July 10, 2012’s PRPD Regular Board Meeting was not the first time Park Ridge Park District Commission members heard Commissioner Vile’s “…that dirty little secret, that elephant in the room” comment. It always proceeds the following: “the clawback”.
Press HERE for definition of Clawback.
The clawback refers to “EXHIBIT A”; a provision included in all of the PRPD/SSI contracts since July 16, 1987 that requires PRPD to reimburse SSI, should PRPD fail to renew the PRPD/SSI contract.
Page Three – again.
| “AMENDMENT TO LETTER AGREEMENT DATED JULY 16, 1987 BETWEWEN SENIOR SERVICE, INC. AND THE PARK RIDGE RECREATION AND PARK DISTRICT |
|
|
The Commissioners are deathly afraid…
The reason the Commissioners are deathly afraid to rescind their claim to the Kemnitz Trust monies, is their fear that SSI and Kemnitz Trust, will not only use those monies to sue the District for Kemnitz related court costs and damages, but additionally, will use those monies to fund more litigation by SSI to effect the clawback provision as explicitly and repeatedly stated in the contracts. Of course, I would assume, the Board is fearful for liability for all litigation costs and damages.
I mean, we’re talking about $600,000+; (Kemnitz Trust = $300k+ & 1987-2005 Clawback = $300k+).
Going after the Kemnitz Trust, I surmise, is the Boards action to aggressively deprive SSI of their ability to fund defensive litigation.
Board President Biagi, at the last Board Meeting, quipped about the Better Government Association and what it would do with this story and the adverse publicity it would cause in the Park Ridge community. I suggest, Mr. Biagi and his Board would do better to remove the cause of the controversy all together.
Of course, it’s just my opinion!
9 comments:
This is shocking beyond belief. What kind of Park District do we have in this town. If they didn't sign the contract, why haven't they paid the seniors the money?? This is down right dishonest. Why should the seniors have to sue them for the money. If they were forthright, honest people on that Board, they would have given the seniors they're money back a long time ago. This smells to high heaven
Ken
Right on, and it is about time the public was made aware of what SSI and the Seniors from the past have done for the Park District and the building in which the Senior Center reside.This is something which has not come to light until now...and the seniors have just been called the "greedy ole geezeers'!
Hm Better Business Bureau ...would be interesting what they would have to say about these elected officials.
The Center and it's programs have just become another Park District Program..see the new Autumn brochure. Nothing like it was before. Attendance is down for programs and lunches.
That which were money raisers in the past are just breaking even ,ie Just Lunch which is now beng catered with low attendance ,and it was originally formed as a money raiser with the meals limited to 60 attendees ( with a waiting list)and the meals cooked by Teresa and 3 voluteers , who did a great job, averaging a profit of $100.00 each month !!The variety show and Steak Fry each year raised money ,however this year if they break even it will be a miracle as much of the food will be brought in from what I understand.There is even talk of bringing in a choreographer for the dance numbers.! Another addition to monies being spent.
What Teresa Grodsky did all these years and loved doing ie ,director, tap dance teacher, programs and reservation and now chorographer is now being done by other individuals. It is taking 3-4 people to fill her shoes and at whose expense ???
And "certain" people complain of the deficit in years past when SSI handed over , with the comtract in place, at least $100,000 a year ! Well wait until "they " see the deficit now How are they going to explain this ?? Oh. wait it is the fault of the "greedy old geezers" !
Quite frankly I think that all members of the Park District Board need to be recalled and the "hatchet man" Director Mountcastle needs to be fired. for mismanagement and starting this whole fiasco grab for the estate money. Also truth was NOT told at meetings in regards to her ( Gayle Mountcastle) treatment of the Senior Senate. I was there and heard her threaten to shut done NOT the Senate but the Center. And now she denies it.
Ms Mountcastle was an employee of the Park District over 10 years ago and a "friend" of Teresa Grodsky. In fact Teresa was excited when she heard Mountcastle was returning as Executor Director. Whoa what a mistake. With friends like Mountcastle one does not need enemies ! Mountcastle knew exactly how the Senate ran and for years there was no complaint then all of a sudden. "The Senate did nothing and had no bearing on the running of the Center" What a lie ! If that were the case how did the Senate in just the recent history vote to raise the dues not once but twice ...the last time in
2011 ?
I was taught as a child never to lie as lies come back to haunt you and you need to keep remembering them and one lie leads to another and then all of a sudden no matter what you say no one will believe you. Well I do not believe one word anyone associated with this board says .Remember this
After reading in the new brochure what the board according to Pres. Biagi says..."they will be reviewing plans for an exciting new outdoor aquatics facility to replace Centennial Pools...etc. " and on top of wanting to purchase the portion of the Youth Campus.
We Seniors really need to watch out.
My, My. The Park Board is crying poor mouth out of one side of their mouth and planning on a $6,000,000 purchase of the land at the Youth Campus and now an aquatics facility replacing the pools at Centennial Park. Are the taxpayers listening? This is the Park District who complained about spending $175,000 on it's senior citizens. But then, they don't count. They've just paid taxes to the Park District throughout their lives here in Park Ridge, supporting all the programs offered. Oh, and by the way, they were mostly programs for children. The seniors find no problem with that, but they just feel it's about time the Park Board stopped moaning and groaning about spending some of their tax dollars on them. All you young moms and dads out there ought to realize that you'll grow old some day. Hopefully, you'll have a Park Board that has your best interests at heart. We weren't so lucky. We're called Greedy Ole Geezers.
This claw back provision is a real revelation. All we hear about from the Park District is that the seniors are ungrateful, blood suckers, costing them money, money, money. Not one word has been said about the $300,000 the Park District owes the seniors. This is a lie of omission and it makes one wonder whether you can trust anything that the Park District is saying. I've heard that this propaganda war put on by the Park District wasn't the whole truth and now we know that was an understatement.
The last of the written license agreements between the Park Disrict and SSI was not "terminated" by the Park District: it simply expired by its own express terms at the end of 2010, and a new written license was not entered into.
The Senior Center remains the center of the Park District's "senior" activities, so there would appear to be an implied "license" in effect and, therefore, no legal basis for the "clawback."
But if SSI wants to continue litigating with the Park District, it can add that clawback money to the case.
Whether the taxpayers want the Park District to spend $6 million or whatever on acquiring the Youth Campus will be decided by a referendum vote of those taxpayers this Novmeber. Are you seniors willing to give those same taxpayers a referendum vote on whether to subsidize the Senior Center to the tune of $175,000 or so each year?
Mr Trizna,
Your first two paragraphs just happen to sound like information (rephrased) from a letter written by attorney Hoffman, sent on 7/24/12 to attorney Snakard regarding the Kemnitz suit.
Coincidence? Or just ANOTHER example of information sharing with your friends - Hoffman, Biagi and Wynn-Ryan.
By the way, this letter has not yet been presented to SSI or Senior Senate boards.
As I read these blogs, it makes me wonder why I moved to this community almost 40 years ago. At that time I was looking for a good place to raise a family. A great deal of my time was and continues to be spent in philanthropic organizations, PTA, scouting and "giving back" to the community. Now I wonder if this is where I want to stay.
Ms. Hameder:
I can assure you that those comments are solely my own, based on my reading and analysis of the relevant contracts and my undertanding of Illinois law.
In the 24 years I have lived here I have heard comments similar to yours from a number of people who seem to love the community when they are raising children and enjoying the taxpayer-subsidized public education, parks and recreational programs that far exceed what they are paying in taxes (e.g., $3,000/year in D-64 taxes for a $12,000/year/student education). But they seem to like it a whole lot less, however, when their taxpayer-subsidized benefits regularly fall below their tax payments.
Go figure!
Clauses in the contracts from the onset have been quite similar. The last contract which expired in December 2010 refers to:
15. "Termination; Upon a determination by District that the needs of District require use of some or all of the Premises for other recreational or Park activities, District may cancel or modify this agreement as to all or a portion of the premises upon at least one hundred eighty days written notice to the Corporation (SSI)...etc. ' The etc. outlines and confirms a payback as discussed previously...hardly an outcome needing litigation. Tis there in black and white as are the parameters for which a contract may even be terminated.(signed by Dick Barton and Mariyn Goll.)
I do not recall such notice was sent (or received by SSI) 180 days prior to end of 2010, as in July 2010. I do not recall the District outlining new recreation needs for the building. Not surprising as much of many of the buildings are idle and space is available for additional programs, if identified.
Two indicators (refractions) that the board does not honor contracts. eek.
Earlier contracts as in 1980 signed on behalf of SSI by the honorable Ray Hollis, SSI President, carries language not to be overlooked and a favorite of mine:
"14. The District covenants that if, and so long as, Corporation pays the specified fees, and any additional fee as herein provided, and performs the covenants hereof, Corporation shall peaceably and quietly have hold and enjoy the premises for the term herein mentioned, subject to the provisions of this agreement."
What happened to the previous honorable men and women who served on the Park District Board? Park Ridge, indeed, was built by honorable people identifying honorable practices and policies.
There is more. Issues may be discussed here, but not settled here from my point of view.
Sandee to Sandee--you mean "infractions" by District. You are having an eye refraction in hopes your vision improves.
Post a Comment