In last Friday’s post about Mayor Dave Schmidt’s “State of the City” address, we predicted that any response from his City Council “opponents” would be short on competing ideas and long on “petty personal criticisms of…his ‘confrontational’ style of leadership.”
So today we give a big Watchdog bark-out to Ald. Robert Ryan (5th Ward) for his brief but insipid rebuttal at the end of Monday night’s Committee of the Whole meeting that made us appear prescient, even though predicting what the alder-dwarfs will do isn’t really all that tough.
We admit to being surprised, however, that Ryan was the “opposition’s” designated hitter – if only because he was MIA a week ago when Schmidt gave the address. We assumed any rebuttal would come from somebody who actually attended and who could be expected to be more combative, like Ald. Don Bach (3rd Ward).
But Ryan got the nod, and his comments were so…so…vintage Robert.
First he claimed that he and his fellow aldermen “are very concerned about the budget.” Pardon our guffaws.
Unlike Schmidt, neither Ryan nor his colleagues have publicly admitted fault, or accepted responsibility, for the last two budgets and the several million dollars of deficits that have left City finances in shambles. And five of those aldermen (Allegretti, Bach, Carey, Ryan and Wsol) are the same guys who most recently demonstrated their “concern” about the budget by increasing the deficit spending and then over-riding Schmidt’s veto of that increased spending.
And if they had gotten their way, we also would be saddled with a new $16 million+ police station that would be adding another million or so of annual debt service expense to the wrong side of the budget.
So if that’s what Ryan means by their “concern” about the budget, we’d sure hate to see their “indifference” to it.
Ryan then mentioned Bach’s heretofore meaningless calls for unspecified personnel cuts, before slamming Schmidt for not embracing Ryan’s own pet initiative: the creation of a “finance committee” of residents to help the Council make “informed decisions” about the budget and City finances generally. In other words, Ryan is ticked at Schmidt for not appointing a committee to make finance and budget recommendations which Ryan and his Council cronies can then rubber-stamp, thereby gaining plausible deniability – and a handy scapegoat – for whatever difficult and unpopular cuts will have to be made.
On a Council loaded with lightweights, Ryan is its Willie Pep.
But that’s typical “public official” Robert Ryan who, while on the District 64 School Board, led the effort to replace the District’s then-newest school, Emerson Jr. High, with the current Emerson Middle School – a project so financially ill-conceived that it set the District on a road to fiscal ruin before a $5 million non-referendum bond issue in 2005 and the 2007 multi-million dollar tax increase referendum salvaged it, at least temporarily.
Ryan ended his rebuttal by chiding Schmidt: “Don’t undermine, don’t divide.”
What Ryan can’t seem to grasp is that this Council has produced nothing to “undermine” – other than those multi-million dollar deficit budgets and the emasculation of the Planning & Zoning Commission that should have been “undermined.”
As for “dividing” City government, Ryan (along with Allegretti, Bach, Carey and DiPietro) drew the first line in the sand when they signed onto former-mayor Howard “Let’s Make A Deal” Frimark’s ridiculous “condemnation” of then-Ald. Schmidt’s totally legal whistle-blowing on the Council’s closed-session briefings about Frimark’s secret negotiations to buy 720 Garden for $200,000 more than the City’s own appraisal valued it.
Ryan and those other four turned that line into a trench when they collectively pumped over $3,800 into Frimark’s re-election campaign (with Ryan’s $864.51 contribution trailing only Allegretti’s $1,500) in their unsuccessful effort to keep their buddy “Let’s Make A Deal” in the big chair at City Hall.
From what we’ve seen over the past few years, the main “divisions” between Schmidt and the Council majority seem like the divisions that exist between common sense and foolishness, between prudence and irresponsibility, between candor and artifice, between courage and cowardice.
People of Park Ridge, the choices are yours.
13 comments so far
Forming a commitee to make recommendations on a contraversial subject. Wow what a concept. As with most things, it depends on who does it. If it is an alderman it is all a part of a plot and looking for cover. If it is Schmidt it is a good thing, by god it is practically visionary!!!!! Can you say double standard????
Who said there was anything “visionary” about the Flood Task Force?
But since you brought it up, 12:44, appointing a group of residents to help devise a comprehensive, multi-year plan for dealing with one particular chronic problem is qualitatively and quantitatively different from the annual task of balancing the city’s budget.
When you compare apples to oranges, you better have a “double standard” because one standard doesn’t work for both.
1244, the difference is that developing a comprehensive flood control plan requires expertise that our city staff does not possess and that we would have (and actually have had)to pay through the schnoz to obtain. Schmidt’s move in tapping engineering expertise in the community (AT NO COST TO THE TAXPAYERS) to help come up with a plan was smart. On the other hand, figuring out how to cut spending and balance a budget is precisely what our City Manager and Finance and Budget Department staff are paid to do with out the need for outside expertise to help them along. Capisco?
1:03:
I will admitt visionary was a reach, but my point remains the same. I see this as a double standard. Ryan gets a beating for what is a silly suggestion but Schmidt did the same thing and not a peep. Why is it that a committee of residents is required for flooding any more than for budgeting. I would hope that both are looked at in an equally comprehensive and long term way. So 1:03 please tell me how this is “apples to oranges”. I am all ears!!
The point is that in BOTH CASES we have city staff as well as possible hired experts to help the elected officials have all the information required to make decisions – sometimes very difficult decisions. While I appreciate the efforts of the flood committee members, they are just as much “cover” as a budget committee would be. The Mayor used the flooding issue as a huge point in his campaign. He was justified in doing so as during the Frimark administration virtuallty nothing was done. But the Mayor has himself covered to the hilt on this one. We are almost a year in headed toward spirng and nothing has been done but he can point to the committee (even though he is ignoring one of their biggest recommendations). Based on what I have seen there is nothing revolutionary there. He has already said he wants this to go to referendum so he is covered there for the next year. His third level of cover is blame the aldermen. We could be 2 years into his admin (probably more) and will be no closer to resolving the flood issues than the day he was elected.
12:44pm…
Let’s understand something. The comparison you make is apples to oranges.
Schmidt recommended a flood control task force to get a bunch of so called experts to take a look at a significant and unwieldy problem that rears its head on an occasional, but unfortunately and more recently much too often, problem with the City’s sewer system. Not only is the problem with the sewer system but in individual neighborhoods and for individual homeowners the problem may be that the surrounding land is a part of the problem. The other night it was admitted that no one knew too much about the City’s sewer system and that, in fact, the sewer system was last studied/investigated fully in 1979! And while the current head of Public Works, Wayne Z., is responsible for maintaining the sewer system currently, he did not design or build the sewer system. Ergo, if the idea is that the City is to make a significant “investment” in the sewer system it might objectively make sense that some experts are asked in to help out. That’s why Schmidt formed a flood control task force.
Now, on the other hand, Ryan’s call for a citizen committee to look at the City’s finances flies in the face of the fact that finance and budget is a day to day task of several of City staff. It’s blocking and tackling. It’s meat and potatoes. We have a very expensive City Manager and very well paid City Finance Director and the Finance Director has a very well paid staff. I’d guess, all-in, that we have +$500,000 of salary and benefits in some large part dedicated to finance and budget and the exercise of putting together an annual budget is simply a recurring part of their job. There should be no need for a committee of citizens to “study” what should or shouldn’t be in the budget. Citizens can call their Alderman or come to meetings to express what they would like to see in or out of the budget. And, frankly, if the City Manager and/or the City Finance Director can’t marshall the very expensive resources they have available to them to do their jobs and get a budget together on time and in a reasonable fashion then they ought not to be in their jobs.
Sorry this is so long but if you have read this far and you can’t see and understand the difference between how these two “issues” should or shouldn’t be managed with citizen committees then I think your problem is obvious… you are a dolt.
Ryan is out with the next election. There’s no way the 5th Ward residents are going to re-elect him.
Ryan and his fellow bozos won’t admit it, but they are waging Park Ridge “Council Wars” – they’re the Vrdolyak 29, Schmidt is Harold, except he’s white and pays his income tax.
LOL, same as the “gang of nine” versus Frimark. Oh wait sorry Schmidt backed Vrdolyak…I mean Frimark. Oh wait, sorry again we shouldn’t talk about that. We all need to move on. Me bad.
3:07 pm
Yeah, and DiPietro, Allegretti, Bach and Ryan ripped the “gang of nine” for taking Frimark’s powers and opposing him. So your point is……..
PD:
Back a few months, probably about 6 months, you had a post about your suggestions on how to balance the budget. As I recall, one of the biggest dollar amounts in yur plan was stopping the summit street/sidewalk improvements. I think that was over 500K. I know that it is great fodder to go back and forth about the community groups but how ever that shakes out it will not bring us even close to balancing the budget.
What ever happened with the remaining money for the street scape? Based on the way it looks, I am sure that it is gone and spent.
Fred, it’s so funny how you keep “forgetting” to add Mayor Dave when you mention “DiPietro, Allegretti, Bach and Ryan” on that topic. Oh gee sorry again for pointing out the facts.
7:03 am
That’s right, Schmidt also ripped the gang of nine. So your point still is…..
The point is…..which side is Mr. finger in the wind on?
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>