On March 13, 2012 I submitted Freedom of Information Act ( FOIA-120313-001), requesting:
“Please provide a copy of all written communication to or from former Executive Director Ray Ochromowicz to staff relating to Park Ridge Senior Center for the period 01/01/2010 through 12/31/2010.”
The purpose of the request was to gather facts used to confirm or refute hearsay and other unsubstantiated rumors and allegations – no matter the source.
The two pages below were on the top of the stack, and as the subject is directly connected to the last post, I thought you might find its contents both timely and of interest!
Teresa Grodsky to Ray Ochromowicz – 09/12/2010
34 comments:
Anon's statement of March 12th, 8:52 AM states that "bequests were the result of a very few key individuals, not due to the work of the foundation that until this post have claimed credit for raising the monies". This letter from Teresa Grodsky to Ray Ochromowicz proves that Anon's statement was not accurate. Ms. Grodsky's letter states that the foundation was responsible for the following:
1) Grants from the City of Park Ridge, and also Maine and Norwood Park Townships. These, if I'm not mistaken, were saught frequently over the years.
2) They obtained $90,000 from the Retirtment Research Fdn.
3) The foundation conducted vigorous fundraising efforts and raised $250,000 for the building expansion.
In addition, as I recall, the foundation had an annual fundraising luncheon.
This sounds like more than sitting around waiting for a bequest from a few individuals.
Seems like seniors weren't leaches after all!
Trizna and company need to apologize.
But don't bet on it!
The Senior members, themselves, ought not be overlooked as a key fund-raising source. Luncheons and fashion shows, the Annual Variety Show and Steak Fry, an annual fall bazaar, dollars charged for programs in excess of the cost of the program, fees generated from musical performances for clubs and groups from other communities were just a few of the annual activities which garnered funds to offset operating expenses through PR Senior Services. The brick walk in front of the Senior Center has been in process for years. The creation and sale of the 30th Anniversary cookbook has been a recent project. PRSS hopes to be allowed to soon retrieve its inventory of cookbooks remaining which are being held hostage in the Senior Center building.
As stated before, well intentioned or not, the great majority the various activities cited as fundraisers netted only a few thousand dollars, at best; laudible but hardly enough to offset the ever-growing operating deficits. a long list of activities, however enjoyable, with nominal charges is not relevant to a revenue-vs-expense discussion; whether something has been "in process for years" is not relevant; and neither is the fact that something is "a recent project." What matters is how much revenue it brings in, net, after subtracting all expenses, including the heavy involvement at taxpayer expense of the various staff members. This is not some arcane idea: When the local gradeschool parents put on an original musical and work their tails off for weeks and months after work, the school still bills them for the janitor, even though the fundraising musical is FOR the school. You don't have to have an MBA to see that until recently, programs, etc. did not charge in excess of the bare costs of the program so staff time and other associated fees were never recovered. If the theater charged $50 the Park District charged $50, ignoring the cost of the time it took for the staff and/or manager to put the event together in all particulars. It would appear that the only thing being "held hostage" has been the Park District.
AND going back to Mr. B's narrative, which speaks to fear of political whims, where was all the hatred, vitriol, character assassination and just vile tackiness foisted on the current Park Board when the City and the two Townships that cooked up the Senior Center idea to pander to senior voters and then abandoned the Senior Center, leaving only the Park District holding the bag? What's that? I can't hear you.
YAWN......move on.
Since you are clearly in the know abotu all things SSI Mr. Butterly, care to elaborate on the sudden and unexpected removal of Christel Owens and Jack Owens from the SSI Board?
Just for the record, anon using all the ; 's, the cookbooks clearly paid for by PRSS are unable to be sold by PRSS because Ms. Mountcastle refused in an email from PRSS to release our property.
I am anxious to review the 2011 and 2012 Park District financial reports to determine how much more "efficiently" the Park District will manage the Senior Center, if it can retain the attendance and interest of the senior population through the end of the year.
Anon: March 26, 2012 5:45 PM,
You’ve made quite a few unsupported assertions.
Without knowing whom you are, its impossible to take those assertions seriously.
When I write a post I display the facts that support my position. And do so under my name.
If you really have something to say, may I suggest emailing me your “blog post” with its supporting facts and I will see that your blog is posted under your name.
Think of it; YOUR opinion will be on the internet for all to contemplate, and for all I know, it will be imortal.
Can't do better than that!
Dear Ken --
Right.
Fuck the Founding Fathers and fuck Mark Twain. Those cowardly, un-serious bastards dared to offer anonymous and pseudononymous criticisms of the events of their respective days.
What the hell did they know.
As we've previously discussed, it may well be that those who believe putting their name to their opinions, in an attempt to give their ideas and opinions more gravitas, just may have an over inflated view of themselves, or are adulation seekers.
Wise and truly honest men avoid the cult of personality.
And those who fall back to demanding identities before addressing issues raised and opinions offered have bared their own intellectual weakness.
There's another blogger who does that, when he's challenged too fiercely -- a fraudulent practice when not making the same demands of those with whom you agree.
Just my opinion.
Carry on,
PRU
Anon: March 27, 2012 11:04 AM,
Sorry!
Not going to be goaded into discussing that subject at this time.
ParkRidgeUnderground: March 28, 2012 9:23 PM,
You must be kidding! Do you really expect a response to this verbal swill?
Please!
Indeed, those Founding Fathers and that Mark Twain were crafty and contentious fellows in their time. Have we lost sight that this blog is centered on Senior Issues as indicated by its very name? Although I was not there then, I doubt the boys referenced by PRU were concerned about providing healthy recreation activities for mom, dad, grams, gramps. Families were more intact in those days. This is now.
It appears the Park District through their continuing actions find little interest in responsibly using the resident's own money in providing quality recreation for seniors when and where they would like to play.
I was disappointed that one of the many participating "Anon's" felt the PD was reclaiming its storage building to "make a profit". I missed when it was determined the PD and the Commissioners were to use the money annually allocated to the Park District from property taxes to be used for generating profit rather than providing recreation and maintaining parks/property for the residents. Let us be more focused and dignified in finding a solution for the issue at hand. Watch what the PD has done and does rather than what it has said and says it intends to do.
No, Ken --
No real response was expected -- there's been a consistent demonstration of a preference for the lowest hanging fruit. Anything more substantive simply goes ignored, even when festooned as low hanging fruit.
In all seriousness -- you do neither yourself nor your readers any favors or justice by demonstrating the same, sad hypocrisy found elsewhere.
See Ms. Main's comment as an example of the resulting emboldened nincompoopery.
PRU
Park Ridge Underground
You call Sandee Main's comments emboldened nincompoopery. I totally agree with her. Whoever came up with this concept of a Park District taking the taxpayers money and instead of providing a service, making sure they make a profit. At least she is taking credit for her comments. You're nothing but a low life, foul mouthed idiot who won't even sign her name. Of course, if I had a mouth like your's, I'd be ashamed to sign my name also. You're right down there with the gutter snipes.
Sandee Main can't seem to follow the actual topic under consideration any better than you can, Anonymous @ 6:58.
One would have to presume that you have something in your character of which you are ashamed, since you didn't sign your name. And according to you, anonymous commenters are ashamed of themselves in some way. I don't believe that's true, but if you take comfort in that idea, go with it.
So, in keeping with the pleasure of personally directed name calling, you are an amusing but hypocritical dumbass.
The only truly substantive comment of any length, in this thread, was expressed by Anonymous @ 5:45 -- opinions and relevant comparisons of practice -- to which Mr. Butterly responded in a most weak and sadly hypocritical way, by insisting that the commenter sign a name before he engages on the topics; something not demanded of commenters with which he agrees.
Then again, Rush Limbaugh has his sycophantic following of Ditto Heads -- I guess Ken has his sycophantic following of Butt Heads.
I called Ken out for doing what other bloggers, steeped in the putrid stench of double-standards, so often do. I even made my remarks an easy target; an opportunity for Ken to "score" with a scold for the cussing while addressing the issue, as some of Ken's admirers are scandalized by words such as "shit."
But, just like the last time I challenged Ken's point of view on an issue (sans cussing), he chose not to respond to the subject at hand. Certainly that is his right, but it's lacking and is the method of operating which truly lowers the level of debate -- as is evidenced by the emboldened nincompoopery of Ms. Main and you, Anonymous @ 6:58.
As mentioned previously, wise and truly honest men avoid the cult of personality.
To "Anonymous" 3/25 @ 7:21 PM:
About what, exactly, am I supposed to apologize? Nothing posted here denies the fact that the Senior Center ran up a $993,000 deficit from FY 2005 through 2010, which I posted on PublicWatchdog back on 1/27/11.
And Anonymous 3/29 @ 6:58 PM, your objection to "this concept of a Park District taking the taxpayers money and...making sure they make a profit" is simply wrong. The Park District will not really be "making...a profit" so long as it keeps collecting property taxes.
What's wrong with the Park District's taxing property owners for the costs of building, maintaining and repairing its physical facilities - parks, playgrounds, buildings that are available to all residents - but then also charging user fees wherever possible to help defray the extra costs (supplies, wear and tear, utilities, instruction, supervision, etc.) that are caused by that use? Other than, of course, the users not wanting to pay them.
Life is so full of joy and desire to seek other opportunities. Well over a year ago, I removed Public Watch Dog from my bookmark tab. Not a credible source of information.
Ms. Main:
Whenever you're ready to identify any "information" in any PublicWatchdog post that is untrue - and whatever documentation or other resource which disproves it - I'll be happy to address it.
Hold it guys! Hold it!!
This experiment in “uncivil” interpersonal communication is over!
The topic of the post was not Bob Trizna and his numbers. The subject was not Madam former PRU_ADMIN or her opinions or thoughts on anonymity. In short guys, this post was not about YOU, nor ME.
The subject of the post was a document and the contents therein.
You believe the contents of the document, the facts, or you do not! It is your opinion on that document and its contents alone that I seek!
Lastly, thank you! Thank you all for clearly displaying for the Park Ridge taxpayers and Park Board, the current state of affairs regarding the Park Ridge Park District Senior Center fiasco.
Dear Ken --
Stipulated: the document you posted is true, to the best of Ms. Grodsky's ability to convey. However, considering Ms. Grodsky's recent track record for honesty, a grain of salt is advised.
The document demonstrates that in 30 years of operation, SSI and it's membership have contributed 4 generous improvements (roughly, $700,000 via fundraising and a bequest, and a $90,000 foundation grant, which is very interesting in light of the foundation's stated funding policies) to the Park District Senior Center property, for the exclusive use of Senior Center membership -- while Senior Center programming and operations has been running up deficits absorbed by the Park District and it's larger pool of taxpayers.
Can you explain why SSI and it's membership and this blog have not addressed the fact that the Senior Center, for many years, double and triple-dipped into the majority of taxpayer pockets, through funding provided by not only the Park District, but also the City of Park Ridge and Maine or Norwood Townships?
Can you explain why SSI did not engage in "vigorous fundraising efforts" which would cover the costs of programming and operations, instead of spending the money it raised on building improvements exclusive to the use of it's membership, so the larger pool of taxpayers would not have to absorb the costs/losses?
Can you explain why SSI and certain of it's membership seemed to vehemently object to having to pony up the money to begin to cover those costs and losses, when the Park District Board finally got around to addressing the deficits?
Can you explain why Senior Center membership has been fairly stagnant; why SSI failed to make any "vigorous" recruiting efforts to increase membership dues revenue?
Can you explain why SSI remained such a mystery to "9 out of 10" seniors, when SSI was the entity charged with seeing to the collection of membership dues, fundraising, and provision of funding for capital and program expenditures?
PRU
My apologies to all and especially you, Ken. You are absolutely correct.
Folks,turn off the hate radio for a minute and remember that when a government facility like the Senior Center, paid for by your taxes "earns a profit," that doesn't mean a handful of fat-cats pocket most of it as it means in the private sector. It means that the government facility doesn't have to cut services to you, or raise taxes on you, or mooch off of members at other facilities such as the Community Center, in order to pay its bills. Any "profit" goes back into the operating and capital improvement budgets of the public entity that serves you with pools, and maybe someday, with pool tables.
I would also suggest that we all take Sandee Main's sage advice. Pay attention to what the Park District does. Despite all the Chicken Little-ing a year ago, the Senior Center is alive and well, spiffed up, offering programs and maintaining services and entertaining members. And hey, because it's now actually seen as a public building, you can drop by any time and see for yourself.
Anon: April 2, 2012 11:23AM,
You said: “Folks, turn off the hate radio for a minute…”
My response: There is no “hate” of any kind, going on at this site, by anyone! And "Anonymous”, I resent the implication.
Is there direct passionate public discussion at this site? You bet! The same kind of direct passionate public discussion that should have taken place, in open session, among all concerned residents of Park Ridge, prior to PRPD’s hostile takeover of the Senior Center over a year ago.
Had the public been given the opportunity to become truly involved in the decision, this last year would have been, for Park Ridge Illinois Citizens, PRPD and Senior Center members, a year of peaceful transition.
Instead, some seniors and Board members have been at each other’s throat and each side has had they’re dirty laundry aired and their reputations besmirched. If the experience of seniors at this months Senior Senate meeting tells us anything, trust in Park Ridge management is gone! And long hard-won friendships and working relationships that could have made a difference; are all but lost!
And because of Mr. Biagi's inability last January, to control his good sense and emotions, and the resultant new hostility his actions created, this unfortunate story will continue!
Instead of gentle leadership and cooperation, we've experienced heavy handedness and turmoil.
The spirited discussion you consider “hate” speech, would have never happened had Ms. Wynn-Ryan and Mr. Biagi and others on the Board, taken the advice of their Attorney and former Executive Director, to renew (for the last time) the $10,000-taxpayer-funded PRPD/SSI agreement.
Had they done so, we’d all be writing about something else on this beautiful spring day!
Anon, I strongly suggest a recalibration of your [hate meter] is in order!
As for the rest of you comments – they’re worthy of future public discussion here, but currently off topic!
Anon April 2, 11:23 AM
This may be off topic but I just couldn't allow Anon to make a completely inaccurate statement. The Senior Center may be "alive" but hardy "well". Attendance is way down and people have cut back tremendously on volunteering. They were couldn't get enough volunteers for the Pancake Breakfast and 5 people signed up for the Mens Follies. How do you put on a show with 5 people? The memberes that cooked and served Just Lunch quit and they now have to have it catered.
I'll agree that the center is definitely spiffed up but why now? The former director asked repeatedly that the place be cleaned up to no avail. Our feet were actually sticking to the floor in places. She couldn't even get the windows washed. Now that the Park District wants to bring other programming into the center and rent out the facility, all of a sudden it's immaculate.
Furthrmore, the seniors are demoralized. Let me tell you about just one thing that happened recently. At the last Senior Center meeting, the president started reading the minutes from a Special Meeting not held at the center. Gayle Mountcastle, the Superintendent of the Park District, immediately stated the minutes could not be read, because the meeting didn't take place in the Senior Center building and the manager wasn't present. According to her, no Senior Center meeting is valid, unless the Park District manager is in attendance. Later she told the Senators and members present, "I can shut you down in a minute and lock the doors." When other organizations meet in the Senior Center building does she attend and tell them what they can say and do? Of course not. Only the seniors get this type of obnoxious behavior. We were also told that the Park District does not recognize our by-laws. Strangely, the Park District manager wants to start her own by-laws committee (as ours according to her isn't valid). Her committee, of course, would remove everything that gives the Senior Center Senate all the authority over everything. Now perhaps you can begin to understand why the seniors are frustrated and totally demoralized.
Cheryl Fergus - I almost can't believe the story that you just told. Why in the world doesn't the Park District recognize your by-laws and why do they want to strip them of everything giving you control over your own organization? In the first place, why are they present at your senate meeting and taking control of things, not to mention threatening you? This is absurd. Am I missing something.
Yes, you are missing the fact that the organization can do what it wants on its own property but not on public property owned and largely funded by the rest of the taxpayers. The Schumacher family donated significantly to the Community Center pool, but it's not the Schumacher family's pool. The rest of us "can't believe" you don't get it.
"The rest of us "can't believe" you don't get it".
The rest of us?!?!?! Exactly how many is the rest of us???
Here is the truth. The vast majority of PR could care less about this issue. It has not occupied a single moment of their time. It does not even make the list of issues of the day - not even close.
What you have is two fairly small groups, both represented by blogs and a great deal of bickering between these groups.
The rest of us....toooooo funny!!!!!!
It's really not "toooooo funny!!!!!" anon 1:36.
What is happening and will happen at the senior center impacts seniors in the community. People can't care about everything that goes on in their community because they simply don't have time for that, but hopefully enough people will pay attention to ensure that good decisions are made about it. Lots goes on at Park Ridge City council meetings that the vast majority doesn't get involved in but that doesn't mean that what happens at those meetings doesn't matter. People come forward to take a stand on an issue that they know well, or that affects them. Thats just how things work. Don't assume that this issue isn't an important one.
And anon at 9:10 the seniors should be able to have their own meetings without the Park District being able to tell them what to do. If Park Ridge baseball or the Girl Scouts use a Park District room to hold a meeting, the Park District can't tell those groups how to run their meeting. Why does it get to do that with the Senior Center members? If anything, the senior group has more right to the building than the Park District staff because the seniors are taxpayers so it's their building. I think the Park District is forgetting who it serves.
Park Ridge Baseball and the Girl Scouts aren't having meetings in which they try to dictate to the Park District how to run a facility funded by ALL the taxpayers for the exclusive benefit of a mini-minority of taxpayers. Everybody loves baseball and Thin-Mints, but these groups don't get to control the buildings and grounds they use for their meetings.
Anon 5:56
You really don't have your facts straight. The senior center members were not trying to dictate anything to the Park District. All they wanted to do was conduct their meeting. Their OWN meeting.
An analogy: I think there are about 1500 kids in Park Ridge baseball. They use fields funded by ALL the taxpayers. They are the primary users of those fields. If Park Ridge Baseball Commissioners meet and make some decisions about how many games the house league 12-year-olds will play for a season, or about how many junior girls teams there will be, should the Park District have a say in that? Should the Park District prevent PR Baseball from even discussing that issue? Because that is what the Park District did to the Senior Center folks.
Please, give it a shot. EXPLAIN. How exactly have the seniors tried to dictate to the Park District how it should run the building?
Seniors don't want control of the building or grounds. They want to be able to run their membership meetings without the interference of the park district staff.
If what 11:39 said were true, there would never have been a problem. Too bad controlling the building, who gets in, what they pay, what the building is used for is exactly and entirely what these "membership" groups want to dictate.
One commenter (11:39 on April 10) says all the group wants to do is run its own membership meeting. A prior commenter (10:34 on April 4) says the Park District wants to "remove everything that gives the Senior Senate all the authority over everything."
Sounds like they want a bit more than to run a meeting, hmmmmmmm?
Well ladies and gents; this has been fun but I think it’s time to close the thread.
Thank you for your lively comments and as always, it continues to be my privilege to provide you the space to express them!
Post a Comment