The IRONY, the delicious irony ...

[Bear]

OC's lame explanation on Tuesday will be hilarious.

[Bonster]

The only thing funny is that Meth-backer #1 a/k/a  HYPOCRITE #1 is even asking about it. 

Is she just looking for abuse?

The DCoBozos have surely made some terrible choices in who to represent for their party.  Pathetic.

[Bonster]

Do YOU really think he
will do anything better or different in the next term?

He plays childlike games as usual, voters want substance, time to clean house and start fresh.

You're exactly right.  Cleaning house as in NO NONA, NO LOVERO, NO O'CONNOR, NO SKRYD... i.e. NO return to the OLD GUARD policies of
"We'll kick your ass if you disagree or criticize us!  We'll deny all permits and inspections, and hassle folks over chipped paint and flowers on the sidewalk."

UNfortunately, the DCOBozos have offered little in this present administration to provide "substance." 
They've run around together for years now, without a plan, without a clue on the old Berwyn catch phrase: "TRUST ME."

DCoB/IVB: it's time to put your money where your collective mouths are.  We don't want your pretty website pictures in classic shyster pose. 
Give us a path forward we can believe in, and earn the TRUST that you will execute - not just buddy up on every vote in a game of Follow the Leader. 

[ZORBA]

OC's lame explanation on Tuesday will be hilarious.

What's absolutely hilarious about the DCOBRDO crowd is that their attempts at misdirection are no better than the above.

These tools completely disregard the fact that there is no way in the world the mayor is responsible, yet try to throw blame his way-like the Methadone fiasco.

I guess this is the end result when you can do no better than Bear as your spokesperson on BTF.

[ZORBA]

They've run around together for years now, without a plan, without a clue on the old Berwyn catch phrase: "TRUST ME."

BINGO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Nazerac]

This is a quote for the IVB'ers, the source is The Little Prince by Saint Exupery.

Chapter 10:  The planet with the king

"If I ordered a general to fly from one flower to another like a butterfly, or to write a tragic drama, or to change himself into a sea bird, and if the general did not carry out the order that he had received, which one of us would be in the wrong?" the king demanded. "The general, or myself?  ...   One must require from each one the duty which each one can perform," the king went on. "Accepted authority rests first of all on reason.

If I am working on a team, or better yet, leading a team or committee of my peers, and I know that some of the committee members are not up to par and are out there to sabotage me, I would micromanage all of their to-do-lists and always ask for updates.  I wouldn't just pass on a to-do action item to them and wait until they fail.  If the committee fails to deliver under my watch (regardless on who dropped the ball), I would personally feel responsible.

What is done is done.  It may just be a clerical thing, or something more serious.  I don't care.  When can we pass this ordinance?  So you folks think that it will be till April?  How can we make sure that it DOES get on the ballot then?

[Bonster]

This is a quote for the IVB'ers, the source is The Little Prince by Saint Exupery
...
If I am working on a team, or better yet, leading a team or committee of my peers, and I know that some of the committee members are not up to par and are out there to sabotage me, I would micromanage all of their to-do-lists and always ask for updates.  I wouldn't just pass on a to-do action item to them and wait until they fail.  If the committee fails to deliver under my watch (regardless on who dropped the ball), I would personally feel responsible.

This is a quote for those neither IVB nor DCoB, the source is me.

Chapter 1:  Hate to tell you this

"The leader is ONE OF THEM."

[Ted]

...  When can we pass this ordinance?  So you folks think that it will be till April?  How can we make sure that it DOES get on the ballot then?

  The citizens themselves cannot pass an ordinance.  The city council passes ordinances.  At the July city council meeting, a zoning ordinance was proposed to be able to zone certain types of medical clinics.  That ordinance was sent to the legal department.  Based on statements by the city lawyer at the July city council meeting, I thought the legal department wanted to wait until after the vote on the referendum before sending the ordinance to the city council.

  The referendum that the city council passed to put on the ballot was an advisory referendum.

  Citizens can put an advisory referendum on the ballot with a petition containing at least 814 signatures of registered voters in Berwyn. (8% of the number of people who cast ballots in Berwyn in 2006 in the governor's race).

The city's lawyer was very cautious and generic about the language of the referendum that the city council voted to put on the ballot last July.  They city lawyer felt that it could not mention methadone clinics specifically but had to be more generic.

  btw, I don't think that your analogy about kings, princes and general's holds water, since we are talking about elected politicians who are of opposite political parties.

  Why is it the job of one elected official to make sure another elected official does his or her job? 

  Ted

[Nazerac]

...  When can we pass this ordinance?  So you folks think that it will be till April?  How can we make sure that it DOES get on the ballot then?

  The citizens themselves cannot pass an ordinance.  The city council passes ordinances ...   Why is it the job of one elected official to make sure another elected official does his or her job? 

  Ted

I didn't mean *we* as us, the citizens, but thanks for the clarification of the process.  I can see the concerns about the proper wording, and make sure that the city doesn't get sued for passing an ordinance that can be in violation of the ADA.  The issue here is to close the loop.  A request to put an ordinance was placed, that went to the clerk ... to never be heard of again.  Then someone asked why it  didn't show up on the ballot, and a plethora of accusations ensued on this board.  The general question is who is responsible to close that loop, put something as an action item.  I work in a very political (as in office politics) organization.  When I chair a committee or task force, I make sure that all action items (old business) stay on the agenda or get an update at every or every-other meeting.   It is not my responsibility to make sure that other people who don't report to me do their jobs, but I feel a certain level of responsibility, and when I am involved in any type of initiative, I want it to succeed.   It is simply called taking ownership.

The bipartisanship in Berwyn (and the US in general) has crippled this town.  As a casual observer, it seems that each party sabotages the other and hopes to gain some votes by showing the other's incompetence.  When one party comes with an idea, the other doesn't counter with a better idea, but rather attacks the first one about how stupid/wasteful their plan is.  It also seems to me that all the ideas come from one side.  I'd like to see both parties compete with better ideas rather than keeping on attacking each other.

At the end of the day (or the term), the real losers are the city of Berwyn, the residents of Berwyn, and the politicians themselves.

[Bonster]

"The general question is who is responsible to close that loop, put something as an action item.
The bipartisanship in Berwyn (and the US in general) has crippled this town. "

By Nona (DCoB) waiting to see if it was on the ballot, she is as entirely complicit as the Mayor (IVB), if at all (and for her to feign concern is a joke as she's FOR Meth clinics).
YET, putting the onus on the "leader" is not sensical when you realize he is no different than the rest of them.  Either side of the bipartisanship is as bad as the other, as they're from the same mold.

There is no one on either side of that ship who will close the proverbial loop. 

[Ted]

  Well, Bear, it looks like you were right on this one.

The motion that was documented in the minutes was for the law department to draw up a resolution to put the referendum on the ballot. The motion was not to put the referendum on the ballot.

  Alderman Chapman made a motion asking that the law department provide a written statement about why a resolution to put the referendum on the ballot never came back to the city council for a vote.  That motion was then amended by Alderman Erickson to request that the law department draft a resolution putting the referendum on the ballot in April. That motion with Erickson's amendment was passed 8 to 0.

  The city attorney responded to Alderman Chapman, saying he thought he had already vetted the text of the referendum and that he was expecting the city clerk to draft the referendum and present it to the city council to vote on.

  Alderman Chapman pointed to the text of the motion in the minutes and stated that the motion in the minutes specifically said the city attorney was supposed to draft an ordinance and that a sentence followed about the referendum.

  The city attorney then pointed out that putting a referendum on the ballot does not require an ordinance.

  Alderman Weiner then asked why Alderman Chapman (or any of the other alderman, for that matter) did not seem to notice in either of the August city council meetings that the referendum was not on the agenda and why she had not raised the issue in the August city council meetings.  Alderman Weiner also stated that Alderman Chapman only raised the issue because it had been discussed on Berwyn Talk Forum.

  Alderman Chapman angrily responded that she raised the issue because she herself had noticed it was not on the ballot and that her constituents had asked her why it was not on the ballot.

So, here is where things stand:

1. The law department will provide a written explanation as to why they did not provide a resolution to the city council to put the referendum on the ballot.

2 The law department will send a resolution to the city council to put a referendum on the April ballot.


BTW, I still think that the ordinance in the motion was referrring to the proposed zoning ordinance to be able to zone medical clinics and that it was the zoning ordinance that was sent to legal, not the referendum.  As the city attorney pointed out, putting a referendum on the ballot does not require an ordinance.

   - Alfonse and Gaston

[Bonster]

So really everyone was right. 

Bear was right in that the ball was in legal's court (albeit needlessly).

Ted was right in that the referendum didn't NEED to go thru legal.

OPS was right that Nona got the idea from BTF (if her constituents, they got it from BTF, practically word for word).

Naz was right that the Mayor probably could have pushed this.

And I'm still right the Meth-4 are huge hypocrites.



- Shit Stew

[Ted]

  Bons, I will write up the rest of the meeting tomorrow when I'm not so tired.

  There were a LOT more controversial things said tonight on other issues, including a statement by the police union that our country's current financial crisis and its affect on the city's finance is "an allegation"  (the union was apparently complaining about some layoffs and cutbacks).


Ted