovery after the election when he will be available with the numbers and to do more "out-of-cope" work - for a fee. And these dullards will pay him, because now they have hung their wash on his line and don't want it to fall in the mud. Keep digging - these people aren't very bright and their greed will do them in. We just need to uncover what is really going on.
Posted Thursday Apr 12, 2007 12:28 # -
He can do what he wants. He can't change the meaning of "but for" as interpreted by the Illinois Appellate Court, three times. He can't change the fact that we have development both within and near the TIF district, and that we therefore do not qualify for a TIF.
Posted Thursday Apr 12, 2007 13:06 # -
Catherine. Rather than talking about it and criticizing those who have stepped up and spent considerable time genuinely trying to benefit the community by helping to attract people to run for village office, why don't you form your own political party or Caucus or some other organization. Better yet, why don't you actually run for Village Trustee. It is so easy to criticize civic-minded people yet so hard to do anything. I challenge you and others to become involved in the political process in Riverside beyond criticizing others and writing on a forum. Way too easy!
Posted Thursday Apr 12, 2007 19:13 # -
If one is to pop over into the thread about how incumbents vote, it is actually amazing how very little time has actually been spent deliberating this issue whatsoever. The meat will come out during the boards next 2 meetings. Up until now, the only discussions have been about how much more money the consultants need, not actually what they have produced.
For example, when was the TOD ever really adopted in the first place, and then amazing that the village is "advised" by the consultant to use that as it's comprehensive plan because it does NOT HAVE ONE, and LEGALLY we need one for a TIF. Wow.
It actually blows my mind that the TOD has NEVER been discussed. (or at least not publicly that I can find in minutes, which is a problem...) There are references to it in the minutes, claims it will be discussed at the next meeting, but never discussed.
I do not for a moment disagree that these volunteer positions are not time killers, I know that I have certainly given enough of mine to garner dirty looks and snide remarks as well. As a concerned citizen, I am doing my civic duty by being involved, asking questions, and demanding answers. Mr. Suriano, this is not easy.
Posted Friday Apr 13, 2007 09:00 # -
I AM involved in the political process, in the way that I choose to be. Shall I run for the House of Representatives, the Senate, both state and federal, and the presidency also? For I often have occassion to disagree with those officeholders as well, in addition to donating to some of their campaigns. That is my role. Your role is to select candidates in a secret Masonic-like ritual. Shall all reporters and others who criticize officeholders also be challenged to run or shut up and be accused of not performing a public service? They serve also who question.
Your remarks are sulky and childish. I have already challenged you and your organization to come out of the shadows and into the light so that it may be properly assessed, and that is what gives rise to your pique. You simply don't like anyone questioning you and like the trustees say, if you don't like it, why don't you replace us. But that is not what democratic organizations say, or how they conduct themselves.
The criticism is that your organization impedes the democratic process by unleveling the playing field. If I can help get that message out, and therefore encourage more people to come forward and run instead of being discouraged by your organization, I will have done my job. I have already said I do not see the need for another party so long as your organization were retired from the field.
I would not care to be a trustee as I do not suffer fools gladly and do not care to conceal it, as you can see. Some trustees are unable even to tolerate those with whom they disagree, and I think they should retire also. If you had bothered to show up on this forum before your organization was criticized, you would know how much time I have spent on this issue.
For someone who has left the forum, you are doing a lot of talking. If you would instead talk about your nominating committee and selection processes and criteria, you would be answering the questions posed and be doing something constructive. Instead, you continue to demonstrate why your organization's judgment and quality is questionable.
Are you civic-minded? I wonder. This town is less a democracy than a fiefdom. Your organization has helped bring about that state of affairs.
So, again, what are your selection criteria, how many people have "presented themselves" before you and not been nominated and why, how do you decide who is on the nominating committee, how much money do you spend putting your candidates forward if any, what do you stand for if anything?
Posted Friday Apr 13, 2007 09:28 # -
wsuriano - if we do, it won't be just realtors and developers and lawyers with mixed loyalties that are our "kingmakers" If people with ties to developers nominate the people that hold the offices, and they then grant the variances and vacate the alleys and setn the fees for the parking buyouts that make the projects so much more profitable, that is cutting a little too close to the bone for us. We might have an agenda, but it would be oiut there, available, in print and open to anyone. We wouldn't accept anyone who was afraid or reluctant to have his affiliation known. It's amazing the vitriol that has been generated by just objecting to a one party Board developing a code that allowed for the granting of variances to a developer. This requires more research.
Posted Friday Apr 13, 2007 11:08 #
Reply
You must log in to post.