By now you should have received your February issue of our taxpayer-paid propaganda sheet known as “The Spokesman.”  The new issue features a cover article titled “Business retention report shows healthy climate of growth” [pdf] which creates the impression – without actually coming out and saying it – that our local economic development is going great guns.  Which is what Mayor Howard “Growth and Development” Frimark wants us to believe.

But most of what is written is pretty much just factually-unsupported feel-good fluff which, when you really think about it – actually sounds pretty un-promising.

Let’s start with the first paragraph, which states that the City “utilized the data-collection instrument to survey 41 businesses.”  Is 41 a statistically significant sampling, or just a semi-meaningless number?  We’d also like to know what’s a “data-collection instrument” – is that a fancy way to say “broom” or “trash bin”?  And when they say that of the 41 businesses surveyed, “28%” were “retail” and “10%” were restaurants, do they really mean that they surveyed 11.48 retail businesses and 4.1 restaurants?  Why not just name the businesses, which would be a whole lot more informative (but which might explain, come to think of it, why they didn’t do it).

The second paragraph tells us that “growth in product and service offerings” indicates a “healthy business climate.”  We don’t know where that theory comes from, but we’ll take their word for it for purposes of this discussion.  The City reports that 32% of the 41 responding companies (13.12 of them?) “introduced new products, services or capabilities in 2007”; and within 18 months another 17% (6.97) “anticipate introducing new products or services.” Adding those up would still mean that less than 50% of those 41 businesses are experiencing, or expect within 18 months, a “healthy business climate” – and that’s assuming that, for example, a restaurant can satisfy the “new product” standard by as little as offering a new flavor of Jello for dessert.  

The third paragraph gives us some factoids about those businesses.  But does it really matter to the health of our business climate whether “43% are family owned” or “8% are not-for-profit”?  Of course not – just some irrelevant information to create the appearance of substance.  If the City wants to give us some meaningful information, why isn’t there any mention of whether (and if so, by how much) the City’s sales tax revenues have increased? 

The final three paragraphs talk about employment and expansion.  We question how “healthy” is a business climate where  “[e]xpansion/ renovation dollar investment is projected to exceed $22 million” yet only creates “20 new jobs”?  Or how the City administration can appear to brag about an anemic 2.11% “net gain” of “83 full time positions” (out of 3,930 full-time employees of the 41 responding businesses) following a virtually non-existent 0.10% growth (4 full time positions) in 2006?

But of course, in the parallel universe that local government inhabits, all of this makes sense so long as you don’t ask any questions, you try hard not to think about what you’re being told, and you just keep on paying your increasingly higher property taxes and fees for stagnant, if not declining, services.

Corporate Welfare, Park Ridge Style:  As reported on this site and in both local newspapers this week, the City is giving Napleton Cadillac $400,000 of our money to grease Napleton’s sale of its old Cadillac dealership location to Uptown developer PRC LLP, for construction of more multi-family housing. 

The purchase price of that property?  Bill Napleton refused to answer that question posed by First Ward Ald. Dave Schmidt, as well as Schmidt’s question about what Napleton paid for the property.  Napleton also wouldn’t, or couldn’t, come up with a good answer to 7th Ward Ald. Frank Wsol’s question about why this could be considered a good deal for Park Ridge.  Napleton did admit, however, that the property was appraised at between $4 Million and $5 Million, so it would appear that this is yet another case (see, e.g., Executive Office Plaza) of greed over need.

But that’s not all.  Over the next 15 years, Napleton gets to keep up to $2 Million of what would otherwise be the City’s sales tax revenue.  In return, Napleton will remodel its new location and stay in Park Ridge for those 15 years.  So effectively we’re giving – not lending, but outright giving – Napleton the money to remodel its new dealership. 

The architect of this windfall to Napleton?  It sure looks like Mayor Howard Frimark, whose mayoral campaign fund received a $1,000 contribution from Napleton.  Frimark apparently assumed the role of the City’s lead negotiator with Napleton and then got to cast the tie-breaking vote to approve the deal.  Now that’s convenient.

Meanwhile, Back At The Budget Ranch:  While our City Council was busy giving Napleton its sweetheart deal, it was also busy figuring out ways to gouge us ordinary citizens with more taxes to fill the $600,000 budget hole for 2008.  Get ready for yet another 5% increase in the City’s share of our property taxes, an increase in the taxes when you buy/sell real estate, a 5-10% increase in water rates, or a combination of these. 

But just think how good you’ll feel when you go to purchase a new Cadillac in the remodeled Napleton dealership you helped pay for.

But There’s Always Money For More Land:  As reported by Craig Adams in this week’s Park Ridge Journal (“Alderman Upset Over Treatment Of Taxpayer $$$,” Jan. 30), the City Council agreed – in another “closed session” – to offer American Eagle Insurance $1.1 Million for its property at 720 Garden Street, presumably as the site for the proposed new police station.  Amazingly, the City’s offer was $200,000 more than the City’s own appraisal [pdf], which led First Ward Ald. Dave Schmidt to complain that the Council is “treating the taxpayer money like Monopoly money.” 

This isn’t the first time, Alderman.

Ald. Schmidt v. The “Culture of Secrecy”:  And speaking of Ald. Schmidt, he once again proved to be The People’s champion not only by protesting the closed sessions that seem to be used more and more by the Frimark Administration to foster its Culture of Secrecy, but also by releasing to the press certain memos from lame-duck City Mgr. Tim Schuenke – one about the City’s attempted acquisition of the 720 Garden property [pdf], the other about the City’s police department investigation [pdf] which discussed a possible “separation agreement” (a/ka/, a “buy-out”) for Chief Caudill.

We applaud Schmidt for recognizing that the Illinois Open Meetings Act (“IOMA”) exists to ensure that as much public business as possible is done in full view of the press and the public; and that while IOMA permits certain limited matters to be dealt with in closed session, it does not require it.  So the bottom line is that any time our aldermen vote to go into closed session, they are doing so not because they have to, but because they want to.