Friday, February 25, 2011

Backroom shenanigans?

For those of you new to blogging, there are two primary components to any blog.  The first component is the blog post itself; that's what you're reading now.  The second, are the comments; the story around or within the story.

Interesting Comments

My last blog, The End of a perfectly good relationship…., has generated an interesting series of comments.  It appears, based on one anonymous source, there is the possibility of PRPD backroom shenanigans.

If you don’t succeed try, try chutzpa.

To add more credence to this “possibility”, I have just now learned of PRPD’s intent to place a copy of their resolution at the Senior Center, with, I believe, the shamefully clear intent of manipulating, confusing and sowing discord and doubt among Park Ridge Senior Center’s most elderly members. 

It seems Chicago style politics is now in vogue right here in little old Park Ridge. 

In my opinion, the Park Ridge Park District Board wanted their “Clubhouse” back but were too cowardly to go after it in plain sight – that is, through the correct and legal use of their vote at a Board Meeting.  Instead, I believe, these covert-acting representatives of Park Ridge-values are attempting to stress the seniors into capitulating to their demands. 

PRPD’s Board clearly wants Senior Center Members to believe they have not been well served by Senior Center Leadership, and that Senior Center Members would be better served by a manipulative Park Board, under current Board leadership and its resolution.   See pages: 21…23.

How silly!  How shameful!  How pathetic!  How wrong!

Of course, PRPD has the right to post anything it wants within that building; they own it. 

What should Senior Center do next? 

To my Senior Center friends, I suggest we all remain calm.  

Pass by the resolution should it be posted.  Read every word.  Ask yourselves this; is there anything in the resolution to force this Board or any future Board to unconditionally keep their commitment to you.   That is what a CONTRACT does.

That guarantee is what is missing and that is what this fight is all about!

Comment in writing, sign your name and leave it in the suggestion box.  

When you see these members on the street, be polite and as respectful as you’ve always been, but tell them what you think.  

So you might easily recognize them, I have included their picture, name and title below.

Jim O'Brien, President

Rick Biagi, Vice President

David Herman, Treasurer

Richard Brandt, Member

Marty Maloney, Member

Mary Wynn Ryan, Member

This act of attempted senior citizen manipulation is unprecedented (by Park Ridge standards) and unacceptable.

The Park Ridge Park District Board has only themselves to blame for this situation. 

The Boards representatives negotiated a contract.  The board needs to vote up or down on that document; nothing less will do.

Those interesting comments in order….

Anonymous said...

 

“I have heard from people at the Park District that some reasonable Seniors have begun meeting with the Park District in unofficial meetings to work within the resolution that was passed, and are supportive of it.


These are Seniors that want a solution and no longer wish to be represented by people who cannot reach an agreement due to pride and vanity. Sounds like there is some dissent within the Senior Senate?

Anon: February 24, 2011 11:07”

 

Kenneth Butterly said...

 

“Anon: February 24, 2011 11:07 AM,


A very interesting development should it be true. However, you will have to provide more specifics, like names, to give your comment the credence it deserves.


Further, as I understand the PRPD/Senior Services relationship, no one but official representatives of Senior Services have the authority to represent Senior Center members.


Period!


It would seem to me, if what you say is true, Park Ridge Park District Officials are knowingly wasting their time and our money.


You state that Senior Center Members, specifically, Senior Services Board Members, cannot reach agreement due to “pride” and “vanity”. Please, show me examples of Senior Service Member or Senior Center “pride” and “vanity” regarding this issue.

At this moment, I can only think of one example of Senior Center “pride”. Maybe it’s the one you are referring to; it’s Senior-members pride in the accomplishments they’ve created within the Park Ridge Community.

Maybe it’s the pride in creating and growing the Senior Center and Senior-centered activities – through their own efforts. Maybe it’s the pride in raising money for various charities. Maybe it’s the pride in making regular payments of thousands of dollars per year directly to the Park Ridge Park District.


Maybe it’s vane to crow a little for what they’ve done; but who can blame them?


That said, if there are any pride or vanity problems at all regarding the contract proposal or contested resolution, it lies with those PRPD Board “enlightened ones” who can’t stand not having their outrageous demands met.


Remember, the seniors only want an up or down vote on their negotiated proposal; a proposal authorized and paid for by the PRPD taxpayer. It appears to me, it’s the Park District Board that needs to cover its butt through the use of a back-door method, for not having the political balls to vote the contract agreement up or down!


Happy Clubhouse Day! 

February 24, 2011 12:34 PM”

 

Anonymous said...

 

“Mr. Butterly,


I do understand the need for names to give it credibility. Unfortunately if I provide those names, the discussions will likely end, or significantly change.


Right now progress is being made. It will come out soon enough. For now, it's happening behind the scenes. Well behind the scenes.

February 24, 2011 8:38 PM”

 

Kenneth Butterly said...

 

“Anon: February 24, 2011 8:38 PM,


No one seems to know whom you are talking about. Not the Senior Center’s attorneys. Not the President of the Senior Senate. Not the President of Senior Services. Who else officially represents the interests of the seniors in this matter?


I am a member of the Park Ridge Senior Center and I recognize as my representatives only those representatives duly elected or appointed to represent me. If the Board is in fact attempting to circumvent the official representatives, they will, I believe, be placing the Board and the new Administrative Officers in political of not legal, harms way. If what you say is true, then what does it say about the integrity of PRPD’s Board?


I guess, had I been a member of the PRPD Board, I would have had the balls to vote the proposal down and been done with it. But that’s just me.


As you infer, we’ll just have to wait and see.

February 24, 2011 11:00 PM”

Welcome aboard!

Lastly, I hope Ms. Gayle Mountcastle, our new Executive Director, has more luck dealing with this group than her predecessor.

What do you think?

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Mr. Butterly,

What you have said here needed to be said. The Park District committeemen are acting like children who cannot face making a hard decision. I am a senior and I am not a member of the center. I do not like what is being done to them. Seniors won World War II. Seniors created the economy our children are destroying with their insane spending. These seniors took a crummy, dirty storage building and created a Senior Center. My son and his children live in Park Ridge. They use park district facilities. Yes, they pay fees but they’ve never created the parks or soccer fields.

Good luck Senior Center. Don’t give up until you get your up or down vote!

Anonymous said...

Mr. Butterly urges that the Park Board "vote the Agreement up or down".

To what purpose? Might one reasonably conclude that the Park Board has not taken that route because the most recent draft Agreement proposed for its consideration is not acceptable to it? And what message would THAT send to the seniors? Why should the Park Board do a useless act?

What is all the fuss about? The "Agreement" that expired back in December, 1995, was not replaced until June, 1996, but somehow the Senior Center survived. What is all the hysteria about now?

The Park District's share of the 2010 operating budget for the Senior Center was $185,000, and going forward that is only predicted to increase if the current model applies. Senior Services Inc. has proposed to pay, as its share of the 2011 operating costs of the Senior Center the sum of $60,000, and yet it seems to expect the Park Board, which may find such a "sharing" formula, to be unacceptable, to enter into such an Agreement. Should a "minority shareholder" dictate operational policy, especially when the "majority shareholder" is the taxpayer?

Circumstances have changed. The economy has changed. The old model may no longer be workable. The Park Board, in the exercise of its fiduciary duty to manage the assets of the park district in the best interests of all of the taxpayers and residents of the Park District would be remiss if it were to simply give a rubber-stamp approval of the suggested Agreement.

The citizenry should be proud that its elected officials are taking their time on this one.

The Park Board, through no fault of its own, has been without an Executive Director and a Superintendent of Recreation in recent months and should not be pressured to act without such staff both in place and prepared to make a recommendation regarding the terms under which the Senior Center would best continue to operate. After all, isn't that why they get paid the big bucks?

We should all calm down and give peace a chance. Let's not create needless anxiety for our beloved seniors. The Senior Center is not closing. The sky is not falling.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.