Pru doesn’t have anything either and the video link Pru has looks like the good parts are still being formatted.

See comment >Anonymous on 11.19.09 9:50 am> Just because something might be better than bad does not make it “good.” After all the mismanagement we’ve had at city hall, why can’t we at least expect and demand “good” for a change?

“But Allegretti told commission members before their vote to think of the financial benefit to the entire city.”

I wonder how much money we can make with 4:00 AM liquor licenses, massage parlors or even (dare we think) full ticket whore houses?

I missed Monday night’s meeting, but watched the entire thing on video on Park Ridge Underground and it was pathetic. But Allegretti gives hope to any “D” student who ever aspired to law school.

…I’m sure it is…

…heh…if you think “after the fact” commentary is bad…you should see what happens with commentary BEFORE the fact!

It’s brutal.

When Schmidt campaigned for mayor, and Wsol for alderman two years ago, neither one of them told me during their campaigns that I was going to have to go to every meeting to hold their hand and tell them what to do so they wouldn’t screw it up.  I don’t recall any other candidates saying that, either.

If these jokers can’t do the job right – whether because they don’t have any sense of public policy, or what’s best for the community as a whole and long-term, or whether they just don’t give a damn about anybody but themselves and their egos – then they shouldn’t have run in the first place. Or they should quit now and give somebody else a chance.

It’s also not “after the fact” because the mayor still has veto power, not that he’ll have the cojones to use it now that Bach has handed him this half-baked supermajority compromise even though nobody seems to know what the supermajority number is.

Alrighty, I re-checked my copy of the 3P manual, Appendix B, “Statutory Requirements For Council Votes And Actions Excerpted From the Illinois Compiled Statutes”

A two-thirds vote of the corporate authorities (including the mayor) is required in the following instances:

***9 instances are listed, all with very specific and narrow subjects, none of which have anything to do with overrides of planning and zoning denails.

A three-frouths vote of the corporate authorities is required to:

1, Lease or convey any city property in excess of two years

2, To accept the high bid or any other bid determined to bin the best interest of the City, etc.

3, To dispose of City-owned personal property…

4, To raise the amount of levy above that provided for in State law for the improvement of streets and bridges

A three-fourths vote of the aldermen is required:

1, To pass an ordinance to vacate a street or alley

Anonymous on 11.19.09 1:39 pm,

Maybe you’ve seen a different 3P manual? Or, you’ve received different information about vote calculations?

Again, Robert’s Rules governs the Council and the calculation of votes, and specifically states votes are calculated on “the basis of present voting members.”

As an aside, I think it would be loverly if the City web site published the 3P manual because it is billed as the “Handbook for Elected Officials/Questions and Answers for the Informed Elected Official/City Council Policy Statement Manual”

…and can I get an “Amen!” for MuniCode viewer? Searching the current PDF files can be painful!

I hear a lot of after the fact commentary. It’s always easier to find fault when things are done, I would say that if you thought you could have asked better question, made stonger arguments, or somehow been more convincing, where the hell were you and why didn’t you try?