First off, congrats to the fire fighters getting a promotion.
Phelan is wanting the taxpayers to cover the cost of his defense in a lawsuit due to his slinging mud at Scott Waugesback during Scott's campaign for Chicago alderman. I've heard the attorney Phelan wants to use is very, very expensive, around $500 per hour. Hopefully the aldermen will not approve this expenditure. To put this in perspective, 100 hours of billing will take $50,000 in funds away from the city which could otherwise be used for police protection.
"100 hours of billing will take $50,000 in funds away from the city which could otherwise be used for police protection."
That is a doosey, but the payout for j marzullos back pay is also a whopper on the agenda. By union law, son of frank was owed 62k in back pay after being reinstated. OC had to continue his vendetta
to beat a dead horse and amass another 100k in legal fees using taxpayer money on a case in which he had NO chance of prevailing.
Sharp move there mayor.
Quote from: OakParkSpartan on February 25, 2008, 07:44:02 PM
Hopefully the aldermen will not approve this expenditure.
WHOA BOY!!!
This outta be fun!
Sharp move there mayor.You mean, sharp move there Bobby...
DCoB'ers...........yes, Marzullo
and Phelan. Bobby's guys. Sharp move there taking these winners on board, Bobby.
Besides having no plan, he's garnering support from all sorts of unscrupulous players. Can you say, "old guard?"
Is that like Old Spice?
Old Spice smells good in comparison.
Quote from: Bear on February 25, 2008, 08:20:08 PM
amass another 100k in legal fees using taxpayer money on a case in which he had NO chance of prevailing.
Sharp move there mayor.
You saw the bill for the legal fees? This employee was suspended from duties pending outcome of legal action, am I right? IMO, the Mayor did the right thing to try to deny payment. Did you expect him to cut a check, no questions asked?
The packet says Alderman Phelan wants approval for legal fees for the firm of Miller Shakman. I wonder if his counsel is Michael Shakman himself.
"You saw the bill for the legal fees? This employee was suspended from duties pending outcome of legal action, am I right? IMO, the Mayor did the right thing to try to deny payment. Did you expect him to cut a check, no questions asked?"
Terri, union contract terms were in place. It was not a suspension deal, it was reinstatement after he was canned by the SAO. He was on a "leave of absence" during his short tenure at the SAO, and was reinstated by the union. OC fought this, and withheld wages. There was no legal way to get around denying
funds owed despite how people felt, even tho the leave of absence letter submitted after the fact by his father was questionable at best due to timing. This is just another example of the mayors total ineptitude
and arrogance costing the taxpayers an additional 98k pissing our tax dollars in the wind for his own
political vendetta. OC has no defense in this matter, it was just plain stupid. And your OK with this deal? Time for a reality check Terri. This deal made OC look as bad as marzullo.
[/quote]
You saw the bill for the legal fees? This employee was suspended from duties pending outcome of legal action, am I right? IMO, the Mayor did the right thing to try to deny payment. Did you expect him to cut a check, no questions asked?
[/quote]
Terri,
No one expects anyone to cut a check no questions asked. But I would expect the city to follow the courts rulings and not waste taxpayers dollars appealing it for over a year. Lets call things the way they are... The only reason OC fought this for so long was because the kids last name is Marzullo.
How much more money is the city going to waste defending Phelan? I hope they put a cap on it.
This is just another example of the mayors total ineptitude and arrogance costing the taxpayers an additional 98k pissing our tax dollars in the wind for his own
political vendetta.
I was under the impression they were fighting the legality of the leave of absence, not the legality of his return from one. Where did you see the $98K figure?
This deal made OC look as bad as marzullo.
Nothing can look that bad...
Except Bobby taking Marzullo under his wing.
Quote from: cubbie07 on February 25, 2008, 10:30:55 PM
How much more money is the city going to waste defending Phelan? I hope they put a cap on it.
Yes, at $0.
"Where did you see the $98K figure?"
His original reinstatement wage at the outset of this beef was determined to be 62k.
The remaining 98K represents legal fees and interest paid
Again, where are you getting this 62 + a remaining 98 = $160K figure from?
Point me to the thread/case/notes. Just curious.
Quote from: Bear on February 25, 2008, 10:27:24 PM
"You saw the bill for the legal fees? This employee was suspended from duties pending outcome of legal action, am I right? IMO, the Mayor did the right thing to try to deny payment. Did you expect him to cut a check, no questions asked?"
Terri, union contract terms were in place. It was not a suspension deal, it was reinstatement after he was canned by the SAO. He was on a "leave of absence" during his short tenure at the SAO, and was reinstated by the union. OC fought this, and withheld wages. There was no legal way to get around denying
funds owed despite how people felt, even tho the leave of absence letter submitted after the fact by his father was questionable at best due to timing. This is just another example of the mayors total ineptitude
and arrogance costing the taxpayers an additional 98k pissing our tax dollars in the wind for his own
political vendetta. OC has no defense in this matter, it was just plain stupid. And your OK with this deal? Time for a reality check Terri. This deal made OC look as bad as marzullo.
You reminded me that the City paid the Law School tuition for this employee, I must have tried to forget that happened. The same employee takes a leave of abscence from our Fire Dept. to work as a State's Attorney, that didn't work out so the employee asks to return to fighting fires. It's not ok since we footed the bill for Law School yet competely legit under the past tuition reimbursement program.
It's unrealistic to assume the outcome of any court case and I believe it was right to bring this case into court. The outcome was not in favor of the City, the court ruled and employee gets his money. Additionally, I would expect ANY Mayor to step up and defend the City and its residents.
You have a different opinion and that's ok.
Quote from: Terri on February 26, 2008, 09:30:39 AM
Quote from: Bear on February 25, 2008, 10:27:24 PM
"You saw the bill for the legal fees? This employee was suspended from duties pending outcome of legal action, am I right? IMO, the Mayor did the right thing to try to deny payment. Did you expect him to cut a check, no questions asked?"
Terri, union contract terms were in place. It was not a suspension deal, it was reinstatement after he was canned by the SAO. He was on a "leave of absence" during his short tenure at the SAO, and was reinstated by the union. OC fought this, and withheld wages. There was no legal way to get around denying
funds owed despite how people felt, even tho the leave of absence letter submitted after the fact by his father was questionable at best due to timing. This is just another example of the mayors total ineptitude
and arrogance costing the taxpayers an additional 98k pissing our tax dollars in the wind for his own
political vendetta. OC has no defense in this matter, it was just plain stupid. And your OK with this deal? Time for a reality check Terri. This deal made OC look as bad as marzullo.
You reminded me that the City paid the Law School tuition for this employee, I must have tried to forget that happened. The same employee takes a leave of abscence from our Fire Dept. to work as a State's Attorney, that didn't work out so the employee asks to return to fighting fires. It's not ok since we footed the bill for Law School yet competely legit under the past tuition reimbursement program.
It's unrealistic to assume the outcome of any court case and I believe it was right to bring this case into court. The outcome was not in favor of the City, the court ruled and employee gets his money. Additionally, I would expect ANY Mayor to step up and defend the City and its residents.
You have a different opinion and that's ok.
Soo...is the 160K figure accurate?
Or is it actually 98K minus 62K = $36K?
"Nothing can look that bad...
Except Bobby taking Marzullo under his wing."
Bons...This has never happened. The DCOB is a NEW party. #7 has distanced himself
and the party from people like this and the "old gaurd" you refer to. If you had ever been
to any DCOB functions you would know none of the members of the old gaurd are
present. As a matter of fact, most of the leaders of the DCOB were not even involved in politics
prior to the 2005 election and the forming of the DCOB.
This has never happened. The DCOB is a NEW party. #7 has distanced himself
and the party from people like this and the "old gaurd" you refer to.
You couldn't be more wrong.
He has accepted contributions from the guy, and and told me these folks are his friends going way back.
Woodward only recently was removed from the August copies of the Voice as a member of the Board of Directors.
Mario Lavorato - as BRDO as you can get, goes directly to Bobby when questioned about his articles (who then calls the Bonster Complaint Hotline). Nice.
You don't have to have been involved in politics to have been affiliated with the BRDO, either, and he's involving folks who don't even live in Berwyn to make up his guard.
There is nothing "New" about this party. No New, young blood. No New progressive ideas. Citizen's interests are not as important as theirs, no different than with McCheese, even without solid plans in place! (this was confirmed!)
They are garnering votes without a plan, based upon handshakes and a wink, paying folks at their fundraisers, including organizations which give pit bulls away in Berwyn. Read my signature - it was verified by your leader to my face. Truth.
Again, I ask: Where are the Republican voices in Berwyn? Do they exist only in Cicero and on BTF?
Quote from: Bear on February 26, 2008, 11:23:52 AM
"Nothing can look that bad...
Except Bobby taking Marzullo under his wing."
Bons...This has never happened. The DCOB is a NEW party. #7 has distanced himself
and the party from people like this and the "old gaurd" you refer to. If you had ever been
to any DCOB functions you would know none of the members of the old gaurd are
present. As a matter of fact, most of the leaders of the DCOB were not even involved in politics
prior to the 2005 election and the forming of the DCOB.
Bear, what you been smokin' dude? Look at the people who were involved in the BRDO and the people involved and who have contributed to the DCOB. Same names, dude.
Here are some names from the Illinois Board of Election website of people who contributed to both the BRDO and the DCOB/Lovero:
Bob Lovero, Jerry Marzullo, Michael Woodward, Tony Laureto, Alba Lovero, Dorothy Chiero, Michael Raymond, owner of OOT, owner of James Joyce, Paul Dimmena (e.g. Diamond Graphics) , Ed Wanderling, George Gaspasras, Friends of Thomas Shuaghnessy, Nosek & Associates, Ron Pechota, several members of the Cimaglia family, Aiertite Windows and Home Improvements, Awesome Pest Services, Berwyn Insurance and Financial Services, the Karaseks, Myrtle & Walter Slawko, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera...
I am not knocking any of these people and I have a lot of respect for people like Mike Raymond, the Karaseks, etc. But everyone on the above list has been involved or contributed to the BRDO AND have been involved with or contributed to Lovero or the DCOB.
So, please Bear, don't go blowing smoke up our ass that the people in the DCOB are a different set of people that who were in the BRDO. Just look at the above list. THose are only some of the names.
Ted
Under which party did Nora run for 8th Ward Alderman?
They approved Phelan hiring that law firm. Lots of talk about not actually PAYING for it. I'll believe it when I see it. One interesting exchange is when Weiner asked Phelan about his homeowneres insurance, and Phelan refused to answer. The ordinance which Phelan submitted had a clause that the city would pay only when ordinary insurance would not cover the suit. Apparently the aldermen chose to ignore this part of the ordinance and just.
As I said, I don't believe that this will end with no money being spent. I hope EVERYONE remembers that only Weiner and Ramos voted against approving this communication.
Thanks Ted for the vote of respect for Michael Raymond. He is a good guy and I think I would feel the same about him, even if I wasn't married to the man! LOL!!
I do have to add this though, any contributions we contributed in the last campaign where for Michael Woodward OVER Michael O'Connor. My Mike has always been a democrat. We both joined the democratic party after the DCOB was organized, never were actual members before.
god bless mike raymond. i mean jesus christ, being married to berwyn patsy fer crapsake, that's gotta be some serious stress.
It is, I do have to say!! LOL!!
Quote from: Bonster on February 27, 2008, 08:20:51 AM
Under which party did Nora run for 8th Ward Alderman?
She ran as a Democrat (BRDO).
Ted
Did anything positive happen regarding the Sears home? Extension of time?
No. There was a weird vote where Skryd basically had them vote on keeping their previous vote the same.
Phelan made his typical classless remarks. Gail Lofgren (sp) from the BHS then explained what the BHS had done so far (getting 4 estimates, ComEd coming out to advice on best routes). They've also been talking to the park districts (I presume North Berwyn). One minor restrictions is that it probably won't be practical for the house to be moved south of the CN tracks, due to the underpasses (though it would just cost more to go around Riverside Dr.).
A representative from the Berwyn Park District stated that they would work with anyone who wants the house with regards to the time frame. The time frame really is not a factor, thought the resources to under take the move and a location are the real issues.
Why was Skryd pushing to amend the no smoking in Police and Fire Vehicles? I thought the state law was comprehensive enough. Or was it that the jobs are so stressful that those guys really need to smoke? Any fanboys out there to help with this one?
Quote from: OakParkSpartan on February 27, 2008, 04:18:20 PM
No. There was a weird vote where Skryd basically had them vote on keeping their previous vote the same.
Phelan made his typical classless remarks. Gail Lofgren (sp) from the BHS then explained what the BHS had done so far (getting 4 estimates, ComEd coming out to advice on best routes). They've also been talking to the park districts (I presume North Berwyn). One minor restrictions is that it probably won't be practical for the house to be moved south of the CN tracks, due to the underpasses (though it would just cost more to go around Riverside Dr.).
Brian- I'm still alittle confused on Skryd's vote. Did she vote for keeping the 3 month time frame, which considering the magitude of the undertaking is ridiculous or was her point to vote on demolishing the Sears home irregardless of a time frame?
And what was Phelan's classless remark? Has he not yet learned to think before he speaks.
Skryd's motion was to keep the approval for the demo permit in place.
As far as the smoking in vehicles, the ordinance was changed to match the state law.
Quote from: frank white on February 28, 2008, 08:02:07 AM
Why was Skryd pushing to amend the no smoking in Police and Fire Vehicles? I thought the state law was comprehensive enough. Or was it that the jobs are so stressful that those guys really need to smoke? Any fanboys out there to help with this one?
Isn't her ol' man a cop?
She's probably pushing his agenda..!
http://www.fourthwardalderman.com/city.html
Quote from: OakParkSpartan on February 27, 2008, 08:36:49 AM
They approved Phelan hiring that law firm. Lots of talk about not actually PAYING for it. I'll believe it when I see it. One interesting exchange is when Weiner asked Phelan about his homeowneres insurance, and Phelan refused to answer. The ordinance which Phelan submitted had a clause that the city would pay only when ordinary insurance would not cover the suit. Apparently the aldermen chose to ignore this part of the ordinance and just.
As I said, I don't believe that this will end with no money being spent. I hope EVERYONE remembers that only Weiner and Ramos voted against approving this communication.
Took some time to digest this self-serving vote. Our elected Alderman approved the hiring of Phelan's choice of defense in a PERSONAL MATTER. Was the effect on the taxpayers considered? Their duty is to make decisions on the council floor in our best interests, this vote is shameful.
Many thanks to Alderman Weiner and Ramos for standing up for the residents!
as opposed to....?
Quote from: Terri on February 28, 2008, 11:12:40 AM
Quote from: OakParkSpartan on February 27, 2008, 08:36:49 AM
They approved Phelan hiring that law firm. Lots of talk about not actually PAYING for it. I'll believe it when I see it. One interesting exchange is when Weiner asked Phelan about his homeowneres insurance, and Phelan refused to answer. The ordinance which Phelan submitted had a clause that the city would pay only when ordinary insurance would not cover the suit. Apparently the aldermen chose to ignore this part of the ordinance and just.
As I said, I don't believe that this will end with no money being spent. I hope EVERYONE remembers that only Weiner and Ramos voted against approving this communication.
Took some time to digest this self-serving vote. Our elected Alderman approved the hiring of Phelan's choice of defense in a PERSONAL MATTER. Was the effect on the taxpayers considered? Their duty is to make decisions on the council floor in our best interests, this vote is shameful.
Many thanks to Alderman Weiner and Ramos for standing up for the residents!
This event got me to thinking about Erickson's suggestion about needing a council-manager form of government.
How would having a council-manager form of government have prevented this? If you have a city council with members who do not act in the public interest, then how is a council-manager form of government going to act any differently than Berwyn's current form of government, except you would have taken away the mayoral fiigure who could use his/her veto power to prevent something like this?
Things that make you go hmmmm.....
Ted
I think what really needs to happen is to have aldermen who are more mature than 4th graders, and I might be insulting some 4th graders.
Folks are too interested in fighting their personal battles rather than doing what is best for the city.
Remember, the whole Scott press release thing came about because Phelan hates the mayor, the mayor likes/supports Scott, and saying something nasty about Scott W was a way to get to the mayor. How many folks on this board would behave like that?
Please clarify OPS the state law says that smoking is allowed in City owned vehicles just not in the buildings? Because as I saw it the state says no smoking in any vehicle that transports the general public. She then struck that sentence out seemingly to allow officers and Fire personnel the ability to smoke in the vehicles that transport the general publis i.e. prisoners and such. ????
One other interesting item came up.
The HR lady, Pat, brought a consulting group around that looked at how we might save money on the employee health insurance policy. There was a bit of a stink made about "how did they get information" and why didn't anyone ask our current broker.
I've still not heard a good explanation for why Bertucca is the only insurance broker who can get insurance for the city.
I think Count was onto something.
Quote from: frank white on February 28, 2008, 03:52:58 PM
Please clarify OPS the state law says that smoking is allowed in City owned vehicles just not in the buildings? Because as I saw it the state says no smoking in any vehicle that transports the general public. She then struck that sentence out seemingly to allow officers and Fire personnel the ability to smoke in the vehicles that transport the general publis i.e. prisoners and such. ????
You are right about the state law, but I think ours had an exception for vehicles that weren't used for the public. The exception was removed, which means that we now matchup with the state.
Has anyone been appointed to fill Dennis Duffy's CDBG grant coordinator position yet?
What is the job description of a CDBG coordinator?
I've heard an unconfirmed rumor. Will attempt to get confirmation tonight.
It would be someone who is familiar with the Federal CDBG program, and administering such a program.
Any word on your unconfirmed rumor on the appt of someone who is familiar with the Federal CDBG program and administering such a program?
Bozzo, welcome to the board. Despite the extra Z in your namesake, you have chosen
to stick your bright red nose out there early.
Rumor has Dawn Rinehart as the choice (likely) for this position.
Is Bozzo a happy clown, or a sad clown?
A clowns make-up is very unique in the clown realm of life, what face does Bozzo wear? Depends on how Bozzo's last name ends. There are so many consanants out there after all. Clowns do tend to scare children, and adults for that matter.
Perhaps you could clarify your interest here for us.
I heard about Dawn, but I'm not convinced there isn't some confusion with a guy that works over in CDBG named Dwan. In any case, I was told this was a temporary situation. CDBG is complicated and I'd hope we'd get an experienced person in there to work with the feds.
QuoteCommunity Development Block Grant (CDBG)
The proposed fiscal 2009 budget requests approximately $3 billion for CDBG, which is $600 million less than the $3.5 billion appropriated for fiscal year 2008. The fiscal 2009 request is level with the request for fiscal year 2008; however, a proposed permanent rescission of unobligated balances is $100 million less than in fiscal year 2008, leaving net new budget authority of $2.79 billion for fiscal 2009. In early 2008, the Administration also plans to re-propose the CDBG Reform Act, which changes the CDBG formula to target funds to communities with the greatest need and to hold them accountable for results. As part of these reforms, the Bush Administration again proposes to terminate several HUD programs, including the Brownfields Economic Development Initiative (BEDI), the Community Development Loan Guarantee Program, and the Rural Housing and Economic Development program.
Source: http://www.nasbo.org/Washington%20Reports/2008/020608W.htm
Quote from: OakParkSpartan on March 03, 2008, 11:45:22 PM
I heard about Dawn, but I'm not convinced there isn't some confusion with a guy that works over in CDBG named Dwan. In any case, I was told this was a temporary situation. CDBG is complicated and I'd hope we'd get an experienced person in there to work with the feds.
Are there companies that do this for a living? Maybe this is something that can be contracted out to a professional firm that does this kind of stuff on a regular basis.
Ted
I don't read the board as often anymore, so I was surprised to hear that Dennis Duffy is gone. Why did he leave his position? Is he with the City in another capacity?
He retired Pat.
Opportunity abounds at 6700 West!
Finance director WANTED...Is this the 4th or 5th
one, I forget?
http://www.berwyn-il.gov/pdf/Employment/jobpostingfinance.dir36082.pdf (http://www.berwyn-il.gov/pdf/Employment/jobpostingfinance.dir36082.pdf)
And...
Movin' on up!.... I keep hearing the Jefferson's theme song in my head
http://www.berwyn-il.gov/pdf/Employment/jobposting.secretary.mayor.3608.pdf
Quick question..Does being a secretary qualify you to run the grant program? If so I'm going for the secreatry job and then I could move up! Oops wrong gender though.
On a side note the secretary position does not state that it is temporary ,present date til April 09, when the current joker get's run out on a rail.
Quote from: frank white on March 07, 2008, 06:25:15 PM
On a side note the secretary position does not state that it is temporary ,present date til April 09, when the current joker get's run out on a rail.
If you knew anything about the DCoB and how they operate, it will be April '09 (provided they make enough friends to vote for them for no reason), as they'll pull the same shit hiring friends, family, unqualified idiots who stroke them just right. Why would THEY do anything in the best interests of the taxpayers?
Unqualified idiots who stroke them just right?
Hey, where can I get a few of those?
Quote from: Bear on March 07, 2008, 06:16:50 PM
.. Finance director WANTED...Is this the 4th or 5th one, I forget?
Did the previous finance director leave? I thought she was doing a good job. She seemed to really know her stuff. Does anyone know why she left?
Ted
Stephanie leaving is a big loss. She seemed to be pretty good according to people on all sides of the political spectrum.
I liked how she did the budget, where she broke out headcount per department, listed achievements and also listed what they want to do in 2008. At least we have some idea what our governments priorities are.
Quote from: OakParkSpartan on March 08, 2008, 02:52:17 AM
Stephanie leaving is a big loss. She seemed to be pretty good according to people on all sides of the political spectrum.
I liked how she did the budget, where she broke out headcount per department, listed achievements and also listed what they want to do in 2008. At least we have some idea what our governments priorities are.
Brian,
Was there a reason given for her leaving?
Thanks
Ted
Is it just me, or does it seem like there is a fast turn around within the emloyment
status of city jobs? I though things were going good.
No. You're right. Its an absolute mess at City hall. Those people have no idea what they're doing. Mass mutiny.
Quote from: Ted on March 08, 2008, 06:49:03 AM
Quote from: OakParkSpartan on March 08, 2008, 02:52:17 AM
Stephanie leaving is a big loss. She seemed to be pretty good according to people on all sides of the political spectrum.
I liked how she did the budget, where she broke out headcount per department, listed achievements and also listed what they want to do in 2008. At least we have some idea what our governments priorities are.
Brian,
Was there a reason given for her leaving?
Thanks
Ted
I'm willing to bet she's joining her husband, he has a job in a different state.
LOL!
Suckers bet Terri!
It appears we'll be paying market wages, so hopefully we'll attract a similarly talented employee.
Quote from: OakParkSpartan on March 08, 2008, 02:52:17 AM
Stephanie leaving is a big loss. She seemed to be pretty good according to people on all sides of the political spectrum.
I liked how she did the budget, where she broke out headcount per department, listed achievements and also listed what they want to do in 2008. At least we have some idea what our governments priorities are.
I agree. In the few times I have seen her at city council meetings, she seemed like a very competent person - one of the best financial directors that the city has had in years.