rather than political persuasion to solve their self-created problems.
| A reader asked I provide source documents as I have done in the past. This addition will increase the length of the post, but will provide you with confidence in the numbers. Further, it appears some of my readers still do not believe PRPD leadership wished to change the name of the 100 S. Western Building or the focus of its activities. I have now included a new document, an email from Ray Ochromowicz to Teresa Grodsky: September 13, 2010. See: Additional Email Information 09/17/2012. |
Readers and commenters from both sides of the aisle complain of the extraordinary costs to the Park Ridge taxpaying community brought about by PRPD’s two-year-long Senior Center debacle.
I’m not going to go over old ground with you, nor will I comment on any of the facts displayed at this time. Instead, I’ll just display the information obtained from Park Ridge Attorney Billing and Payment records received under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), provide some general remarks at the end and await your comments.
Of course, I intend to give you my take on this matter a little later.
The Point Of The Exercise
My friends, you must decide for yourself if the (2011 & 2012) Wynn-Ryan/Biagi Boards choice, to create a legal fracas from a simple political problem, was the right one financially.
A major financial drain to any extended litigation are Attorney fees. That is where we will focus today.
The Reports
First report document, “Attorney Billing Payment Summary Report PRPD” displays the monthly attorney billing payments from January 2008 through April 2012.
| The detail will show the “Check Date” and “Amount” paid. There are two totals: sub-total by month and total for year. |
To see the complete, full-screen Document, click the box on the lower right side of the document window. To move UP or DOWN use the SLIDER on the right.
Attorney Payment Summary Report
The second report will display yearly totals from 2004 through April 2011.
| The detail will show Year, Amount, Year-To-Year Difference, Percentage of Total and Dollars Per Day. There is also a total for years 2004 through 2011. Pay particular attention to the “Dollar Per Day” amounts. These facts are also presented in graphic form. |
Yearly Totals – 2004-(Jan-Apr) 2012
| Yearly | Dollar | Percent | Dollar | |
| Year | Amount | Difference | Total | Per Day |
| 2004 | 41,546.64 | 9.91% | 113.83 | |
| 2005 | 30,498.80 | (11,047.84) | 7.27% | 83.56 |
| 2006 | 65,227.25 | 34,728.45 | 15.56% | 178.70 |
| 2007 | 52,945.50 | (12,281.75) | 12.63% | 145.06 |
| 2008 | 44,315.50 | (8,630.00) | 10.57% | 121.41 |
| 2009 | 55,707.25 | 11,391.75 | 13.29% | 152.62 |
| 2010 | 40,680.00 | (15,027.25) | 9.70% | 111.45 |
| 2011 | 88,400.00 | 47,720.00 | 21.08% | 242.19 |
| ============ | ||||
| 419,320.94 | ||||
| 2012 | 31,280.00 | 258.51 |
2011 (MWR) and 2012 (RB) are the PRPD/SSI/Senior Center Debacle Years.
Dollars Per Day Chart – 2004-2012
Ask yourselves:
| Is this unhappy situation what you had in mind when you elected these Commissioners? At this moment I understand there are three court cases open, all started by PRPD Board action. When your publicly-elected-officials spend scarce cash on frivolous law suits and petty scheming against some of your older neighbors, instead of keeping their contractual commitments, all for the sake of saving a few bucks, ask yourself; how does that increase my happiness and what does it teach my children? |
I for one will never understand it!
One last thing. The next time some a Commissioner or former Commissioner/Blogger tells you the money is going to maintain the “Senior Center” building at 100 S. Western, show them this:
Today…
Tomorrow…
Today, The Senior Center – tomorrow - Centennial Recreational Center, Park Center, Centennial Park Center or, based on current usage; The Wynn-Ryan/Biagi Cultural Center!
Additional Email Information 09/17/2012
Change Name of 100 S. Western Building
Can we now just agree a name change to the 100 S. Western building was seriously contemplated by PRPD leaders; and that the “Park Ridge Senior Center” signage on the building was not sacrosanct and could have been changed to the “Activity Center” at any time by a Board vote?
Of course, it’s just my opinion.
P.S. Some of my detractors will blame my efforts for causing these needless expenses. I would remind them that Park Ridge Park District Commissioners failed to take into account senior concerns from the outset. Their arrogance and incompetence brought this on. My obligation to my many friends at the Center, and as a former Senior Center Member and concerned citizen, was to inform the public; something local papers and other bloggers miserably failed to do.
Source Documents
To see the complete, full-screen Documents, click the box on the lower right side of the document window. To move UP or DOWN use the SLIDER on the right.
9 comments:
Those name change ideas were when the Board, at that time, was discussing changing the name of the Community Center, but don't let the facts get in the way of you riling everyone up. Have at it.
Anon 9/17 5:08
I am not sure what your point is. Clearly, there was consideration being made not only to change the name of the Community Center but also to change the name of the Senior Center. The facts are getting in your way, it seems.
Ken:
Nice photo of the "Park Ridge Senior Center," which further corroborates the PRRPD's argument that Ms. Kemnitz intended her bequest to go for the maintenance and operation of its Senior Center instead of to some fictional "unincoporated association" that conveniently sprung up only after Grodsky filed her lawsuit.
As for ensuring that the Kemnitz money would actually go to the Senior Center, any court order requiring the PRRPD's use of the Kemnitz money solely for the Senior Center would be enforceable by a finding of contempt, which would permit Judge Flynn to actually incarcerate any contemnors on the Park District staff or Board. I trust you can't seriously think that any Park Disrict Board or Staff member would risk spending a night/two/three in Cook County jail just so that the Kemnitz money could be diverted to other purposes - so what's the point of your comment to that effect?
Finally, your comments about how the PRRPD is wasting taxpayer money in legal fees to chase the $330,000 Kemnitz bequest are making less and less sense, as your photo demonstrates. Unless the PRRPD attorney has been totally wrong and outright misleading in pressing the issue and the litigation to its current point, there's no reason why the PRRPD shouldn't continue to pursue that bequest to the "Park Ridge Senior Center" on behalf of the Park District's "Park Ridge Senior Center."
If you go back and look at Board minutes from those years, you will see that there was a great deal of legal work being conducted by Attorney Hoffman in connection with a host of matters unrelated to the Senior Center, including, but not limited to, the Collective bargaining Agreement with the SEIU, the hiring of two executive directors, at least one personnel matter in which litigation was threatened, and a number of vendor contracts. It's not all about the Senior Center, as you would like to think.
Also, the name change issue had nothing at all to do with the Senior Center. The staff, under Ray O's leadership, was looking at changing the names of some of the buildings to better reflect the building's purpose, thus the Community Center was going to be renamed something that would reflect its focus on family fitness. Since there would no longer be a "Community Center" if the name change occurred, some thought that this name would be more appropriate for the 100 S. Western facility since it does, in fact, cater to the needs of the entire community. Again, you are trying to create some fiendish conspiracy theory out of nothing Ken. Give it up.
Bobby me lad, I sense an air of desperation in your comment.
The name on that building; “Park Ridge Senior Center” is temporary. Name change takes mere minutes.
The Park Ridge Senior Center “Club“ (Mary Wynn-Ryan’s word) are people; without people, there is no “club”, no Center. The “Park Ridge Senior Center” building located at 100 S. Western was their “Clubhouse”. Kemnitz gave money to a “Club” when the “Club” ran their Center, to provide services to “Club Members”, not to maintain a multi-purpose Park District run public building.
As to the 330k, you know and I know that money is fungible. That 330k offsets/displaces 330k that should have gone to that public building’s maintenance and allows the District to stretch its taxed funds, to be used for something else; croquet or badminton maybe?
All legal - no jail time!
Ken:
And here I was thinking that you were the one getting desperate for a settlement before a mediator and/or the judge told the parties that the PRRPD has the most valid claim to the money.
The only "club" here would have been SSI, with whom the PRRPD had a series of contracts related to the operation of the Senior Center. But its legal name was and is "Park Ridge Senior Services, Inc.", not the "Park Ridge Senior Center" - which must be why some folks on your side of the fence decided to make up this bogus "unincorporated association."
Absent an order or a contract requiring the PRRPD to put $330K into the Senior Center building and/or operations, it has no obligation to do so; and, therefore, "fungible" money or not, the order would be enforceable by contempt - and jail time for the contemnor(s).
I realize that would screw up SSI's plan to use that $330K as seed money for its new clubhouse, but that's apparently what Ms. Kemnitz wanted when she left her bequest to the "Park Ridge Senior Center" rather than to SSI. But if you and SSI disagree, that's what the courts are for.
And so what is your point, Ken, about the name change? How does Ray O's idea to change the name impact a thing in this debate?
The latest email from the ED Ray is very important. PRRPD attorney or the additional support attorneys hired to assist with the lawsuit will need to prove the ED expressed similar disinterest in and dismissal of all District programming to prove that the Senior Center was/is a viable PARK DISTRICT program.
Then how will the Board success be measured in retaining such an ED?
This is when Bob would exclaim, "Game, Set and Match."
Anon: September 17, 2012 2:31 PM,
It wasn’t just Ray O’s idea to change the name. It was Ray O’s Park Ridge Park District’s superior’s idea as well. The PRPD Board has oversight responsibility for the actions of the Executive Director. They communicated with each other on regular basis. If Park Board officials were not happy, and if their ideas were not in line with Mr. O’s, they would have made their disapproval known in no uncertain terms. So, don’t blame the “name change” idea on Mr. “O” alone.
As to my point; the building is temporarily known as the Park Ridge Senior Center. Mr. “O” and the Board could have easily changed the name to “Animal House” at any time and the activity mix therein as well, had they been the ones running the Senior Center. Of course, they weren’t running the “Senior Center”; Senior Senate and SSI were.
Of course, building name and utilization change was their goal, and still is!
Look, Senior’s need their own place! Park District needs to make money from that building! If I were PRPD, I would give the Senior’s all the money owed, help the Senior’s pack and send them on their way! I would say “thanks for 30 years” and “write when you can”. Simple, straight forward and in the end, the least expensive decision they could make.
But that’s just me!
Post a Comment