Biagi-Ryan Board Vote 5-1 for Preemptive Strike –Update: 08/31/2012

or this Board’s political insanity is why there are over 27,000 views on this site!

The PRPD/SSI/Grodsky/Senior Center imbroglio, has been going on for almost two long years; and every time we turn around these fumbling incompetents, come up with another laughable Park Ridge Park District moment, one designed to stretch out the process and bankrupt Senior Services, Inc. 

For those who no longer bother to read the local rags, this is what Journal-Topics Reporter Heather Holm had to say:

Note: To see the complete, full-screen Parks File Preemptive Suit to Senior Group, click the box on the lower right side of the document window. To move UP or DOWN use the SLIDER on the right.

Parks File Preemptive Suit to Senior Group

Now let’s see if I got this straight.

PRPD, who started the Kemnitz Trust suit by informing Kemnitz Trust attorneys of their alleged claim to the Kemnitz  assets, voted to do a Pearl Harbor like sneak attack on these old World War II era Seniors. Hysterical Board leaders, Biagi and Wynn-Ryan convinced their sycophantic Board associates to believe rumors, based on comments revealed on this blog.  The commenters were demanding that SSI  contractual rights be honored.  The boys and girl concluded those

pesky old codgers were planning a legal offensive of their own to gain what Seniors believe PRPD owes them; the agreed-to dreaded “clawback” provision money.

Your representatives who voted yes for this insanity:	Rick Biagi
	Mary Wynn-Ryan
	Steve Hunst
	Richard Brandt
	Jim O’Brien.

The lone Commissioner who voted no: Stephen Vile.

WWII era Senior’s don’t like sneak attacks!

For those Board Commissioners too young to recall or understand how many seniors of this era might view their act, look at the video.

Biagi!  Wynn-Ryan!  Have you no political common sense?  Have you no shame?

UPDATE: 08/31/2012

I received a copy of the following email this morning.

Senior Services, Senior Senate and Senior Center members, and friends of seniors, As some of you already know, this week we made a counteroffer to the Park District in an attempt to end the Kemnitz lawsuit once and for all. As you may also know, the Park District had offered to settle the suit if we agreed that we would not use any of the Kemnitz monies in legal action against the Park District. Publicly, the Park District's rationale was that Betty Kemnitz would not have wanted her bequest used in such a fashion. Given our responsibilities as a non-profit organization to preserve and protect our assets, we could not agree to such a broad restriction on the use of our own money. We need to protect our rights and our assets, and legal action is sometimes the only way to do that. However, we made a very reasonable counteroffer. Following a lengthy consultation with our attorneys, we agreed that we would not use Kemnitz money to sue the District over the capital payback provision of the contract we had for many years with the Park District. We agreed to this because of our desire to end the lawsuit now, and because we believed our offer addressed the real concern that the Park District had, which was that we would use Kemnitz money "against them" to recoup monies from the Park District. Instead of accepting our offer on the spot, however, we learned yesterday that the Park District has inexplicably filed yet another lawsuit against us. In this lawsuit they are asking the court to declare that they do not owe any money to us under the capital payback provision. We view this lawsuit as unnecessary and a complete waste of our own and taxpayer money. Neither SSI nor the Senior Senate has made a decision to sue the Park District under that provision, so the Park District is taking a step it need not take at all. And our counteroffer creates a substantial restriction on our ability to even bring such a suit if we wanted to do so. Unless they drop this latest suit, not only will they be spending more and more taxpayer dollars, but we will have to pay our attorneys to respond to the lawsuit. That could get expensive, and all of the money would have to come from our Kemnitz assets. Up until now, the bulk of the legal fees we have incurred in the Kemnitz matter have been largely paid not out of the Kemnitz funds but through our insurance coverage. Our insurance coverage will not be available to defend this latest lawsuit, however, so if we have to defend it, it will come straight out of the Kemnitz money. We don't want to see that happen, and don't think Betty Kemnitz would either. After nearly two years of trying to resolve this matter in a lowkey manner, we believe that a more direct appeal to the Park Board and others is now needed. For that, we need your help. Please contact members of the Park Board and ask them to ACCEPT THE SETTLEMENT OFFER SSI HAS MADE IN THE KEMNITZ MATTER AND ALLOW ALL THE PARTIES TO MOVE ON! Seniors do not need this matter to drag on even one more day, and the Park Board should end this immediately. We've met their most important demands, they should accept the offer and MOVE ON! Here is the contact information for the Park Board members:  President Rick Biagi rbiagi@prparks.org V P Mary Wynn Ryan mwryan@prparks.org Steve Hunst shunst@prparks.org Richard Brandt rbrandt@prparks.org Steve Vile svile@prparks.org Jim O'Brien jobrien@prparks.org Mel Thillens mthillens@prparks.org (We encourage you to send a copy of your email to us for our file at prseniors@gmail.com) Feel free to share this email with your friends and neighbors as well- the more voices, the better! If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to email us Carla Owen Barbara Hameder Carla Owen Barbara Hameder for Senior Services, Inc. for the Senior Senate (contact us at prseniors@gmail.com)”

Of course, it’s just my opinion!

Litigation, the cause of and solution to, all Senior problems!

or Seniors own their stuff – Board owns seniors stuff – Seniors own their stuff – Board owns seniors stuff…

What the heck is going on here?

Over the last couple blogs I razzed the Park Ridge Park District Board for acting like Homer Simpson. 

But I never thought they’d model themselves after this version: Homer (The Godfather) Simpson.

What a difference one blog post makes!

See: Well I never said I could eliminate intransigent or wanton ignorance!

Now I’m hearing PRPD Officials are apparently, once again, this time in court (using Taxpayer-$$$), claiming ownership of Senior Service, Inc. assets.  Assets PRPD has already stated under the Freedom Of Information Act to belong to Senior Service, Inc.

Previously stated under FOIA:

Senior’s, maybe it’s time to kiss Don Homer’s ring, and ask the Don for his forgiveness and protection.

He says he only has Seniors best interest at heart!

A little tribute! A little respect; and apparently at this moment, maybe those SSI paid Senior Center Assets is all he requires.

And maybe someday, and that someday may never come, he will ask you for another favor, or tribute, or gift, or maybe your final gift:

Your Trust Money!

A personal observation…

PRPD Board Members continue to act in curious ways, almost as if they are taking the process personally; and forgetting to keep this important rule: I think this Board has gone down the rabbit-hole. When a group of seemingly intelligent men and women rely on local blog generated banter as intelligence or as a substitute for direct Senior/Board communication, and use those same opinions as the basis for what I now see as litigation-based decision-making, you’ve got to wonder what type of people Park Ridge voters voted in. See: Negative comments on local blogs - PRPD Board’s excuse for seeking court mediation!          Real story not Senior Center!           Quite frankly, I no longer think the real story is about the Senior Center.  I think the real story is about a local Park Board full of itself and angry their ideas and demands have been rejected by constituents they’re unwilling to or incapable of dealing with!  PRPD’s expensive taxpayer-paid court-shenanigans are starting to look to me like these kids are out of their league; and because they couldn’t get their way by tantrum and bullying, are just getting back at those old codgers; and making seniors pay through the nose with legal bills.  It apparently, is all they have left! This Senior Center problem, under Boards current leadership, has morphed from a purely and easily solved political challenge into a complex legal jumble, and one not to be fully resolved by any court order. Another example:       PRPD Board’s Fantasy Issue      Well, PRPD Board decided it no longer wanted to deal with SSI and Senior Center Members, Senior Senate.  So, they just voted to officially eliminate them, made them at worse, Soviet style nonentities; at best, persona non grata (“"an unwelcome person”).    In other words, the Board fantasizes SSI/Senior Senate no longer exist; a wish, a vote, a change in Board Policy Manual; snap, crackle, pop, bibbedy, bobbedy, boom; SSI and Senior Senate no longer exist!        Reality is what they wish it to be!       Bet Board leaders wish they could do that trick with their Youth Camp property problem!

Is this the sign of a healthy Board? You tell me!

Guys, I don’t think so.  When one sees a government body resort to using the courts to solve its political problems and acting as if their opponents don’t exist, you know they’re in trouble and some of them know it too!

So, let me not mince words!

SSI, it’s over!  It really is.  

An organization that refuses to acknowledge your existence is incapable of rationally resolving differences.

It’s time to take all your property (see FOIA’d list above) from 100 S. Western to a local storage facility until you can open up an independent senior center of your own – unencumbered by local taxpayer-funded-litigation-crazy political hacks.  Assuming of course, PRPD lets you take your stuff! 

In the mean time, I think this Board intends to continue using taxpayers money to keep you in court (the clawback, …that dirty little secret, that elephant in the room…), make you pay and bleed you dry!

If Mr. Trizna’s “comments” over the last two posts continue to bellwether (“a person or thing that shows the existence or direction of a trend”) Board thinking and imminent Board actions, as they have in the past, we can expect many more expensive taxpayer-paid days in court. 

Can you all shout conspiracy?

Litigation, the cause of and solution to, all Senior problems!

Of course, it’s just my opinion!

 

Well I never said I could eliminate intransigent or wanton ignorance!

One of the problems that happen in long, drawn out affairs such as the PRPD/SSI/Senior Center saga, is the proliferation of rumors.  The rumors most times aren’t malicious, just stories based on bad or incomplete information.  A more recent story flying around town was that PRPD intended to make it difficult for seniors to withdraw their assets from the 100 S. Western building.

Now, rumors usually have a kernel of truth, albeit incomplete.  The ignorant, (”lacking knowledge or information as to a particular subject or fact”), unfortunately, often take these rumors as gospel truth by virtue of the fact that their contextual grasp of the issue is incomplete.

One such story (rumor) was the recent report that Park Ridge Park District Officials intended to give Seniors a difficult time retrieving their assets from Park District’s 100 S. Western building.  As of this writing, that rumor is not true; and that is a good thing.

I never said I could eliminate intransigent or wanton ignorance. intransigent:(“refusing to compromise: stubbornly or unreasonably refusing even to consider changing a decision or attitude”);  wanton:(“random: lacking reason or provocation”, “desiring to do harm: done out of a desire to cause harm”, “excessive: unrestrained, heedless of reasonable limits, or characterized by greed and extravagance”, or “unruly: lacking discipline”).  However, I can provide facts to those with open eyes and open minds regarding the PRPD/SSI/Senior controversy.

So, lets review the facts acquired from the Park Ridge Park District utilizing the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Press here for more information on writing FOIA requests.

FOIA Generated SSI/Senior Asset Ownership Facts

I first heard about PRPD possibly withholding access to Senior Services, Inc. (SSI) owned assets last February.  Wanting to know more, I submitted two Freedom of Information Act (FOIA#’s – 120202-001 and 120207-001) requests, to determine what assets were owned or paid for by SSI seniors – assets they will take with them should the they move into a new facility.  

First FOIA – 120202-001

PRPD Response - FOIA – 120202-001

Extracted Fixed Assets for -“Senior Center” Building

Senior Center Assets From PRPD Report - 03-03-2011

Note: View document on large screen click box at lower right corner.

Now, you’ll notice the two reports are somewhat different. The first report came to me from PRPD under the Freedom of Information Act. (FOIA). Unfortunately, it was incomplete. The second report was created by me. I took the misleading PRPD report data and added, along with some additional calculations, the best replacement values I could find using US Government derived figures. That is the reason the PRPD version only shows a replacement value of $2.467 million while the more complete version shows a truer replacement value of $3,212,301.

Completed -“Senior Center” Building Report

Asset Report PRPD Senior Center

Note: View document on large screen click box at lower right corner.

SSI Senior Magic…

Take a good look at the acquisition dates and cost vs. the replacement cost for these assets. 

As of 03/03/2011, the acquisition cost in 1970 of the 100 S. Western storage building was roughly $140 thousand.  Under SSI/Senior/PRPD’s government/private partnership, and through SSI/Senior magic, the value of that derelict building grew to a little over $3.212 million in replacement value. 

In other words, the property actually grew in value by over $2.476 million.

That’s one hell of an asset appreciation for PRPD’s minimal yearly investment; and what a immense return on investment to the senior community.

Ironically this was is a feather in the then PRPD Board’s hat and a tribute to their prudent actions.

Second FOIA – 120207-001 – SSI Owned Assets

In my judgment…

Fortunately, the rumor was untrue.  But here’s the problem.  Seniors believed the rumor to be true because seniors have been deceived by PRPD leaders multiple times throughout this process and their patience and good will has been abused.  PRPD/SSI and PRPD/Senior Senate relations have been so diminished, these two senior entities are no longer even recognized by Park Board Officials who now fully control the financial destiny of “Park Ridge Park District Senior Center”.    

Without the 30-year collaborative partnership and ongoing energy and generosity of SSI/Seniors, there would be no award-winning Senior Center in Park Ridge, let alone that lovely $ 3.2 million building for that matter.

Of course, it’s just my opinion.

Negative comments on local blogs - PRPD Board’s excuse for seeking court mediation!

 

At July 10, 2012’s Rescheduled Regular Board Meeting, PRPD Commissioners lamented over recent blog comments emanating from Park Ridge’s two local blog sites; while also discussing their inability to persuade SSI/Senior Senate leaders to sit down to “compromise”.

Email from: Gayle Mountcastle – Monday, July 02, 2012 4:25 PM

Subject: Settlement Meeting

“Dear Carla, Barb and Teresa – As you are aware, the Park Ridge Recreation and Park District has tendered three settlement offers over the past few months in an attempt to resolve the Betty Kemitz Bequest litigation. While we were obviously disappointed that these offers were rejected, we remain hopeful that the parties can come to a mutual understanding that allays the need for further litigation in the matter. It has become apparent to the District that erroneous information regarding these settlement offers has been, in some situations, communicated publically. These public statements often led to speculation as to perceived motives of the District and resulted in unconditional rejection of the pending settlement offers without further discussion. We trust that you would agree that misunderstandings and misstatements regarding a possible resolution to this matter will not aid in bringing the parties to a mutually agreeable settlement. To that end, we are asking you to consider conducting an in-person settlement meeting in the next few weeks, with counsel, in the hope that both sides can piece together a mutually agreeable resolution. Additionally, if you think that having an objective third party (i.e., a mediator) present for the conversation would prove beneficial, we are certainly willing to entertain such an idea. If you are amenable to such a meeting, we would suggest the following ground rules: 1) Meeting at a neutral location (i.e., somewhere other than the 100 S. Western building, the Park District Offices or either of the attorneys’ offices); 2) Each side agrees to check their respective emotions and personal feelings at the door and come to the table with an open mind and willingness to work toward a solution which is in the best interest of all parties; and, 3) The specific representatives from each party have full settlement authority (i.e., that there will not be back-and-forth with people not in attendance at the meeting, other than later ratification by elected bodies or other boards as set forth in by-laws or statutes). If this concept is something that you would be interested in pursuing, we would welcome the opportunity to find a mutually agreeable time and location to hold the proposed meeting. We look forward to your response. Sincerely, Gayle Mountcastle”

In the end, Board resolved to shanghai Judge Flynn into the process. 

See: Park Ridge Park District’s “greedy”, “rowdy” seniors need to mind their P’s & Q’s or else…

So on July 16th PRPD/SSI/Senior attorneys went to court.  As expected, Judge Flynn said yes.  On July  17th, PRPD’s Board met again for an update. 

See: How the Journal-Topics described the meeting.

The real question is why have these “compromise” meetings at all?  What can they alone accomplish that was not able to be accomplished before?   In sort, “compromise” means: (“a settlement of differences by mutual concessions; an agreement reached by adjustment of conflicting or opposing claims, principles, etc., by reciprocal modification of demands.”).

The Park Ridge Park District can give up trying to hijack the Kemnitz Trust money. 

Pray tell, what can the Seniors give up? 

Their $330k Kemnitz Trust money?  Their rights to redress (“the setting right of what is wrong: relief from wrong or injury: compensation or satisfaction for a wrong or injury”) for prior or future wrongs - the very thing Park Board Officials offered in their last “settlement offer”?

Look boys and girls, some of you, like some members on the Board, fear future litigation for prior acts.  That fear is well founded. 

However, Park Board Leaders brought this on.  A negotiated contract that would have transitioned the Senior Center from a private/public partnership to full PRPD ownership was foolishly kept off the public’s table.  No discussion!  No vote! 

Had Board leaders shown just an ounce of courage back then:

• the contract would have been signed,
• the contract period would have been five months from completion,
• the transition to full ownership would have been orderly,
• hundreds-of-thousands of non-taxed dollars would now be in taxpayer coffers with more to come,
• and 800 seniors at the Senior Center would be happy as a clam. 

Instead, there is still trouble in the land! 

Instead of entering into a contract agreement that protected all parties, Board Leaders issued a “Resolution” that didn’t last 6 months; a document that protected no one. 

See: Board Aborts Its 6-month-Old “Resolution”.

Instead of entering into a contract agreement that protected all parties, Board Leaders told unsubstantiated stories designed to turn public opinion against 800 Senior Center taxpayers!

See: Restroom-gate - Park Ridge Park District President acknowledges long-time crapper access problem… and Restroom-gate continued – Park Ridge Park District says NO lists of formal complaints of complainers exist! and A funny thing happened on the way to writing: I swear by my tattoo – Part Three!

Instead of treating Seniors right; instead of:

• respecting their creation of and contribution to Park Ridge’s senior center and programs, and respecting their financial contributions at 100 S. Western in particular,
• treating Seniors as equals,
• harnessing their knowledge and experience,
• estranging Senior Services, Inc. (SSI) and Senior Senate leaders,
• not telling unsubstantiated (Restroom-gate) stories about them,

• not subordinating and ignoring them by issuing non-agreed-to edicts and agreements,
• not winning the peace,

the Board chose to throw away thirty years of knowledge, knowhow, good will and to my personal knowledge, over one million dollars in future Trust monies. 

You can’t make this stuff up folks!  How stupid, arrogant and dumb can one Board act over one simple problem? 

And instead of displaying the courage Obi-Wan Kenobi;

instead of displaying wisdom of Yoda;

or instead of exhibiting the cunning and leadership skills of Darth Vader,

they chose to model themselves after Homer Simpson!

The other day…

The other day I was asked why PRPD’s Board requested negotiating assistance from Judge Flynn’s court. 

Well, I think I know the is the reason why.

I think, it’s because it’s become apparent to most of us, and even to this Board, they lack the skills to complete the job themselves!  The decision to bring in a mediator will, of course, only buy the Board so much time.  In the end, the seniors will find themselves with nothing to give up in mediation, unless you want them to give up their legitimate rights for redress. 

Of course, there is an easy solution, although not risk free.  The Board need only return to it!

“Nothing will ever be attempted, if all possible objections must be first overcome. ” ~Samuel Johnson, Rasselas, 1759.

Finally

Comment as you see fit, and so long as you stay on subject and aren’t too crass, you will be published!

Of course, it’s only my opinion.