Last Monday (Jan. 17) the City Council voted 4 to 2 (Alds. Carey, DiPietro, Sweeney & Wsol v. Alds. Bach and Ryan) to sustain Mayor Dave Schmidt’s veto of the $148,000 compensation package which City Manager Jim Hock negligently recommended, and which a complicit City Council gave to Park Ridge Police Chief Frank Kaminski on December 6 by a vote of 4 to 2 (Alds Allegretti, Bach, DiPietro & Ryan v. Sweeney & Wsol). 

Schmidt based his veto on the City’s salary guidelines, which sets a cap of $142,000 on the police chief’s compensation; and on Schmidt’s concern (supported by the opinion of legal counsel) that the $19,000 of “deferred compensation” paid to Kaminski in lieu of health insurance was improper because other City employees were not given that same option of extra cash instead of health benefits.

Since then, Kaminski has been telling everyone who will listen about how he wants this goat rodeo over because it has been “a major distraction for [him] personally, for the department and…for the community.”

We agree, although we question just how many sleepless nights most Park Ridgians have endured from wondering whether the chief will be getting $148,000 or $142,000 this year.

What should be giving the average citizen/taxpayer sleepless nights, however, is yet another example of our City Manager and certain aldermen showing how they are incapable of getting something as simple as a salary cap “right” – thereby wasting Council time while creating uncertainty, ill will and unnecessary distractions from more important and pressing matters.

Let’s start with the City Manager, who must have liked his own “deferred comp” benefit so much he decided to award one to his police chief…without giving a second thought to City salary guidelines.  We can’t tell whether Hock just doesn’t “get” things like salary guidelines and caps, or whether he simply thinks he’s above all that.  Either way, this chief’s comp mess is further evidence that Hock may already be overpaid, if not totally over his skis.

And what about DiPietro, the dean of the Council, who at times seems positively anal about rules, policies and procedures but totally missed Kaminski’s above-cap compensation?  We’re glad he finally figured out the error of his December 6 vote and squared it away with his subsequent vote to sustain Schmidt’s veto, but why on earth did it take a mayoral veto to get his attention?

On a positive note, we’re happy to give a Watchdog bark-out to Alds. Sweeney and Wsol, who were the only two aldermen who figured out this issue on both the original vote in December and on the veto last Monday.  

For Wsol, that’s yet another sign of his recent transformation from the guy who wanted to borrow-and-spend a bundle on a big new police station and who didn’t want to charge water users the City’s full cost of that water, into the guy who has become the most fiscally conservative vote on the Council – even if that is like being the tallest midget in the circus. 

But while we applaud the sustaining of Schmidt’s veto as good policy and a nod to fiscal responsibility, its savings ($6,000) pales in comparison to the amount at stake when the Council next votes on a mayoral veto: Schmidt’s veto of Hock’s approx. $200,000 compensation package, with its 2-year duration and its “poison pill” severance payment that effectively puts $117,000+ handcuffs on the incoming City Council should it conclude that he just isn’t cutting the mustard after almost 3 years on the job.

The problem: DiPietro and Wsol, two of the aldermen who voted to sustain Schmidt’s veto of the Kaminski deal and might be expected to do the same with Hock’s contract, were part of that four-alderman team that “negotiated” that sweetheart deal.  And the third most likely vote for sustaining the veto, Sweeney, voted for that contract even while admitting that it’s “a good deal for Mr. Hock, but a not-so-good deal for the City.” 

So the necessary three votes to sustain that veto seem to be MIA.  And Mr. Hock looks all teed up to get the kind of comp package and job security that most of us who will be paying for it can’t even dream of.

The “right” solutions for Park Ridge would be for: (a) Kaminski to publicly and gratefully accept $142,000; (b) Hock to publicly request the Council to sustain Schmidt’s veto and leave further discussion of his contract to the new Council; and/or (c) the current Council to sustain Schmidt’s veto of Hock’s contract while publicly declaring that it should be left for the new Council.  

Not that any of those solutions are likely…unless, of course, you see some low-flying pigs buzzing the rooftop of City Hall.

To read or post comments, click on title.