Butterly on Senior Issues

A funny thing happened on the way to writing: I swear by my tattoo – Part Three!

2012-01-27T07:04:00.001-08:00

Where do I start this story?

Of course, at the beginning!

It was Monday, January 23, 2012, 4:04 PM. I was sitting in front of my trusty Acer composing my next blog post: I swear by my tattoo – Part Three, an analysis of the Biagi email and data dump/leak.

Suddenly, I received notification of an incoming email.

It was from Rick Biagi, Commissioner and Vice President of the Park Ridge Park District Board. The last time I received a direct communication from Mr. Biagi, it was his email/data dump/leak, referenced above.

Note: Mr. Biagi’s email arrived an hour or so after I posted: For those who wonder, I do have a life beyond this Blog!, where I announced my intention to continue the “tattoo” series.

Observations & Questions

What I found noteworthy about the email, was not Mr. Biagi’s passionate defense of his wife’s alleged experiences of being denied access to bathroom facilities at the Senior Center, but the people being copied: [Board President] Mary Wynn Ryan, [PRPD Executive Director] Gayle Mountcastle and [Boards Attorney], Tom Hoffman. My […].

Biagi EMail Cc - 01-23-2012

40 Minutes later I received an email addressed to Rick Biagi and myself, from Park Ridge Park District Board President, Ms. Mary Wynn-Ryan. Copies of her email were also sent to: [PRPD Executive Director] Gayle Mountcastle and [Boards Attorney], Tom Hoffman.

Wynn-Ryan EMail Cc - 01-23-2012

The emails, in my opinion, were clearly personal in nature. I think you’ll agree. And the senders, in my opinion, were clearly representing themselves as individuals to me and to one another. No where do they purport to be speaking for the Board.

So why include copies to Attorney Hoffman or to the Executive Director, Mountcastle when the discussion was clearly not OFFICIAL Park Ridge Park District business?

Very odd! Go figure!

So, what to do?

Well, there was only one thing to do. Clearly, Mr. Biagi and Ms. Wynn-Ryan wanted me to publish their emails, otherwise they wouldn’t have sent them to me.

So, I requested permission for publication from each author and as you can see, the email dialogue files titled “Credibility” between Mr. Biagi, Ms. Wynn-Ryan and myself, are attached as PDF/Flash File components to this post.

Observation: Quite frankly, I believe Mr. Biagi and Ms. Wynn-Ryan should have shared this (new?) vital background information with all of us over a year ago. Had they done so, I think their fellow Board Members, their friends, family, supporters, the newspapers and the public at large, including currently offended Senior Center Members, would have viewed their claims as old petty irrelevancies.

And by so doing, Mr. Biagi and Ms. Wynn-Ryan wouldn’t have caused the ensuing Board/Senior Center turmoil.

The Emails

The first file displayed is the request for permission to print their individual acceptance and proviso statements. The remaining two are the original emails, my initial response and their accompanying answers.

Note: To properly read these files, go to the end of the email-string to read the first email. Then, work your way up the file email-by-email.

Biagi - Wynn-Ryan Acceptance Emails

Biagi's Credibility Email - 01-24-2012

Note: Mr. Biagi’s “Credibility” email, referenced to statements appearing on my blog post: Restroom-gate continued – Park Ridge Park District says NO lists of formal complaints of complainers exist!

Wynn-Ryan Credibility Email Response - 01-25-2012

Well there you have it. Make of these emails what you wish! In the mean time, I have some blog site house keeping chores to perform.

Mea culpa!

Obviously, I am at fault for the email-to-email situation that led to this post by not clearly laying out ground rules for those wishing to participate at this site. So, here are the ground rules for future communication with this site as of 01/25/2012.

Emails

I have placed an email address: cfre-il-emsd63@excite.com at the disposal of my readers. I would appreciate all further emails be addressed there. I look once or twice a day. Emails are not a substitute for comments!

Commenting

Comments are made to the blog via the comment box provided. A help page is available should you need it.

Requesting The Publication Of An Open Letter

Readers can request an Open Letter either via a comment that will not be uploaded or as an email addressed to: cfre-il-emsd63@excite.com.

Note: A return email address will be required as coordination on our parts will be necessary.

Leaking Documents Or Other Information

Leaked information or documents (always welcome) can be sent on or attached to an email sent to: cfre-il-emsd63@excite.com.

As always, it’s just my opinion.

For those who wonder, I do have a life beyond this Blog!

2012-01-23T11:54:00.001-08:00

Dear Readers and Commenter’s,

Forgive me for not getting back to your comments more quickly. I took some time away from blogging this past weekend to enjoy life! And you know what? I had so much fun think I’ll do the same thing next weekend.

Today, as you can clearly see, I’m back to the grindstone. This morning was taken up writing my next post: I swear by my tattoo – Part Three, an analysis of the Biagi email.

I expect to have that uploaded quite soon.

Further, as you’ve noticed by now, I recently uploaded a rather extensive comment by Park Ridge’s own Park Ridge Underground. Of course, I intend to respond to those remarks, measure for measure. Problem is; my response will be rather long and I’m not yet sure where my reply should reside; the comment section or as a new post.

Anyway, decision time soon! So stay tuned.

Lastly, there are still comments from recent posts needing my response. I intend to fulfill that obligation while all the rest is going on. The posts involved are: I swear by my tattoo – Part’s One and Two and Is this PRPD’s next Senior Centered Idea?

Lots to do, so I best get on with it!

Is this PRPD’s next “Senior Centered” idea?

2012-01-18T15:08:00.001-08:00

“To help save the economy, the Government will announce next month that the Immigration Department will start deporting seniors (instead of illegals) in order to lower Social Security and Medicare costs.

Older people are easier to catch and will not remember how to get back home.”

Only a joke!

For now, those words are just a joke running on the internet, but by next month, the way things are going south for the seniors, and with Board Leaders actively going after and counting on the disputed $300,000+ Kemnitz bequest, who knows?

When is enough, enough?

It is my understanding a General Board Meeting will be held tomorrow night, January 19th. There, a Board Member, maybe Mr. Biagi himself, is expected to propose adding the $300,000+ Kemnitz bequest to their apparently underfunded budget.

The Kemnitz bequest money are dollars presently in the hands of Senior Services, Inc., the legal and financial arm of the Senior Center Membership. The bequest was made to the Park Ridge Senior Center, then run by SSI and not to the Park Ridge Park District prior to the end of the PRPD/SSI contract and well before the Boards takeover of the Senior Center in January 2011. The PRPD Board and their attorney appear to believe the mere name on the front of the building and the fact that (former employee) Ms. Grodsky was made Trustee, automatically entitles them to the cash. It appears at this time, the Park Ridge Park District Board fully intends to wrench these funds from the Seniors – this year!

To date, as I understand it, the Boards attorney has been in contact with the Kemnitz Trust attorney, and has verbally advised the Trust of the District’s claim of ownership, effectively freezing the dollars until a judgment is rendered. Now I know, what I’m about to say will anger some of my Senior readers, but fair is fair. I might not like the outcome, but in all fairness, if in fact what I understood to have happened actually happened, I must give Mr. Hoffman kudos for a very slick strategic move.

One call – no paper trail – full deniability!

So, the District currently does not yet have, and in my opinion, has no more than a 50/50 chance of obtaining these monies in 2012 – if ever. Therefore, I believe it unwise for the Board to accept the change at this time. An adjustment to the budget can always be made should the District prevail in their efforts.

The View Counter

The view counter has just passed the 10,200 view mark. In my opinion, that’s 10,165 more views than this pathetic, year-long, Board-created and Board-perpetuated saga should have ever generated! Board’s forced retirement of Ms. Grodsky and Mr. Biagi’s recent adventure in document leaking, added almost 4,000 additional views to this site over the last six or so weeks alone.

Never wake up a sleeping dog!

On December 29th, I wrote: Seniors - Stay Young at Heart! That was to be my swan song. A month earlier, I wrote: The end is nigh!

The truth was, the PRPD/SSI/Senior Center episode was over. Biagi, Wynn-Ryan and Steve Hunst got their “clubhouse” back and removed their last strategic obstacle, Ms. Grodsky.

The Issue Was Dead

In short, the issue was dead, the wake was held, the funeral was over and only the grieving remained. But guess what? Mr. Biagi, not content to bask in the glory of his victory, waited until the day of the memorial service (Grodsky’s Going-Away Party) to deliver his coup de grâce by hanging out the District's "dirty little secrets".

It should have been clear by reading the afore mentioned posts, even to the the most intellectually tone-deaf PRPD Board Leader, that I considered their Park Ridge Senior Center fiasco mute. No additional actions on my part were necessary. It was over! Well, not now. And this rudely reawakened dog is not in the mood to play fetch!

Finally

If I might quote, (out of context), from one of the emails I recently received over the last few weeks discussing the Gradsky/Vile/Biagi matter. The statement originated from a local celeb who wishes to remain Anonymous. Quote:

“Finally, on to Mr. Biagi. His actions can only be described as honorably intended.”

Really!

For the record, my anonymous friend did not feel the same way about the actions of Ms. Grodsky or Mr. Vile; that is, my friend saw their actions as “indefensible” or as I take it, their motives and actions were not honorable or lacked good intentions.

But honorable intentions or indefensible actions by what standards?

Of course, we all know about good intentions and we’ve all walked on pavements; haven’t we? So, maybe, based on my anonymous friend’s quote, I should just title my next series of posts: “Well, welcome to their road to hell!”

As always, it’s just my opinion!

I swear by my tattoo – Part Two

2012-01-10T21:32:00.001-08:00

A few of days ago I posted: I swear by my tattoo – Part One. I based that post on emails and supporting documents sent to me by PRPD Board Commissioner Rick Biagi, alleging misconduct, disloyalty and betrayal by a highly and nationally respected award winning professional, PRPD’s own 2009 Employee of the Year, recently retired Senior Center Manager, Teresa Grodsky and fellow Park District Commissioner Dr. Stephen Vile, a highly thought of member of the Park Ridge community.

Every time I think about this story I’m reminded of a 1958 movie with José Ferrer, “I Accuse!” It’s a story of dishonor, alleged disloyalty, personal destruction, and betrayal. All the qualities and attributes associated with this ongoing story. Found this at Turner Classic Network. Enjoy the clip!

I Accuse!

Storyline

From: IMDb.com

The famous "Dreyfus Case" where a Jewish captain in the French Army is falsely accused of treason. He is sentenced to imprisonment on Devil's Island. When the real traitor is found the French Army tries to hide the truth. Written by Steve Crook <steve@brainstorm.co.uk>

More about Capt. Alfred Dreyfus and the Dreyfus Affair.

The Accused

Teresa Grodsky

A recent summary from Pioneer Press:

Park Ridge Senior Center Manager Plans Own Retirement

Additional Grodsky Information

Wave of the Future is Gray

Gradsky - Award - 1994

Illinois Delegation Receives Top Awards at the 1995 Recreation and Park Association (NRPA) Congress

Goin' Back to Nashville

IPO 2008 Conference

Dr. Steven Vile

Dr. Stephen Vile Web Site

PRPD Board Vice President and Fellow Document Leaker

Mr. Rick Biagi

Rick Biagi, Vice President
Park Ridge Park District, Park Board Commissioner
2009-2013

Richard B. Biagi - Employment History

Additional Biagi Information

Knights of Columbus - Maria Council - 4836

“Public Prayer At Work” – Rick Biagi - Video

Note: I will attempt to provide additional internet based background information on others as needed.

As always, it’s just my opinion.

I’m sorry!

2012-01-08T13:22:00.001-08:00

I was having coffee at Micky D’s this morning with a couple of friends. We were discussing the new show playing at the Park Ridge Park District’s Maine Park Leisure Center on West Sibley Ave.; the latest adaptation of: “Park District Follies”, when Frank chastised me for using profanity on this site. He reminded me that in the past I’ve always “kept it clean”.

So here my friends is my apology to Frank and to those of you who were similarly offended.

I, Kenneth Butterly was wrong to use “shit”. I was wrong not to work harder to find an alternative way to express myself other than relying on my meager and pathetic vocabulary. In the future, I will do my utmost not to let that kind of crap, dung, muck, droppings, etc. happen again!

Thank you!

As always, it’s just my opinion.

I swear by my tattoo – Part One

2012-01-05T14:06:00.001-08:00

Just when I thought it was over!

Just when I thought I could finally leave the cold weather for some well deserved sailing in the warm climes of SW Florida; just when I thought it was safe to turn off my computer, I received this email from Park Ridge Board Vice President, Rick Biagi:

Rick Biagi - Email 01-03-2012

Note: I decided to reformat and present the contents of the email in the manner below for easier reading.

Body of Email

“My name is Rick Biagi and I currently serve as the Vice President of the Park Ridge Recreation and Park District, Board of Commissioners. I was elected by the taxpayers of Park Ridge to serve as a Commissioner in 2009. My current term ends in 2013. I am speaking in my capacity as one elected Commissioner and in no way represent or warrant that my statements are those of the entire Board of Commissioners.

For the better part of the last eighteen months, I have witnessed a situation involving the Park Ridge Senior Center spiral completely out of control, for reasons that have totally evaded me up until November of 2011. I have been subjected to personal attacks by members of the Park Ridge Senior Center as has my wife. My character and credibility has been brought into question by these same people, as has the character and credibility of some of my fellow elected Commissioners and certain members of the staff. I have seen false accusations hurled at elected officials and staff of the Park District by members of the Senior Center and the Board of Senior Services, Inc. and I have seen vicious rumors and lies promulgated by these same individuals. In recent days, I have been informed of a vicious verbal assault on a member of the Park District management as well, in which a police report was apparently filed.

In good conscience, I can no longer stand by quietly and allow these rumors, lies and ad hominem attacks continue, without setting the record straight, once and for all.

In the following, I will attempt to address a number of the false accusations, rumors and/or outright lies that were promulgated, with facts that I can personally attest to in my capacity as an elected official. Moreover, I intend to discuss the substance of this communication with the entire Board at the Committee of the Whole Meeting on Thursday, January 5, 2012.

Q. Was Teresa Grodsky fired?
A. No, she tendered her resignation to Executive Director Gayle Mountcastle

Q. Did the Executive Director induce Teresa Grodsky to retire?
A. Yes, to the extent that Ms. Grodsky was made aware of certain issues relating to her performance and was strongly encouraged to retire in light of the alleged transgressions.

Q. Was a formal termination of Ms. Grodsky being considered by the Executive Director?
A. Yes

Q. Why was formal termination of Ms. Grodsky being considered?
A. In the autumn of 2011, it came to the attention of the Executive Director and the District’s Attorney that confidential communications between and among members of the Park Board, its Executive Director and/or its Legal Counsel were being given by Commissioner Steven Vile to Teresa Grodsky and other members of the Senior Services Inc. (SSI) Board. Some of those communications were covered by the attorney-client privilege. All of the communications dealt with internal policy discussions and/or legal strategy as it related to the ongoing operation of the Senior Center and/or the negotiations between the Board, the PRRPD and SSI.

The emails also revealed that Ms. Grodsky, Commissioner Vile and certain members of the SSI Board and at least one of their legal counsel were actively sharing and commenting on the privileged and confidential communications from the Board/PRRPD and/or the Park District attorney. It is my understanding that Ms. Grodsky was questioned in detail by the Executive Director regarding her participation in these actions and that, following the advice of the District's Legal Counsel as well as the counsel for the District’s insurer (PDRMA), the Executive Director would seek Ms. Grodsky’s agreement to retire. At no time during these initial investigations or consultations with Legal Counsel was the Board, en banc, apprised of the situation. It was not until the November Board meeting that the Board was consulted in closed session, with Counsel for the District and PDRMA present. Copies of all relevant emails are being forwarded to the Park Ridge Herald Advocate and the Park Ridge Journal-Topics newspapers.

Q. Prior to October/November 2011, was there any indication that the Executive Director or other staff wanted to terminate Ms. Grodsky for cause or for any other reason.

A. No.

Q. Was Ms. Grodsky given compensation in return for her agreement to retire/resign.

A. It was agreed that she would be able to continue to be employed by the PRRPD until January 1, 2012, in order to achieve certain employment time periods related to pension calculations. When Ms. Grodsky signed the Supplemental Severance Agreement on 1/2/2012, she was entitled to get 4 weeks vacation time and 4 personal days, which will take her through 2/6/12 and from then until 3/30/2012 she will receive $11,065.40 in pay; she has acknowledged that this is more money, compensation and benefits than she would be entitled to receive from the Park District otherwise. As of 1/2/2012, she has been placed on personal leave and will perform no further work for the District.

Q. Was there a concerted effort by the Board to have Ms. Grodsky induced to retire?

A. No. There were several individual Commissioners who did not oppose losing her as an employee. However, the hiring/firing of employees other than the Executive Director is generally not a Board matter. It would, in my opinion, take the action of the entire Board in open session to vote affirmatively to direct the Executive Director to terminate the employment of a particular employee; however, such a direction is not necessary, as the Executive Director has the power and authority to hire, fire, or otherwise negotiate (within certain limits) the termination or departure from employment of any subordinate employee when warranted. During my tenure the Board has never instructed the Executive Director to terminate an employee.

Q. Was the Board briefed in closed session on the circumstances surrounding Ms. Grodsky’s departure?

A. Yes

Q. Did the Board take any action related to Ms. Grodsky following those closed session discussions?

A. No.

Q. At any time did the Board instruct the Executive Director or any other staff member to close the Senior Center?

A. No.

Q. Did the issue of the Betty Kemnitz trust/bequest have anything at all to do with Ms. Grodsky’s departure?

A. No.

Q. Is the Board and/or the PRRPD District involved in any legal action regarding the Betty Kemnitz trust/bequest?

A. The Park District Attorney has been informed by the attorney for the trustee of the Kemnitz Trust that he will be filing such a lawsuit imminently for the purpose of having a court determination made as to the rightful recipient of the approximately $335,000 bequest to the Senior Center. It is anticipated that the Illinois Attorney General's office will be a party to the lawsuit, as overseer of charitable foundations and the like.

Q. Did Commissioner Vile have the authority to share attorney-client privileged documents with the SSI Board and/or Ms. Grodsky?

A. No, and by doing so, Commissioner Vile not only arguably waived the privilege, without authorization, belonging to the Board and the Park District but he also waived the privilege belonging to 38,000 taxpayers.

Q. Is the Park District and the Board committed to maintaining vibrant programming and socializing activities for seniors at 100 S. Western?

A. Yes.

Rick Biagi

Neal & McDevitt, LLC
Intellectual Property and Marketing Attorneys
1776 Ash Street
Northfield, Illinois 60093
Direct: 847.881.2455
Main: 847.441.9100
Fax: 847.441.0911
E-Mail: rbiagi@nealmcdevitt.com
Web: www.nealmcdevitt.com

This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please delete it from your system and notify the sender identified above by e-mail.

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

Thank You.”

As you can see, the only thing missing from Board Vice President Biagi’s email is: It’s all true – I swear by my tattoo!

Mr. Biagi thought it important to support his assertion of betrayal with this data dump.

Godsky.vile.SSI Email Communications

Note: I took a quick review of the file and noticed that documents I would have expected to see were missing. No problem though, that’s what the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) is for.

A couple of observations if you will:

It (Battle for Senior Center) was over!
Mr. Biagi and Ms. Wynn-Ryan got their “clubhouse” back.
Ms. Grodsky was removed.
The Senior Center has been under complete control of the Park District and its Board since January 2011.
Seniors, although dejected and unhappy, were coming to grips with the new situation.
Things were calming down.

It was over and now it’s not!

Apparently, these “successes” were not enough to overcome Mr. Biagi’s upset.

And by the way, in my opinion, anyone believing that the creation of these emails were a “loose canon” exercise by a overly distraught attorney and seasoned Park District Board VP, is kidding themselves. I talked to a couple of people today who know Mr. Biagi. None of them considered him a “loose canon”.

In the end, Mr. Biagi told us what we needed to know about this story or at least why the data was exposed at this time:

“Q. Is the Board and/or the PRRPD District involved in any legal action regarding the Betty Kemnitz trust/bequest?

A. The Park District Attorney has been informed by the attorney for the trustee of the Kemnitz Trust that he will be filing such a lawsuit imminently for the purpose of having a court determination made as to the rightful recipient of the approximately $335,000 bequest to the Senior Center. It is anticipated that the Illinois Attorney General's office will be a party to the lawsuit, as overseer of charitable foundations and the like.”

Where do things go from here?

Over the next few weeks we will be reviewing these documents and putting them in context. The story of the PRPD Senior Center is about money and power. It’s about people in power and those who are not. And it is the human side of the story that interests me and that’s where I hope to focus.

And just so I might clear up a couple questions up front, and so that I might state my bias precisely, let me restate in public for the umpteenth time, my position in this matter.

I do not care if there is a Park Ridge Senior Center.
I do not care if there is a contract.
I do not care if there is a Park Ridge Park District for that matter.
I do however, care how tax-paying citizens (senior or not), are treated by their elected officials. And Senior Center members are tax-paying Senior Citizens who have been in my opinion, treated miserably in this affair.

In the end, in spite of the public diversion that will take place because of the document dump presented by Mr. Biagi, we will all quickly come to the conclusion that it’s all about the old Seniors Center regime. First, the reacquisition of the “clubhouse” and second, relieving the regime of it’s trust money.

So I guess I’m not going sailing for a while!

Gee, thanks Rick!

As always, it’s just my opinion.

Seniors - Stay Young at Heart!

2011-12-29T13:11:00.001-08:00

Fairy tales can come true – it can happen to you – if you’re young at heart…

I first heard that opening refrain some 50 plus years ago. If you’ve forgotten the song take a moment to reacquaint yourself with its valuable lyrics.

Moving toward maturity…

Unfortunately for me, it was at the time, just another song among dozens of other songs my family would sing at holiday-family parties. Ah, misspent youth!

Over the years however, as I continued to lose family and friends, the lyrics took on a deeper meaning and importance to me.

Take a moment to listen once again.

Bad Strategy – Poor Leadership

It’s been a difficult year for members of PRPD’s Senior Center; a year of upset and loss. This sorry story, with its resultant turmoil and angst could have been easily avoided had PRPD management, including recent and current Board Leaders just taken this advice…

Life’s train long ago left the station.

So, now that the battle is over it’s time to sit back and see what happens. It’s time to experience the new “Center” and time to reevaluate your relationship with the Park Ridge Park District. Some of you, like me, have already reevaluated and will move on. Some of you have already changed your Wills to reflect your change of heart and others are doing the same as I write this post.

Yes, life’s train has left the station but you my friends, are not yet at your final destination. And that is something to be joyous about, don’t you think?

So, it’s time to focus once again on what’s truly important.

May you have a Young at Heart New Year!

As always, it’s just my opinion!

Watchdog’s Trizna calls this kettle black!

2011-12-20T14:11:00.001-08:00

When one sits on a toilet, one should not be surprised when shit happens. Of course, that assumes one has access to the toilet.

Bob Trizna, Park Ridge’s own “Watchdog” stated the obvious the other day when he wrote that this blog site was a “vehicle” used by Senior Center members in their “propaganda campaign” against the Park Ridge Park District Board by members of the Senior Center.

It’s too bad he didn’t also tell his readers that he’s been doing the exact same thing on behalf of the Park Ridge Park District Board leadership; a group he’s had close ties to since his days as a former PRPD Board Member.

Yes, it’s true, I’ve given Park Ridge Senior Center members a forum to express their thoughts on what is for them a vital issue. I too have expressed my opinions on the subject when I thought my opinion would add some clarity to the discussion. I’m sorry Mr. Trizna and some of his friends on the PRPD Board have a problem with the choices I’ve made or the words and opinions I’ve expressed. I’m sorry if they’ve found themselves feeling like Frosty.

Look folks, the Park Ridge Park District Board created this mess when it refused to heed the advice of its former Executive Director, Ray Ochromowicz and Board Attorney, Tom Hoffman to enter into a two-year final agreement with the Seniors.

The Board leaders exacerbated the problem by dealing with those same seniors as if they had been coroneted instead of inaugurated!

One more thought!

In case Bob is reading this. The post you commented on passed the 1,000 view mark today. See the guy with the happy face? That’s not me - yet!

Peace, Joy and Merry Christmas!

Of course, it’s just my opinion.

The end is nigh!

2011-11-29T14:38:00.001-08:00

Yesterday’s resignation by long-time Park Ridge Senior Center Manager, Teresa Grodsky marks the beginning of the end for Park Ridge’s Senior Center. Ms. Grodgky was both the glue that held the membership together and the engine that made the center run.

I first met Teresa Grodsky the day I tendered my membership dues. She welcomed me to the center, thanked me for the cash and gave me a cooks-tour of the facility. Whenever I walked in to the building, I always received a smile and a wave. Over time, I learned from long-time members that Teresa was the reason the Center functioned so well. I also learned that she was their shepherd (with all that that implies) leading her flock from activity to activity.

Over the last few months, I found myself wondering how long she would last. It was clear to me over a year ago that Teresa Grodsky would have to go, and that the Board would have to push her out if they were to achieve what I believed to be their end; the complete elimination and replacement of the old Senior Center regime.

Well, now they’ve gone and done it!

Of course, the Board can deny their roll in the matter as I’m sure they will, and say that Teresa left the job and friends she loved for over 30 years, because she wanted to.

Unfortunately for this Board, those of us on the ground, those of us who spoke and worked with Teresa Grodsky, those of us who only the other day were discussing next years schedule, know differently!

So, what’s next for this Senior Center?

Who knows?

All I know is that the glue and motor and the heart are gone.

And I for one, will never renew my membership!

The real tragedy, of course, rests on the shoulders of the other Senior Center Members. Many of them have truly lost their leader and friend. As individuals, each will have to determine their future relationship with the Park District.

To The Park Ridge Park District Board!

It’s one thing to have “Park Ridge Senior Center” plastered on the front of the building.

It’s something else all together to have a Senior Center.

Of course, it’s only my opinion.

Board Aborts Its 6-month-Old “Resolution”

2011-10-05T12:45:00.001-07:00

On September 15, 2011, Park Ridge Park District Commissioners reneged on their 6-month-old “Resolution”. This document was designed to free the Board from damaging public opinion, negative public comments by Senior Center members, and their own internal struggle. The “Resolution” was an attempt to put an end to the 30-year contractual relationship between the Park District and Senior Services, Inc. Senior Services Inc. is a nonprofit 501(c)3 that represented Senior Center member’s.

When I heard this news I didn’t know whether to laugh or cry. This easily solved and sorry saga had just morphed from being a cheap interpretation of…

into

Before we know it, they’ll stop relying on their attorney and local press and lead out this new pitch man to explain their actions.

Note: Click purple words or phrases for further information.

So what happened?

The Seniors were assured prior to the last general election that the “Resolution” was the document controlling senior centered activities. Seniors were assured nothing would change and no contract or agreement was required to govern the Boards relationship with the Seniors.

The Boards “Resolution” Park Ridge voters were told, was something all Park Ridge Seniors could trust and believe in!

So, if the “Resolution” was something to trust and believe in then; as repeatedly and vigorously expressed by current Board officers; namely President Mary Wynn-Ryan, Vice President, Dick Biagi, Board Secretary, Richard Brandt and majority members of the Board prior to the last election, why was it trashed for a worthless letter?

Gee, so much for the trust and mutual respect promoted by prior Boards!

Obviously, the the words of high ranking PRPD Board Officials and their “Resolution”, was not worth the webpage space, paper or gigantic “Resolution” poster it was printed on. The Board demanded the poster’s installation just inside the door at the Center. Some Seniors thought it a daily reminder to Senior’s of the Boards power. Others thought it a big talisman designed to ward off evil sprits. Worthless either way!

Question is, why would this Board trash their “Resolution”?

I believe the “Resolution” was trashed because it was never THEIR resolution to begin with!

Based on Ms. Wynn-Ryan’s account, the unsolicited “Resolution” was apparently created over a weekend and delivered to the Board just prior to its unannounced introduction and Board approval on February 17, 2011, by Board’s Attorney. This story was reaffirmed by: Mr. Biagi and Mr. Brandt, at the same Park Ridge Library pre-election meeting.

So, what is the public to believe and trust now?

The public was led to believe and trust in a sham “Resolution”, now, just an old fashion crock of dung as it were. They were led to believe the hyperbole surrounding Ms. Wynn-Ryan and Mr. Biagi’s undocumented story and assertion that “the public” was afraid of going into the Senior Center and that parents and children were rudely denied use of the Senior Center’s restrooms by Senior Center members. Apparently, a false assertion now debunked!

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!

Now, the public is being asked to believe that this new document, (one in a string of attorney-to-attorney letters), to be the official document underlying a NEW binding agreement.

Oh spare me!

Aborted - Attorney Created – Unsolicited – Pre-Election Resolution

That Morphed Into the “Current Letter of Agreement”.

Thomas G. Hoffman Letter - 09-11-2011

If one were to read Jennifer Johnson’s 09/27/2011 article describing this event as only she can, one would get only the Boards side of the story. Apparently, this scribe neglected to reveal offers made at the meeting by Senior Center representatives to report their side of the controversy. Not to worry however, many here in Maine Township have been reading Ms. Johnsons adventures in local journalism for several years and have learned to expect nothing more.

PRA - Jennifer Johnson Article - 09-22-2011

So you think you’re confused?

Well, the Seniors are now more confused than ever and are tired of being sniffed by a fox. It’s time for the Board to get its nose out of Senior tush and quit playing games. This Boards self-imposed problem will not go away, no matter how foxy the maneuver, such as the one perpetrated last month.

Surprise! You’ve just been Punked by the Board.

There is no “pact”, there is no agreement. And no, the “letter” does not just supersede the pending “cooperative guideline” agreement, a Board-known nonstarter. More over, it supersedes the February 17, 2011 Board passed “Resolution”, a document the Board Attorney apparently did not wish to reference when interviewed, nor was it referenced in the letter in question.

Senior's Response Letter 09.14.11

Just a couple notes.

Note #1:

Just to be clear, based on Park Ridge Park Board Minutes, the board meeting to implement the “Cooperative Guideline” was canceled, and therefore, NO Board Passed “Cooperative Guidelines” exist.

Note #2:

For an agreement to happen, both sides (Park Ridge Park District and Park Ridge Senior Senate) must first formally agree.

Talking points for possible agreement as discussed in on-going attorney communication are not an agreement made.

Note #3:

The Board was aware that “the letter” written by Boards Attorney and used as the basis for the so-called “agreement”, had already been formally rejected by the Senior’s attorney prior to the Board meeting vote. Why these public servant's would have the audacity to initiate this apparent scam is beyond me.

Of course, unless you live in a world of little dictators or you’re a befuddled fox!

So, what really is behind that so called agreement letter and how does it fit into this mess? That’s still what many of us in the public are trying to figure out.

One More Question

The board has and continues to speak with forked tongue. They repeatedly cry poor, when in fact, they have recently been discussing a possible acquisition of additional land, behind closed doors.

Land Acquisition

Just thought I’d ask!

As always, it’s just my opinion.

Restroom-gate continued – Park Ridge Park District says NO lists of formal complaints of complainers exist!

2011-09-15T14:28:00.001-07:00

Just when you thought the dung surrounding Restroom-gate couldn’t get any deeper or stink any worse, we find out this.

Note: Read email-string from bottom to top.

Email - FOIA 110909-001

Gee Ms. Wynn-Ryan! Gee Mr. Biagi! Where’s the proof to your story? Don’t even tell us it was a family member, as someone near the Board recently suggested. Have you no shame?

My research went back as far as 01/01/2005.

Surely, an issue this important, and one used repeatedly as a reason for your current actions, would have generated one official report or the name of one citizen offended!

You two fools would have been better off saying nothing!

Is it any wonder why many Senior Center members have difficulty believing anything the two of you have to say?

It’s time for this Board to remove these two leaders from their leadership positions. In fact, they should be drummed out of the corps for fabricating stories!

Of course, it’s just my opinion!

Cooperative Guidelines – My Turn!

2011-08-27T06:48:00.001-07:00

Park Ridge Park District (PRPD) has continued to drag this sad episode out for over 300 days, that’s 300+ missed opportunities since September, 2010 to make things right, to change:

The Senior Center issue has gone from a minor political problem to a full-blown disaster.

When I started writing about the subject last Fall, I never in my wildest dreams thought I would be writing about it still. Yet here we are, no closer to a reasonable solution.

Last January was the watershed month. The Seniors had been led to believe there was a deal, a renewal of their 30-year contract. The Board twice placed the issue on the agenda only to table it until a later date. Of course, that date never came. Instead, the Board issued a “Resolution”, an unsolicited document written by Boards Attorney, a product designed to appease Senior Center Members and remove forever, the need for discussion and an UP or DOWN vote of the “dreaded” contract proposal. Of course, it didn’t hurt to have the issue off the table as some Board Members were running for reelection.

The “Resolution”, Seniors were told by Board Members Wynn-Ryan and Biagi prior to the election, guaranteed continued Senior centered programs. Ms. Wynn-Ryan even went so far as to state the following in an email to then Senior Senate President Barb Ingolia:

"You know my position on senior programming and services -- we need more, and that's the Park District's mandate and promise, which does NOT depend on any deal with the fundraising foundation. (In fact, I'd like to have Senior Senate play a bigger role. But that's just me.)”

Later, she went on to say here on this blog site:

“I guess I didn't say it often or loudly enough: Park Ridge residents who are seniors can continue to depend on a variety of programs, events and activities from the Park District because that's an important part of why there even is a RECREATION and Park District…” and “…No matter who wins or loses in the upcoming election, the Park District WILL be providing programming for seniors.”

The Resolution

A “Resolution” is not a contract.

After reading the document for the umpteenth time, I still fail to see a total and binding commitment to future senior centered activities by PRPD.

So how did some Seniors see the “Resolution”? I think that can be summed up this way:

And then!

“Cooperative Guidelines for Park Ridge Recreation and Park District & Park Ridge Senior Services, Inc.” supersedes “Resolution”.

What a stunner!

After weeks of silence following a breakdown in negotiations, the Board issued, without first discussing its content and receiving voted approval for issuance at an open meeting, a document clearly designed to supersede the February 17, 2011 Board “Resolution” and to set the stage for future changes in Senior Center member relations.

Cooperative Guidelines – Version 1.0 (Undated)

The feeling I had when first reading that document can best be seen in the clip below:

The tone of that document clearly suggested who would dictate what and who would hold power over whom.

Yes, part of that clip is clearly over the top but you get the point at the emotional level.

Seniors were stunned, confused, rejected and angry!

So what kind of politically blind and inept Board did Park Ridge citizens elect that they could have so easily turned a simple political solution into a long drawn-out fiasco?

A Simple solution not taken.

To solve this problem, all the Commissioners had to do in January 2011 was:

renew the contract for one-year with the proviso that no additional contracts would be forthcoming
add two adjustments or amendments:
- open the building up for additional non-senior activities after 5PM
- increase the Seniors share of the Center’s operating cost by 10% or more
create a committee of seven, made up of three Senior Center or SSI members or combination and three Commissioners or Park District employees or combination plus an outside mediator, their task, reorganizing the Center and operating relationships for future years.

Job done! Case closed! No muss, no fuss, no upset, no bad publicity!

The Board has just issued “Cooperative Guidelines, Version 2.0” and now, Senior Center Members have gotten an attorney of their own!

The Board created this problem.
The Board continues to perpetuate this problem.
Only the Board can end it!

Press here for: this Senior writers free advice! PRPD, should consider that advice an “Ace” they can keep!

New leadership at the top.

Finally, maybe it’s time for President Wynn-Ryan to remove herself from the board and for the Board to find new leaders who can implement and live up to the spirit of their independently created “Resolution”.

In the mean time, might I suggest Jerry Lewis?

Why Jerry?

Jerry’s available after Labor Day.
He works damn hard.
He’s focused year after year.
He brings people together.
He succeeds.
Jerry’s a professional clown.
He has a sense of humor.
He knows how to bring BIG money to the organization.
France’s Senior’s still love him!

As always, just my opinion!

Restroom-gate - Park Ridge Park District President acknowledges long-time crapper access problem…

2011-08-03T09:23:00.001-07:00

or she doth skipth to the loo!

Rarely does one get a opportunity to see such estrogen or testosterone fueled fury as was apparently displayed at the July 21,2011 Park District Board meeting. Faced with a crowd of angry Senior Center members, Ms. Wynn Ryan and Mr. Biagi apparently revealed what some PRPD observers already suspected, the underlying reason for PRPD’s unprecedented takeover of it’s former Senior Center “Clubhouse”, was not money, not expanded access for additional PRPD programming, but a perceived need for unfettered public access to the buildings crappers!

Surely you say, you’re full of it! But what else could it be?

First the public was told the Park District needed more money. When the Seniors relented in their contract proposal to more money, the reason turned to open access for more Park District revenue generating activities. When Seniors relented in their contract proposal to sharing the facility after normal hours, the reason for taking back their “Clubhouse” was no longer discussed; at least until now.

Apparently someone complained to a Board member of having been turned back from using one of the Senior Center potties. I’m not kidding folks, as you’ll see for yourself in a moment.

The first time I heard this complaint was from Commissioner Biagi at the pre-election meeting held at the Park Ridge Public Library. Mr. Biagi was so animated when he blurted out this new senior-center-deal-breaker, one would have thought his knowledge of the incident to be first hand. Of course, had it been, I’m sure he would have stated so that night.

So who did it? Was it a Senior? Was it a PRPD employee? No one seems to know who the perp was. No matter, then Senior Senate President, Ms. Barbara Ingolia, apologized for the apparent indiscretion; said she would look into it and would instruct Members to display proper etiquette when dealing with these delicate matters.

At the time, I thought the whole thing too funny, considering the significance of the Senior Center issue. So, I thought nothing else of the “incident” until reading an article in the paper about last months General Board Meeting brouhaha. Apparently Ms. Wynn Ryan chose that meeting to raise that messy little stinker up again.

Now, read this comment from on Bob Trizna’s Watchdog website discussing the subject of who’s running the Senior Center. An anonymous commenter wrote the following:

“…Have you ever tried to use the bathroom at the senior center? If you have kids and want to take them to the bathroom at the senior center while playing at the ballpark, or playground, they will refuse you entrance. I know several families that have not been allowed to use the bathroom at the senior center…”.

So now we know the Boards dirty little secret. They’ve been using the Senior Center issue as a smoke-screen to cover up the Park District’s lack-of-loos and their apparent failure to provide adequate and strategically placed portable toilet facilities, thus requiring mommies with children to go begging. Who-would-a-thunk-it?

Now, I’m all for public access to bathrooms. But I have three questions:

Have any of you gone into the “publicly accessed” bathrooms at McDonalds on Oakton and Rand just after a Saturday morning Park Ridge baseball or soccer game? It ain’t pretty!
Further, there’s a school just to the south of the Center, park and pool. Does that school allow unfettered public access to taxpayer-paid school bathrooms while school is in session? I don’t think so.
Isn’t there a public access bathroom directly behind the Senior Center?

Of course, it’s only my opinion!

Cooperative Guidelines – Without Comment…. Updated 07/21/2011

2011-07-15T14:41:00.001-07:00

This is my follow-up post to Finally, PRPD Board Offers Its Own - Senior Centered Proposal. Unlike prior postings, I have chosen to refrain from providing extensive comments of my own at this time. Instead, I thought I would just display the Board’s Resolution, a document referred to in the proposal, a copy of the original Cooperative Guidelines as presented to the Seniors for their signing, followed by a more easily read point-by-point Cooperative Guidelines Report by Line, for your consideration.

I would appreciate you’re reading this post in its entirety before commenting, should you so choose.

Background

The Park Ridge Recreation and Park District and Senior Services, Inc. (the Senior Center membership’s representative) have been partnering to support Senior Citizen activities at the Park Ridge Senior Center for thirty (30) years. These partnership arrangements have been codified in the form of multi-year contracts. The last iteration of that contract having expired on December 31, 2010.

The intent of this post is to publically present in context, the Board’s new cooperative agreement; a unilateral list of working rules presented to Senior Services, Inc. (SSI), an independent 501 c3 organization, without public notice or fanfare, a couple weeks ago.

The document included a demand for SSI’s acceptance by 07/21/2011.

Bear in mind that this manifesto was delivered to SSI prior to its public presentation, vote and approval by the Park Ridge Park District Board, which by the way, is scheduled to happen tonight.

Apparently, the implementation of the new “Guidelines”, in conjunction with the District’s previously published “Resolution”, is the Boards attempt to restructure by fiat , the prior working PRPD/SSI/Senior Center relationship.

I’ve written extensively about this tragedy at various times over the last several months. I call it a tragedy because this 200+ day-old political, strategic and angst-creating debacle did not have to happen. I gave the Board a working solution as early as 09/25/2010.

Now, the observations presented at Butterly on Senior Issues are just my opinion. My “Photoshopped” version of events, so-to-speak. At the same time, the Board has presented to the public it's “Photoshopped” version of events. Apparently, the public, including many seniors, are still feeling contextually deprived when it comes to this story. So I thought I would add a bit more background material to help bring the entire picture info fuller focus.

Thirty Years of Close and Mutually Beneficial Cooperation

The Rat-Hole

The Board would like the public to believe that the building currently being used as the Park Ridge Senior Center, was always the way we see it now; it’s current size; a facility that is clean, organized, equipped, well led, fully functioning, and of course, completely paid for by our taxed dollars.

Of course, PRPD Commissioners would also like the public to believe that the Seniors currently rely on and have always relied on, the largess of PRPD. As you will see, nothing could be further from the truth.

When the Seniors first took over the then “Storage Facility” it was described by one volunteer, as a “rat-hole”; dirty, cluttered, unkempt. As I understand it, there actually were rat droppings. The Seniors, (many of them having since passed away), spent hundreds of elder-hours cleaning and prepping the building prior to opening day.

A lot of Senior investment in time and money has happened since then.

Major Additions

Initial addition to the building (1980’s)	$350,000
Stage addition (1999)	$300,000

On-going Remodeling and Equipment

Library (furniture, shelves, carpet)

Lobby furniture and display cases

Lobby and hallway wallpapering

Valances in the card room

Painting and redecorating washroom

Updating of sound system

Purchased pool tables

Purchased ceramic kiln

Purchased kitchen supplies and small appliances

Purchased pianos (baby grand and 2 digital pianos)

Storeroom addition

Purchased air conditioning of building

Converted doors into emergency doors

Made washrooms handicap accessible

Purchased all tables and chairs in the drop in area

Purchased game tables

Purchased computer club projector

Purchased banquet tables

Purchased two big screen televisions

Paid for original remodeling of the kitchen (1990)

Added Cash Payments made by SSI to Park Ridge Park District

2006	$112,000
2007	$103,000
2008	$120,000
2009	$125,000
2010	$104,000

More than Money

The Park Ridge Senior Center is not money or a building. It’s people. There would be no Park Ridge Senior Center, or at least the vibrant one we still have today, without its core; its long-time active members. Those people are the driving force behind the Center; not the employees and certainly not the Board. They are unhappy! They are feeling abused and disrespected by these Board Members.

Putting a face to these documents

As you read the text of the next three documents, I want you to put faces to their authors.

Click on a name to send email to your elected representative. Yellow = Officers


Ms. Wynn- Ryan	Mr. Biagi	Mr. Thillens	Mr. Vile

Mr. Brandt	Mr. O’Brien	Mr. Hunst

February 17, 2011 Resolution

Cooperative Guidelines

Cooperative Guidelines Report by Line

Note: AR = (A)uthority and/or (R)esponsibility.

Item	Page	Expectations	Who	Obligation	AR

	1	WHEREAS, the Board of Park Commissioners of the Park Ridge Recreation and Park District ("District") adopted Resolution No. 11-1 on February 17, 2011 (the "Resolution"), and
	1	WHEREAS, the District's Executive Director, Gayle Mountcastle, has reviewed the matters pertaining to the operation of the Park Ridge Senior Center and the relationship between the District and Park Ridge Senior Services, Inc. and recommended to the Park Board that such relationship going forward (if it is to continue) should continue on the basis of the following Cooperative Guidelines, with which the Park Board has concurred, with the mutual expectation that SSI and the District will proceed to work together, if at all, in good faith, with the expectation of mutual reliance on the points hereinafter set forth:
	1	SSI is a 501-C3 corporation that provided the Park Ridge Senior Center with financial and advisory support. SSI has an eleven member Board of Directors that meets six times per year at the Senior Center.
	1	The mutual expectations of the parties are set forth below:
1	1	Serve as advocates for Park Ridge Seniors for the purpose of further providing healthy living opportunities during the aging process.	SSI	Advocate	R
2	1	Conduct fundraising, accept donations, and encourage bequests to the District's use in supporting the operation of senior programs.	SSI	Marketing	R
3	1	Invest donations, fundraising dollars and bequests in a manner to obtain the best income yield consistent with due regard for the conservation of principal.	SSI	Finance	R
4	1	Provide input into applications for financial support submitted to obtain additional funding.	SSI	Finance	R
5	1	Accept financial support from donors, both individual and/or organizational.	SSI	Fundraise	R
6	1	Approve expenditures of SSI funds when indicated to be used for the purchase of equipment and supplies for senior center programs.	SSI	Pay Bills	R
7	1	Turn over to the District all monies received by SSI during each calendar quarter from all sources (including but not limited to proceeds of donations, fundraising, and grants) not later than 30 days after the end of each quarter, but not in excess of $15,000 per quarter; provided, however, that in addition to the forgoing required payments any monies received by SSI in a calendar quarter shall be paid by SSI to the District at the end of the next succeeding quarter, if any, during which monies received by SSI were less than $15,000, to the extent necessary to result in the District being paid $15,000 or as much there of as possible for each succeeding quarter, and further provided that any monies received by SSI in a calendar year in excess of the sum of $60,000 shall be paid by SSI to the District within 30 days after the end of such year. All monies thus paid to the District shall be used solely to defray the expense of programs and operations for seniors.	SSI	Fundraise	R
8	1	Notify the District within 30 days of receipt of any bequests received.	SSI	Fundraise	R
9	2	Plan and implement at least one annual fundraising event.	SSI	Fundraise	R
10	2	Offer fundraising events which will produce worthwhile net revenue, review proposed events with District staff prior to committing to the event for the purpose of determining if it is likely such event(s) will achieve such goal, or otherwise to not offer such event(s).	SSI	Fundraise	R
11	2	Insure against loss, theft, and other perils to its own personal property which as of June 2011, consists of the items listed below and any other additional personal property which SSI acquires or owns in the future, to be added to this list on an annual basis: Baby Grand Piano, Ceramic Kiln, Four (4) Pool Tables, Two (2) Big Screen TV Sets, All Lobby Furniture and Display Cases, All Tables (7 card tables, 12 banquet tables) and chairs (50) in the "Drop-In" Area at the center, Game (4) Tables, All Equipment in the Kitchen other than the Major Appliances, Projector used for the Computer Club, Two (2) Digital Pianos, Banquet Tables.	SSI	Insure	R
12	2	Prepare periodic financial reports showing only its own district revenues and expenses [not those provided by or expended by the District] such that same are timely available for SSI Board meetings and usable for the annual audit.	SSI	Book-Keeping	R
13	2	Prepare and provide a year-end income and expense statement to the District within 30 days after the end of each calendar year of its operation.	SSI	Book-Keeping	R
14	2	Prepare, timely file and provide to the District copies of all required State and Federal governmental reports and timely pay all amounts due in connection therewith.	SSI	Book-Keeping	R
15	2	Promptly inform the District of any revocation of its tax-exempt status and of any involuntary dissolution of its corporate existence.	SSI	Humble-Themselves	R
16	2	Make no claim at any time against the District, its officials, commissioners, agents, employees, successors and/or assigns for reimbursement or repayment to SSI of any unamortized capital improvements cost such as might arguably otherwise be required had any previous Agreement between SSI and the District been canceled by the District prior to its expiration.	SSI	Give Up Rights	R
17	2	Provide District with a certified copy of a resolution, in form reasonably acceptable to the District, duly adopted by the SSI Board of Directors not later than July 21, 2011, indicating its approval and acceptance of these Cooperative Guidelines.	SSI	Ultimatum-Deadline	R
18	3	Provide leisure, recreational and social opportunities for seniors at 100 S. Western Avenue, Park Ridge, Illinois or at any other location(s) which the District deems appropriate to offer and/or facilitate such senior opportunities.	PD	Facilities	RA
19	3	Provide District employees to carry out senior programming at the above location or at any other location(s) which the District deems appropriate to offer and/or facilitate such senior programming.	PD	Employee-Services	RA
20	3	Have sole responsibility for the hiring, evaluation, and discipline of such employees in accordance with the District's Personnel Policy Manual and to the extent applicable, the District's Collective Bargaining Agreement.	PD	Employee-Services	RA
21	3	Offer a wide variety of senior programs and evaluate continuously to assure the success of such programs.	PD	Programs	RA
22	3	Allow all seniors in Park Ridge the opportunity to register and participate in programs.	PD	Programs	RA
23	3	Have the sole responsibility for setting and collecting membership dues and fees and charges for all activities.	PD	Book-Keeping	RA
24	3	Permit others use of the building at such times and on such days as the District determines will not frustrate the purpose of these Guidelines.	PD	Programs	RA
25	3	Permit SSI to remove its personal property from the building, but not fixtures or capital improvements, upon request.	PD	Perceived Generosity	A
26	3	Make any improvements or alterations in, to or upon the building which District may deem necessary or desirable, from time to time.	PD	Facility-Mgmt.	RA
27	3	Periodically require those District employees who serve as staff at the building, with approval from the Superintendent of Recreation, to submit a list of requested equipment and supplies for consideration for funding from SSI.	PD	Facility-Mgmt.	RA
28	3	Provide a Park Commissioner to serve as a liaison to SSI, to be appointed by the President of the Park Board from time to time.	PD	Board-Ambassador	A
29	3	Provide SSI with a certified copy of a resolution duly adopted by the Park Board not later than 2011, indicating its approval and acceptance of these Cooperative Guidelines.	PD	Deadline	RA

Finally, PRPD Board Offers Its Own - Senior Centered Proposal.

2011-06-21T12:32:00.001-07:00

For the last few weeks I’ve been patiently going about my business; silently waiting for the other shoe to drop on Park Ridge’s Senior Center Members, including their long time negotiating representatives, Park Ridge Senior Services, Inc. (SSI), a 501-C3. In the mean time, I have been right here, content to watch a magnificent bit of banter between Park Ridge Senior Center Senator, Ms. Helen Roppel and Park Ridge PublicWatchdog’s own Robert Trizna.

Leadership - Wynn-Ryan/Biagi/Brandt Style!

Well, the other shoe has finally dropped – in the form of a manifesto titled: “Cooperative Guidelines for Park Ridge Recreation and Park District & Park Ridge Senior Services, Inc.” This documents unreasonable demands, in my opinion, can only be interoperated one way:

“If you stay in my house – you live by my rules!”.

The on-going Park Board/Senior Center farce has come down to this new – absurd document. Friends, I would love to display this new information today. However, I’m not yet at liberty to publically display these “Guidelines”, having agreed to withhold the documents release until the Seniors have had an opportunity to read the manifesto for themselves.

So who’s to blame for this mess?

If you ask the Wynn-Ryan/Biagi/Brandt led Board, they’ll probably blame it all on those pesky Seniors. If you ask the Senior Center leaders, they’ll blame it on PRPD’s non-communicative intransigent Board of Commissioners.

Well, I say we need to place blame where it really belongs!

Stay tuned!

Bin Laden Found – Wynn-Ryan Still Missing! – Updated 05/09/2011

2011-05-05T05:58:00.001-07:00

She’s been found!

Anonymous said…

Mary Wynn Ryan showed up at the Senior Center this afternoon (Friday May 6) with Commisioner Dick Brandt.It appeared they were inspecting the whole bulding. Be interesting to hear her "report" at the next board meeting. Also why she never responded to an invitation to have lunch at the Center ( on May 9 ) and speak with some of the members.

May 6, 2011 2:29 PM

Original Post starts here!

Of course, we were all overjoyed to see-read-hear the news that Osama bin Laden had been found and not not at all saddened by his dispatch.

Now that he’s gone, I suspect, the intelligence community might have an extra minute or two available now to find Ms. Winn-Ryan, Mr. O’Brian, Mr. Biagi and Mr. Herman.

20 Days have elapsed since I made the offer to these fine Commissioners to drop in at the Senior Center. Still not one email to confirm a sighting.

It’s time to change this:

to:

Anyone out there know Mr. Panetta’s phone number?

Open Letter from Ms. Helen Roppel….

2011-04-28T19:40:00.001-07:00

Member - Park Ridge Senior Center Senate

Over the past 30 years, the Senior Center and the Park Board have had an agreement with respect to the relationship between the two entities, thereby setting the framework for, among other things, the payments made to the Park District, by Senior Services. As discussed on this blog, the 2011 agreement remains unsigned and a worthless “Resolution” has been signed in its place. To my dismay, the senior center membership has been vilified, denigrated, said to have “entitlement mentalities”, and portrayed as, “I’m old, give me stuff” in some forums and by some non-senior residents. Seniors only wish that the Park Board would consider spending just a fraction of the revenue they spend on children, on its senior citizens.

I don’t believe that the Park Board realizes that the Senior Center is a “home”, not a “club house”, to its members. In many cases, they have outlived many of their family and friends. It provides an environment where they can feel vital and appreciated. Knowing that the park board can, at its discretion, as provided in the language of the “Resolution”, close this “home”, leaves the membership feeling betrayed and deserted by the Board, after spending most of their lives and paying taxes in this community.

Perhaps the following poignantly drafted Letters to the Editor, of the New York Times, will enlighten them on the need to make their seniors feel they won’t be thrown to the wolves and the humanity required when making decisions regarding the fair distribution of Park District funds:

To The Editor:

Re: “Alone, Together” (News article, March 27):

I am 92 years old and widowed, and going to my senior center is vital to my day-to-day life because it helps me have a life! Other people my age need conversation with people. We need something to do other than watching TV, because sometimes we can’t see very well or hear very well and we need to speak with someone face to face.

If I were to stay home, my life would be full of dull moments and I wouldn’t be able to speak what’s on my mind. It’s very important to keep connected, and my senior center is the place that allows me to keep connected with old friends and new friends.

Dorothy McCann

New York, March 28, 2011

To The Editor:

Your poignant article captured the importance that senior centers play in the lives of thousands of older New Yorkers. The need for friendship and a peer community is basic to our humanity throughout life, at 5, 65 or 95.

For the elderly who have experienced much loss and whose world has gotten smaller, their local senior center becomes central to daily living. To thrive in old age in New York City, neighborhoods must be truly age-friendly. Nothing is more age-friendly, than neighborhood-based senior centers.

Public dollars are wisely spent ensuring that senior centers thrive, allowing New Yorkers to grow old in their community with dignity.

Igal Jellinek & Bobbi Sackman

New York, March 28, 2011

Goings-On At Area Senior Centers….

2011-04-16T21:41:00.001-07:00

For months I have attempted to persuade Park Ridge Park Board Members to treat the jointly-developed PRPD/SSI Senior Center proposal, their authors and the citizens they represent with respect; to openly discuss the document and to quickly vote it UP or DOWN.

To date, I have been unsuccessful. Instead of tackling this problem head-on, the Board, for political reasons (read elections), chose to replace the proposed agreement with, in my opinion, a sorry, unenforceable substitute; a “resolution”.

For months I have suggested to my fellow Senior’s; should the PRPD Board fail to do its duty, consider “removing this problem” from their midst and seek a new relationship or new relationships, something better suited to our needs. For those remarks, I have been poo-pooed by some of my readers. All’s fair in love, war and politics. Yes? Well, poo-poo all you wish; some of us are actively reviewing the situation.

In the end of course, we might not find a willing or suitable partner. In that case, we will have to make-due, bide our time and wait to see what this feckless Board means when it’s members write or say, as in the case of Ms. Wynn Ryan: “You know my position on senior programming and services -- we need more, and that's the Park District's mandate and promise, which does NOT depend on any deal with the fundraising foundation.”

What did that resolution say again?

I call your attention to page (1&2) paragraph (7) which reads:

I now call your attention to page (2) paragraph (2) which reads:

Finally, I call your attention to page (2) paragraph (3) which reads:

Fear Of The Unknown

The driving force behind the Senior’s need for a contract is their fear of uncontrolled change and, especially since January, their fear of perfidy. For arguments sake, lets just call it, fear of the unknown. Not one part of PRPD’s “resolution”, as I read it, removes that fear.

Knowledge Enters – Fear Recedes

In order to help Park Ridge Senior’s better understand their neighbor facilities and to lessen their continuing fear of diminishing services or abandonment, I thought it might be helpful to add a little more knowledge to ease their concern. I thought it might be helpful to let them know that there are other places to go and things to do should it become necessary.

Current Membership Fee Schedule

Description / Location	Park Ridge	Niles Center	Maine Twnshp	Frisbie Center
Non-Resident Members	Yes	No	No	Yes
Membership Fees - $$ Single - Resident Married – Resident Single – Non-Resident Married – Non-Resident	45 68 68 97	20 30 NA NA	Free Free Free Free	60 80 NA NA
Miles from PRPDSC		3.5	3.7	6.6
Time from PRPDSC - Min		12	10	14

Note: Niles and MainStreamers do not presently allow for non-resident membership. Frisbie does allow for non-resident membership but does not charge a different rate.

Goings-On by Senior Center

Click on Senior Center Name to go to their website!

Niles Senior Center

MaineStreamers (Maine Township)

Frisbe Senior Center (Des Plaines)

Park Ridge Senior Center

In the end of course, it will ultimately be up to the Park Ridge Park District Board to bring a joyous ending to their self-made predicament and the self-made problems they’ve created.

Of course, as always, it’s just my opinion!

Has anyone seen Mary Wynn Ryan? – Day (24) - Updated 05/09/2011

2011-04-14T13:36:00.001-07:00

Has anyone at the Park Ridge Senior Center seen Ms. Wynn Ryan?

Word around the center is that this recently reelected Board veteran has been invited, (multiple times) by Senior Center Leadership and Center’s staff to join some of her “constituents” on site to view first hand how the center actually works, the activities provided and services performed.

Now I don’t know the actual date of the original invite, but for my purpose, the invite date is today: April 14, 2011, and this invitation includes all Board Members.

Board Member	Days Missing	Found
O’Brian	24	No
Wynn Ryan	21	Yes
Biagi	24	No
Herman	24	No
Vile	NA	Yes
Brandt	NA	Yes
Thillins	0	Yes

How many days do you think it will take for the entire Board to meet with their Senior Center staff and members?

Note: #1: NA = Already showed up. Is a member of the Senior Center.

Note: #2: Any PRSC Member, staff-person can inform me of a Board Members presence at the center. Upon receipt, by email, I will stop the clock!

It is time to go! - Updated

2011-04-11T15:00:00.001-07:00

When I first started writing about the Park Ridge Park District Senior Center issue, I mistakenly thought that I would see a fair and equitable outcome by this time. I mean, this is Park Ridge. I was naïve! I was wrong!

I base my conclusion on Board Meeting Minute history and a Board Member Comment to a Senior constituent.

PRPD Commissioner Mary Wynn Ryan Email To Barb

“… Hi, Barbara -- just heard that the event this evening is from 6:00 p.m. to 8:45 p.m., firm (the Library closes at 9). I thought it was 7 to 9 p.m. Maybe it's my misunderstanding but I thought you'd want to know.

Also, what is going on with Helen Roppel? I have never spoken with her in my life. What are these "widely rumored comments" she is accusing me of? You know my position on senior programming and services -- we need more, and that's the Park District's mandate and promise, which does NOT depend on any deal with the fundraising foundation. (In fact, I'd like to have Senior Senate play a bigger role. But that's just me.)

I will be there tonight, but I sure hope you can pass the word that I am not the bad guy. In fact, anyone who votes for anyone else in hopes that the old deal will come back is going to be disappointed. No one except Steven Vile is in favor of it. But everyone is in favor of more productive and enrolling senior programming to reduce the deficit, and that's a fact!

See you tonight.

Best,

Mary”

When I first started writing about the Park Ridge Park District Senior Center issue, I mistakenly thought the Senior’s were dealing with a Board made up of mature and astute men and women of reasonably-high moral character. I mean, this is Park Ridge. I was naïve! I was wrong!

I base my conclusion on the Boards unwillingness to discuss and vote UP or DOWN, the taxpayer-paid, board sanctioned, jointly-developed proposal, in spite it being on the Board Agenda twice so far this year. Instead, we are entertained by the reading and passage of an un-discussed “resolution”.

Proposed PRPD/SSI Agreement Vs. Unsolicited Resolution

Joint PRPD/SSI Agreement

PRPD Board (Packet) Published - Resolution

When I first started writing about the Park Ridge Park District Senior Center issue, I thought all Park Ridge non-senior citizens tolerant. I mean, this is Park Ridge. I was naïve! I was wrong!

I base this on prior and current blog postings and “comments” by a former Park Ridge Park District Commissioner and local blogger and by some of his readers.

In my opinion, his Park Ridge Public Watchdog site is, as of late, starting to reek of anti-senior hostility, or at least Senior Center Member hostility. The last three or four posts especially.

PR Public Watchdog Blog Posting Titles	Date Published
Winners, Voters and Suckers	04/06/2011
Time for a Senior Center Reality Check	01/27/2011
“Misinformers” Getting Park District’s Goat	12/01/2011
“Sharks” vs “Jets” – Who Ya Got?	10/22/2010

Click on Blue Title to go to Posts and Comments.

Board Betting on Seniors Staying – No Matter What!

The Boards current no-response strategy is based, I believe, on their belief, that in the end, current Senior Center Members will stay and like it, no matter what. After all, this Board is resolved. The Board presently believes that current members are afraid to leave that space, with all that that departure entails.

The Board believes they’ve got Senior Center Members by their old gray feathers!

Maybe it’s time for Senior Center Members to take flight and peck Park Ridge’s Park District goodbye! Maybe its time to find a new home or create one; a better facility with with an enlightened partner less hostile to current Senior Center Member needs!

Maybe Mr. Trizna and his friends on the Board will finally respect us, not for fighting for a open discussion and the UP or DOWN vote we deserve, but for the courage and smarts to walk away from a bad relationship.

Maybe, they’ll even miss us. Na!

I’m sure, the ever resourceful members at the Public Watchdog team will find a way to help PRPD’s Board keep their “commitment” to Park Ridge’s remaining senior’s per the Board’s recently passed “resolution”. I mean, based on Mr. Trizna’s 12/01/2010 post, charging Senior’s “…. dues of $225/year (about 60 cents a day)….” should make things work just right.

I can read the headline now:

Seniors Get Out of Town; Solve Park Ridge Park District Budget Problems!

Well, now that I have been released from recent stress caused by those initial misconceptions and false ideas, I feel so much better.

Fellow Senior’s, once you’re released, so will you.

Of course, it’s only my opinion!

First look….

2011-04-05T19:37:00.001-07:00

Well, as you can see, no one showed up to “my party”. I’m sure some in the audience see it as “my comeupance”. I can’t blame them for that.

In truth, the post was a last minute idea and no one involved in its creation expected more than one commitment, if we were lucky. By the way, I backed Butler, so it was a bad night all around.

Although one might think the post a complete failure, I do not. Phone calls were made. Emails were sent with none undelivered. There is a lot to be learned from silence. Based on calls received today, that silence did not go unnoticed.

I’ve just heard that the quartet of Hunst, O’Brien, Thillens and Wynn Ryan were declared the winners. So, for the most part, Board leadership and direction will remain the same.

To the loosing candidates, you did your best. To the winners, well done!

Down to the wire…. - Updated - Sorry No Takers!

2011-04-04T15:11:00.001-07:00

Well, we’re down to the wire. Tomorrow is the big day. Within 48 hours Park Ridge Senior’s will know the makeup of the new Park Ridge Park District Board.

The question still outstanding is, the future of the jointly developed contract proposal.

Who stands with the Senior’s? Who will commit to an up or down vote on this item by May 31, 2011?

We’ve heard a lot lately from local newspapers, commenter’s at this site and from other local bloggers, about the dreaded ~~HUN~~ SEIU back candidates. I for one do not possess this fear – yet!

But I am me and you are you. What is your SEIU-Fear tolerance?

Then there are those who fear a return of the INCUMBENT candidates. Where do they really stand on this vital subject? What is your INCUMBENT-Fear tolerance?

For Senior Center Members, this is a dilemma.

Should they back O’Brian and Mary Winn Ryan in spite of their contract-intransigence or should they “go to the dark side” and vote for those other guys, believing things couldn’t get much worse?

The issue driving Senior Center Member angst, is the currently-buried jointly developed contract proposal.

I was thinking. What would happen if PRPD’s current board members (as independent citizens) and future board members candidates committed by email addressed to this site, their pledge to vote UP or DOWN on the currently proposed, jointly developed contract proposal. What an interesting last minute twist that would be to this contest.

I can’t guarantee one changed vote to any candidate based on this post, but I say this, there are enough Senior’s and others looking at this site to possibly make a difference to one or more of you.

So here we go.

The Rules

Listed below are the names of current PRPD Board Commissioners followed by the names of remaining PRPD Board Commissioner Candidates.

Those parties listed below wishing to publically pledge their commitment (word of honor) to vote (no ifs, no ands, no buts) UP or DOWN on the jointly developed contract proposal by May 31, 2011 can email me at cfre-il-emsd63@excite.com. I will keep this pledge posting open until 10PM CDST. Then, sometime shortly after 10PM, I will update the blog one last time.

No pledge posted in the “comment” section attached to this post will be accepted.

Board Member or Candidate Names	Committed(Yes/No)
Jim O'Brien, President	No
Rick Biagi, Vice President	No
David Herman, Treasurer	No
Stephen Vile, Secretary	No
Richard Brandt - SEIU	No
Mary Wynn Ryan	No
Nicholas Giordano – SEIU	No
Peter Wachowski - SEIU	No
Kristen Mattes - SEIU	No
Mel Thillens	No
Steve Hunst – Unopposed	No

What do they have to loose?

Let me answer Ms. Wynn Ryan….

2011-04-03T17:41:00.001-07:00

Comment to: Open Letter to My Fellow Senior Center Members – 03/31/2011

Mr. Butterly:

Were we at the same meeting?

I guess I didn't say it often or loudly enough: Park Ridge residents who are seniors can continue to depend on a variety of programs, events and activities from the Park District because that's an important part of why there even is a RECREATION and Park District.

Virtually every point you make here is, at best, a misunderstanding of my intention, and at worst, is actively inaccurate. I could take an hour and attempt to clear each of them, but after nearly three hours the other night standing up there explaining everything with my heart on the line, I truly don't know what more I could say that would convince you. Your mind is made up.

So I guess I'll just say it one more time: No matter who wins or loses in the upcoming election, the Park District WILL be providing programming for seniors.

Thank you for this forum.

Ms. Mary Wynn Ryan, April 1, 2011 1:24 PM

My response…

Ms. Wynn Ryan,

We did indeed attend the same meeting and no additional repetition in message or increase in volume will change what I and others Senior’s who attended that meeting think. I or should I say we, as I’ve discussed the meeting and your subsequent blog “comment” with various Senior’s who attended the meeting, believe the message delivered does not match the Board’s recent actions. I’m referring of course to the current Senior Center problem.

Your Board continues to act as if this dilemma were purely a misunderstanding on the part of the Senior’s and if only Board members continue to repeat the mantra, the Senior’s will be mollified and the problem will go away.

You say that Senior’s shouldn’t worry; that they can depend on PRPD’s mandate, they can depend on PRPD’s good intentions and the Board’s word.

Senior’s know that PRPD has a mandate to serve all Park Ridge residents. So what else is new? It’s not like they were born yesterday. They’ve heard the Boards good intentions. They’re nice intentions. The resolution was well crafted. The problem revolves around their believing in the Board’s word, its bond.

Ms. Wynn Ryan, actions speak louder than words. So, look at a little history.

A little history.

Board Minutes without mention of Senior Center or SSI Contract.

Jan. 07, 2010	Jan. 21, 2010	Feb. 18, 2010
Mar. 04, 2010	Mar. 18, 2010	Apr. 01, 2010
Apr. 15, 2010	May 06, 2010	May 20, 2010
Jun. 03, 2010	Jun. 17, 2010	Jul. 05, 2010
Aug. 05, 2010	Aug. 19, 2010	Sep.16, 2010
Nov. 18,2010	Dec. 29, 2010	Jan. 13, 2011
Jan. 26, 2011	Feb. 03, 2011

Board Minute Extracts where the Senior Center or SSI Contract is discussed.

First there was Mr. “O”’s concern!

Sep. 09, 2010

That led to Senior’s concern!

-Approved 11/18/2010-
Park Ridge Recreation and Park District
Board of Park Commissioners
Maine Park Leisure Center, 2701 W. Sibley Avenue
Regular Board Meeting Minutes
Thursday, October 21, 2010

Citizens Present Wishing To Address The Board On Non-Agenda Items

“Numerous senior citizens addressed concerns about rumored changes to the Senior Center. They spoke of the importance of the Senior Center and objected to any changes in the building’s name. Commissioner Biagi stated that the Board has never entertained the notion of closing the Senior Center and they are pleased with the Senior Center programs. He stressed the importance of coming up with ideas to lower subsidy. Executive Director Ochromowicz stated that the Senior Center’s subsidy is increasing by more than $20,000 a year; approaching $190,000 in 2010; and that increasing subsidy can’t continue. He asked for the names of those who spread misinformation so he can speak with them. Commissioners thanked the audience members for their comments and for attending the meeting.”

Oct. 21, 2010

That led to an agreement!

Approved 11/18/2010-
Park Ridge Recreation and Park District
Board of Park Commissioners
Maine Park Leisure Center, 2701 W. Sibley Avenue
Committee of the Whole Meeting Minutes
Thursday, November 4, 2010

New Business

“Executive Director Ochromowicz summarized the terms and conditions for an agreement between the Senior Services and the Park District: the agreement will no longer be a lease agreement and the building will be recognized as the Districts and will be useable for other programs and services; the contract will be for two years instead of three; Senior Services would pay the Park District not less than $60,000 per year divided into
four equal quarterly payments; should the Senior Services secure funding from the city, township, grant or other source, the payment would increase in 2012 to an amount to be negotiated by August 15, 2011; the District will make up the difference by recouping the expenses to operate the building (salaries, maintenance and repairs) by programming and renting the building not to interfere with scheduled senior activities; and Senior Services would be required to provide the District with Directors and Officers Liability Coverage and Fidelity and Theft.
Superintendent Knouse said the terms and conditions have been sent to Senior Services representatives for their review. Executive Director Ochromowicz said the District will need to generate an additional $70,000 through program net and rental of the facility. A lengthy discussion ensued on the current and proposed agreement; subsidy; Senior Services payment; programming; staffing; the cost and burden to the District. Several Commissioners expressed disappointment with the proposed terms and conditions. Executive Director Ochromowicz said staff will go back to the drawing board.”

Nov. 04, 2010

Agreement reaches final stages!

Dec. 16, 2010

First deferral – two board members missing!

Jan. 12, 2011

Second deferral – need new Executive Director’s involvement!

Jan. 20 2011

The Resolution!

Feb. 17, 2011

Note: On January 20th, the Board’s attorney agreed that missing two Commissioner’s was enough to keep the Board from taking a five member vote on an agreement that had been in the hands of the Board for several weeks. Did the Board’s attorney not see the irony in the Board’s passage on February 17th, of an unsolicited resolution; a document delivered a day or two earlier, a document not discussed or previously reviewed at a prior public meeting,; a document then proposed, challenged by one Commissioner and passed by only four Board Members in spite of two Commissioner’s being absent?

So where’s the proposed contract now?

What contract?

The only thing missing from this Hogan’s Heroesque charade is Sgt.Schultz’s statement: “I knowwwww nothhhhhingggg”.

Sorry kiddo, I just didn’t believe you. And neither did they!

Open Letter to My Fellow Senior Center Members – 03/31/2011

2011-03-31T18:23:00.001-07:00

For weeks, I’ve been urged by friends of PRPD’s current Board to tone down the rhetoric in order to give current Board Members and the new Executive Director a chance to work their magic, to solve the Board’s self-created “senior center crisis”. For the most part, I have done so.

Now this from PRPD Board Incumbent-Candidate, Mary Wynn Ryan!

The following email was sent to me today. The emailer clearly intended my sharing this with you, or else this email would not have come to me.

The Email

I will be there tonight, but I sure hope you can pass the word that I am not the bad guy. In fact, anyone who votes for anyone else in hopes that the old deal will come back is going to be disappointed. No one except Steven Vile is in favor of it. But everyone is in favor of more productive and enrolling senior programming to reduce the deficit, and that's a fact!

See you tonight.

Best,

Mary”

Now we know the truth. Now we know where this Board stands on passing or rejecting the Senior Services/Park District created proposal, and right from the horses-mouth no less.

Based on Ms. Wynn Ryan’s written appraisal of the current situation, Seniors will have:

no contract
- no force of law to protect their interests, only nice sounding words and empty promises
- no security
no up or down vote
no independence
no trust!

Seniors have been told, in my opinion, to surrender their hard-won creation, the “Senior Center”, into the hands of of what appears to be an incompetent, uncaring and now untrustworthy Board of which Ms. Wynn-Ryan is a leading figure.

We are told that the “Resolution”, passed earlier this month, is all that is required to calm our fears of future betrayal. You don’t need the force of contract law to protect your interests, your creation; we are assured. All you need are our good intentions!

To that I say, BULL!

Now, the ambiguity is gone. We now know, should we believe Ms. Wynn Ryan, the voting intentions of six of seven Board Members. Another thing we learned about the Board is their inability to handle anomalies. A contracted relationship with the Seniors is different than the other partnering relationships they maintain, an anomaly. If something doesn’t fit in their predetermined single-sized box, they apparently can’t deal with it. They apparently don’t want it! I wonder how previous Boards were able to handle these things over the last 30 years?

This inglorious Board wants control.

This Board wants to control:

the “club house”
the money
all the activities under their authority.

Fair enough. I say, let them have it. All of it!

Let them control the money; what little there will be. This isn’t about money anyway. Our continuing to fork over 60k in yearly contributions toward their expenses doesn’t seem to mean a thing. We even offered to take out the one sticking point, the deal-breaker. A reimbursement clause possibly worth as much as 300k in PRPD savings. Instead of closing the deal and going to contract, instead of making the Seniors feel happy and secure with a limited contract with no downside potential to PRPD, Board members went home empty handed, probably thinking of ways to extract more. Now they blame the Seniors for stopping the talks while leaving the Park District vulnerable to the reimbursement repayment!

Let them control and be responsible for all the activities within the building. The Park District has been trying unsuccessfully to increase utilization for months. I was told by candidate Hunst that the responsibility of increasing the utilization of the building belongs to the building’s manager. Rubbish! It belongs to the Board, Executive Director and her immediate staff. This is a PRPD marketing problem not local building management or a local senior center service problem.

Let them use the building as an additional pool-side services center when they close the Oakton pool or as additional storage for the Community Center such as was described by Ms. Wynn Ryan last night. The Board wants the building.

Let them have the whole bloody thing! The Board Members can have their “club house” back; it was always theirs. The Senior Center is not a building. It’s an idea! It’s people!

These idiots just don’t get it.

It’s time to rethink this relationship.

Would you live with an abusive partner; one that thinks so little of you, takes your 60k a year, while they refuse to tell you their true intentions? Well that’s what they are and that’s what they’ve done; at least as I see it.

One more thing.

I went to a “meet the candidates meeting” at the Park Ridge Library last night. I watched with fascination as Ms. Wynn Ryan opined to a stunned audience the Boards frustration over a perceived lack of communication within and outside the Park District organization. To illustrate her point, she told her story of how the PRPD Board learned of the latest PRPD/Senior Services proposal, and how it was allegedly created by their Board-chosen employee, without the Boards prior knowledge.

In her opening remarks, Ms. Wynn Ryan went to great lengths to convince her audience of her competence by focusing on two primary political illustrations; her time spent as Park Ridge Alderman and her current stint as Park Ridge Park District Commissioner.

At the end of her tale, I found myself wondering how a person at this experience level, along with other PRPD Board Members, some of whom claim to possess equal or greater managerial or leadership experience, would have have allowed herself to be so removed from the process, that an agreement of that nature could have been created without her, let alone another, Board Members knowledge.

At the completion of her yarn the gathering was treated to beautifully timed supportive comment voiced by Board Vice President Biachi and simultaneous nod of agreement by Commissioner Brandt. Mr.’s Biachi and Brandt were in the audience, I suspect, in support of their colleague.

Legitimate question to ad hominem attack.

Lastly, some of us at that meeting were really taken aback at Board members Biachi and Mary Wynn Ryan’s uncalled for ad hominem attack on former Park Ridge Mayor Howard Frimark. Their stormy public ridicule of his administration was boorish and in my opinion, Biachi and Mary Wynn Ryan need to publically apologize to him in writing. I’m certainly not a Frimark fan but he was asking a reasonable question regarding the Boards decision to give the former Executive Director a bonus while at the same time talking “poor”. This clear overreaction by these current Board Members to reasonable questioning is typical of what I call, executive decision discomfort.

So here’s the question.

Who will you be voting for on April 5^th?

Still knockin!

2011-03-25T10:13:00.001-07:00

It’s been 11 days since my last “"Knock, knock”!

Back then, I gently pulled the Board/Administration’s chain, because the Board and Administration failed to post on the Park Ridge Park District’s (PRPD) Website, the Board Meeting Minutes for a couple vitally important meetings held over 30 days earlier.

At the time, I chose not to link any particular motive to this inaction on the part of the Board or Administration. But now, however, I must ask if there is a motive for this inaction.

This is the political season in Park Ridge, and has been for the last three months.

Maybe protecting Board incumbents is more important than informing the public of their meeting activities. Considering these meetings dealt, in part, with the Senior Center Contract and City of Park Ridge’s proposed detention pond at North Park, two volatile subjects affecting several thousand Park Ridge citizens, I can see why.

How much longer must we wait?

The PRPD, to my knowledge, has always posted their Board Meeting Minutes in a timely manner and on time.

Meeting Date	Days Ago	Days Overdue
Feb. 8, 2011	45	17
Feb. 9, 2011	44	16
Feb. 17, 2011	36	8

I asked you-all to fix this problem back on March 14th. So, please have the staff take a few minutes to remedy the situation. I would hate to resort to having to use the Freedom of Information Act to solve this on-going issue.

Of course, it’s only my opinion!

Where are the meeting notes?

2011-03-14T16:51:00.001-07:00

Knock, knock!

Is anybody home at the Park Ridge Park District?

Seniors have been waiting for weeks for you guys to update your website’s meeting notes so we can see where we stand on our proposal. Now, maybe your ongoing strategy is to wait us out, hoping we all die off first?

Sorry, we’ve just too darn ornery for that to work.

Today is March 14th. The February 8th and 9th Board Meeting Minutes are still missing.

Please fix it!

While you’re at it, you may as well play it smart and post the February 17th minutes.

We’re all supposed to continue to remain quiet now. So shush, you Seniors!

2011-03-06T21:14:00.001-08:00

I received an email this evening. It was from a reader unable to post a oversize comment in response to someone else’s a prior comment. It read: “I responded to the last post on your blog, but it won't accept it because it is too long, I guess. I have copied it below. If you want to find a way to post it, that would be fine with me.”

The original comment, was attached to to Reality Check Indeed….. A second comment, a complete copy of the first, was attached to Backroom shenanigans? Obviously, the writer wished to make sure he got his point across.

If you have not read these posts, I urge you to do so now by clicking on the links above.

The Original Comment….

Anonymous March 4, 2011 8:26 AM and 11:28 AM wrote….

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.

The Response….

Anonymous March 6, 2011

The writer of the last comment is so "inside" the Park District thinking that he has completely missed how seniors and Senior Services have viewed the actions and inactions of the Park District from their perspective. His is certainly not the only reasonable view, though he arrogantly makes that assumption in his post. Let me explain.

First, seniors feel insecure because the Park District has refused to act on the contract, one way or another. At the same time that it said it wouldn't even talk about the contract since the new Director should be in place first, it pressed forward to adopt (over numerous requests not to) a resolution that by its terms infers that the contract is no longer on the table. From this one can see how seniors might very reasonably conclude that the Park District no longer wishes to have a contract with seniors. And in fact, members of the Park Board have sent clear signals that they do not wish to continue a contractual relationship with Senior Services. This is not a matter of taking a while to finalize details (as it may have been in 1996), this is a situation where the Park District Board, for undisclosed reasons, is refusing to sign the contract that was negotiated by Park District staff after lengthy discussions.

I think one might "reasonably conclude" that the Park Board is afraid to vote down the contract because of the upcoming election. It has had ample opportunity to negotiate changes in the contract, and to discuss it's concerns about the contract at its meetings, and has refused to do so. They don't want to negotiate, they refuse to vote it down--let me guess... after the election they won't have any problems voting it down? That sounds pretty political to me.

Second, you say that "the Park Districts' share of the 2010 operating budget for the senior center was $185,000...." That's a really interesting and misleading way to phrase it. Let's be clear about this-- the Park District owns the senior center building and runs it's senior programs out of it. Those are programs that it claims to have no intention to change or discontinue, and those are programs that seniors should be able to expect from its park district. These programs are very similar to what is offered in other senior programs in the area. All costs associated with that building and its senior programming are 100% Park District costs. They don't "share" them with anyone. Do they "share" the cost of the community center with anyone? Do they "share" the cost of the pools with anyone? If they are concerned about the cost of the programs and building, they should do something about it-- that is in fact their responsibility, and in fact Ray O made a number of changes in programming and expenses before he left to do just that. Some of those changes have already been implemented, by the way. Any money that comes to the Park District from Senior Services is great because it reduces the cost of the Senior Center to the Park District. And what does Senior Services ask for in return? A contractual right to preferential (NOT exclusive) use of the building during the day. That's it. Are you really alleging that this preferential use is the "model" that will cause the Park District to incur more cost in the future? That makes no sense. Senior Services is not preventing, via the contract or in any other way, the Park District from reducing expenses or increasing revenue at that building. If you disagree, you should present the facts in support of that position.

The Park District Board has so bumbled this situation that it has created every bit of the anxiety that you so callously attribute to seniors misinterpreting the facts. They haven't, and for you to say they have is utterly insulting. They know that the sky is not falling, but they also know that the foundation of the relationship between the Park District and Senior Services is crumbling. Is it wrong of them to ask for confirmation of that fact so that they can figure out how to move forward?

Senior Services and seniors in general are waiting for the new Director to start. The Park District Board should have done the same before it chose to adopt a resolution prematurely and have that resolution posted on boards at the senior center. More than anything else, those actions fanned the flames of unrest and "needless anxiety for our beloved seniors."

I am a citizen. I am not proud of the Park Board on this one.

Seems likes silence by seniors is not an option.

Backroom shenanigans?

2011-02-25T15:36:00.001-08:00

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?

The End of a perfectly good relationship….

2011-02-19T15:32:00.001-08:00

Thursday’s Meeting – The beginning of the end.

Thursday, February 17, 2011’s Park Ridge Park District Board Meeting did what it’s members intended to do; it destroyed the 30-year Park District/Senior Services relationship.

At this point, based upon the actions of those Board members present at that meeting, the actions at the Mid-January, 2011 meeting, and everything I’ve seen in print; including the old contract, the recently negotiated agreement and the newly passed resolution, I don’t see how any kind of working-relationship based on mutual respect and trust, can exist.

Poor Leadership = Poor Results.

The Park Ridge Park District Board has once again micro-managed its way into a corner.

It, unfortunately, doesn’t think so. Based on what I can see, Board Members apparently believe, or wish to believe, their newly passed resolution will stamp closed to this problem.

It will not!

Those of you who’ve read my earlier blog postings on this subject already know that I couldn’t care less, whether seniors meet in Park Ridge or not.

My concern has always been, and continues to be, the shoddy way in which Park Ridge seniors, possible even your parents and grand parents, are being treated; by this Board. And based upon Thursday’s meeting, I now have, I believe, a better understanding on why a professional like Mr. Ray “O”, left.

Prior Warning

For weeks I’ve been warning some of my fellow Senior Center members that the PRPD Board as a whole, was apparently incapable of dealing straight with them, and that they, the seniors, were being led down a path by men and women who were not showing their true colors.

And now, those colors are clear.

At the Mid-January Board Meeting, board members tabled their expensively negotiated proposal, because “they had questions”; even weeks after having the proposal in their hands.

In the end, of course, they didn’t have questions. Tabling the item did what it was supposed to do, kick the can down the road.

The Board apparently didn’t even propose questions that would lead to a resolution on the contract when two of its members met at the Senior Center with Senior Services members, a week or so prior to last Thursday’s vote.

No Guts – No Glory.

Seniors have been patiently asking this board for two months; please vote our proposal, up or down.

What they got, was – nothing.

No.

What they got from this weak and dysfunctional Park Board, was in my opinion, a poorly executed lesson in deception.

Five Board Members came to vote on that resolution and they were damn if they weren’t going to get what they came for.

And they voted themselves a flowery, shamefully meaningless, unenforceable, resolution.

Return of the “Clubhouse”

So, Park Ridge Park District Board Members and Park Ridge non-Senior citizens, you now have your “Clubhouse” back.

In years to come, I am sure Park Ridge children, and maybe even your grandchildren will proudly proclaim each February 17th, “Clubhouse Day”.

They don’t want us here – maybe it’s time to go!

So now my fellow Senior Center Members, I suggest we look for another home. I am sure there are places we can go; senior-friendly places. Places where we can share our final years.

It’s obvious to me, “the enlightened ones” on the Park Ridge Park District Board believe we, and their other self-inflicted problems, need to go away.

If board actions to date are any indication of what is to come, then I believe the resolution they just passed, at the whim of the board, won’t be worth squat.

Seniors, maybe it’s time to blow this place!

Reality Check Indeed….

2011-02-01T22:36:00.001-08:00

Dialogue has been moving fast and heavy over there at PublicWatchdog.org. As you’ll recall, they recently published a post titled: Time For A Senior Reality Check.

This one sub-thread made me chuckle.

Reader #1 Comment

“I think it’s time for the seniors to abandon the Center. Tell the whiners on this blog that they can have the “club house”. They can stop crying to daddy now!

Citizens of Park Ridge think they’re “North Shore” by the airport. They whine when the planes fly over their house. They whine when the Park District wants to place a cell tower in their back yard, they whine when local church(s) want to provide Park Ridge homeless comfort and now they whine over the senior center clubhouse.

North Shore want-a-be community, my ass!

EDITOR’S NOTE: We can’t speak for commentators to this post, but our beef with the Senior Center clubhouse is that it has sucked almost $1 million out of the taxpayers’ pockets in just the past six years, and it has done so for the benefit of approximately 800 Park Ridge “members” who constitute only a small fraction of all the seniors in Park Ridge – all while those “members” pay $35 in annual membership dues (up from $22 just a few years ago) and now want to lock the Park District’s taxpayers into an expensive “poison pill” buy-out.

By Anonymous on 01.31.11 11:38 am ”

Reader #2 Comment

“11:38am…
That’s a very reasoned approach to debating the issue at hand. Did you learn that skill in a Senior Center class offering you took?

By Anon on 01.31.11 12:46 pm”

Reader #1 Comment

“Anon:12:46

Thank you!

Actually, I learned that at New Trier! I know how North Shore communities take care of their elder citizens. Glad I don’t live in Park Ridge.

EDITOR’S NOTE: That makes two of us.

By Anonymous on 01.31.11 1:36 pm”

Enough said.

Not everybody agrees….

2011-01-27T18:58:00.001-08:00

I wanted to take a moment to thank fellow Blogger PublicWatchdog.org – Park Ridge . They ran a post on the Park Ridge Senior Center today titled: Time For A Senior Center Reality Check that was eye-opener. I think seniors should see for themselves how PublicWatchdog and their readers feel about seniors and the Senior Center.

Park Ridge Seniors dissed….

2011-01-21T16:37:00.001-08:00

Thursday, January 20, 2011, Long After Midnight

Thursday, January 20, 2011 marked my 56^th Public Board Meeting since 2003. It was cold outside with temperatures in the single digits. It was however, very warm inside Park Ridge Park District’s (PRPD) Board Room. Angry seniors who only minutes before braved the cold and ice to attend the late night meeting were made hot under the collar after they realized they’d just been snookered. The seniors thought they were going to witness an up or down vote on the newly revised contract. Instead, they got a civics lesson in local politics and the opportunity to witness first hand the dysfunctional operation (micro-managing) of the PRPD Board.

Political Cowards!

A decision not to vote, a purely political act.

At last weeks PRPD Board Meeting, a quorum of commissioners elected not to vote on the newly revised PRPD/Senior Services Contract, citing the absence of two members.

This week, the full board, after placing the same item on the agenda, copped out again, removing the vote and sentencing the agreement to agenda-limbo for an undetermined period of time. Only one Board Member, Mr. Vile, had the political acumen and courage to demand an up or down vote. He was soundly defeated 6-1.

Mr. Vile needs to read your emailed thanks!

Stephen Vile, Secretary.

Click on name to open email window.

In the end, not only did Park Board Leadership cause a group of 80 year olds to brave late night ice, wind and freezing temperatures, they refused to give these seniors the satisfaction, courtesy or decency of an up or down vote.

Why? To what end?

The Board’s failure to take an up or down vote tonight was clearly, based on my experience, a political decision.

Some members are seeking reelection. They obviously didn’t see Senior Citizens as their primary constituency. Marty Maloney and Mary Winn Ryan recommended again, the agenda items removal. Said they “had questions”.

Board members have had access to the completed board-attorney negotiated document for weeks. Board and Senior Services attorney’s and Senior Center leadership were available to answer Mr. Maloney or Ms. Winn Ryan’s questions all along.

Senior Center/Negotiator/Attorney Jack Owens made an impassioned plea to complete the process, then-and-there. Yes or no! He also offered to address those “questions” that night. The item was ultimately removed and sent into agenda-limbo to be addressed at some later date.

In my opinion there were no questions that could not have been answered, if in fact it was answers Mr. Maloney or Ms. Winn Ryan were seeking.

No questions from any of the Board Commissioners were forthcoming!

There were, in my opinion, no questions from this Board - because there were no questions.

In the end, it appears, at least to me, that these Board Members just didn’t have the political-balls to make the decision and take the heat.

It’s funny. These guys wanted the job. Wanted the bragging rights. Wanted their little bit of power. Some even finance their own campaigns to get it. But when it came to making the controversial decisions in an election year…… “take it off the agenda”.

What do the Seniors do now?

I’m not on the Senior Services Board so I can only speak for me. I’m not sure what I am about to present is ultimately the way to go. That said, I am livid!

If I had some say-so, I would recommend:

Senior Services Board (SSB) and Senior Center Senate tell the Park Ridge Park District Board to suck pond water (call their bluff)
SSB tell PRPD’s Board that we will no longer be fobbed or abused
SSB tell PRPD’s Board; as far as we’re concerned, the contract ended December 31, 2010 and that we no longer feel bound by the agreement
SSB demand PRPD pony-up the estimated $300,000 repayment for contract termination

No contract – no money!

SSB stop making those $10,000 quarterly payments designed to defray operating costs and place those monies in an escrow account
SSB start looking for a possible new home – a home where they will be wanted!

Will those recommendations solve the problem? I don’t know. Senior Center Leadership have tried playing “nice nice” without success. It is time, in my opinion, to fish or cut bait.

My friends, these six politically-inept Board Members need to hear from you, and they need to know how you feel. One way or the other!


Jim O'Brien, President	Rick Biagi, Vice President	David Herman, Treasurer

Richard Brandt, Member	Marty Maloney, Member	Mary Wynn Ryan, Member

Senior Center Members came to the Board Meeting tonight to complete the renegotiating process and close a PRPD inflicted wound. They (we) thought we had a deal. We were wrong!

If the Board is stupid enough to renege on it’s “board attorney” negotiated agreement, as I believe some of these six would prefer, then it’s “Katy bar the door”, and I have no idea where things will end. That said, I am convinced, if need-be, there will be other venues available to us, that would be happy to take in Park Ridge Senior Center refugees – especially if we are willing to pay our own way as we do now.

But that’s just my opinion!

An Open Letter to Fellow Park Ridge Taxpayers

2010-11-20T09:01:00.001-08:00

by: Mac Mc Lendon, Park Ridge Senior Services, Inc.

69 Years ago, I enlisted in the US Army and during the 5 years of active service found a “HOME AWAY FROM HOME”, the USO.

Today, having been retired from business since 1991, I have a new “HOME AWAY FROM HOME”, the Park Ridge Senior Center.

Not all Park Ridge seniors – male and female – may be aware that OUR Center offers more than 140 different scheduled programs in areas of: RECREATION, CONTINUING EDUCATION, CULTURAL EXPEERIENCES, HEALTH AND FITNESS, NEW FRIENDS, SOCIAL SERVICES, and most important, VOLUNTEER OPPORTUNITIES.

Our Center operates 7 days a week as a drop-in facility for its approximate 1,000 active members and has monthly contacts with roughly 4,300 Seniors, members and non-members.

I wish to invite all Seniors and “Furure-Seniors” to DROP IN and visit. Learn FIRST HAND why today’s members feel so strongly that their “QUALITY OF LIFE” is helped by membership in the Senior Center – their new “HOME AWAY FROM HOME”.

Time to make them an offer they can’t refuse….

2010-11-19T14:01:00.001-08:00

It’s been almost two months since I last blogged. I’ve been waiting to see how the Park Ridge Senior Center / Park Ridge Park District contract negotiations would play out. I must say that it appears that things are not going well.

A couple nights ago, Park Ridge Senior Services, the organization representing Senior Center members, voted on the Park District’s latest unvetted proposal. Apparently, based on what I’ve heard through the senior grape vine, the Park District made an offer to the Senior Services Board that proved to be so unacceptable not one member could vote yes for it. That’s got to be one exceptionally crummy offer. I’ve met some of these Board seniors over the last couple months and they’re not the unbending type.

The current contract has a little over a month until it expires and the expensive consequences of the failed process play out. As I understand it, should the contract be allowed to expire (terminate), the Park District could be on the hook for up to mid-six-figures in reimbursement dollars.

Fact: These Seven Park District Board Members and One Administrator say they want a deal.

Click on a name to send e-mail to your elected representative.


Mr. Obrien	Mr. Biagi	Mr. Herman	Mr. Vile

Mr. Brandt	Mr. Maloney	Ms. Wynn- Ryan	Mr. Ochromowicz

Is this possibly the Board or top Administrators attitude toward Senior Center Members?

Facebook: Ray Ochromowicz

“Life is too short to stress yourself with people who don’t even deserve to be an issue in your life…:)”

Fact: Majority of Senior Center Members do not have deep pockets. If they were rich, they would probably be living somewhere else; maybe in a real “north shore community” I would think.

Fact: The Seniors say they want a deal they can afford.

Park District. Perhaps it’s time to employ the Corleone approach to positive contract negotiations. Perhaps it’s time to make the Senior Center Representatives an offer that is both good and reasonable enough. It’s time to make the the Seniors an offer they can’t refuse. Look at my last blog post guys. I’m almost sure they’ll accept the reasonable offer printed there.

Lastly, when all is said and done, should this new contract be signed, the tax-paying Seniors will have a Happy Holiday. The non-senior tax payers will once again be off the hook for thousands of dollars, and Park District leaders will be able to paraphrase Marlon Brando’s famous line: “Someday, and that day may never come, I'll call upon you to do a service for me. But until that day accept this justice as gift” in this holiday season.

I am only speaking for myself here, but I think something is starting to smell at the Park District , and it’s not decomposing foliage.

From Senior Center to Teen Center or….

2010-09-25T07:52:00.001-07:00

We’re doing it for the children!

Park Ridge Park District (PRPD), headed by Executive Director Mr. “O” Ochromowicz, is apparently moving ahead with PRPD’s Strategic Plan to create a “teen space.” See page 8 of 14.

011909 Revised Park Ridge Park District Strategic Plan

I’m sure, every Park Ridge Resident with a teenager in-tow could not be more ecstatic. It’s nice to have the “Center” for Park Ridge teens to get together, play games, get vital information and support from their community. Too bad it’s being purchased at the cost of the “Center” for Park Ridge seniors who get together, play games, get vital information and support from their community.

I’ve just taken an afternoon to review PRPD’s child-centered 2010 budget. Based upon the numerous graphs, the “senior” costs under PRPD’s plan (budget) range from 4% to 5% of the overall budget. Even with my limited military-school mathematics, that leaves 95% to 96% of the budget for everything else.

What else?

A partial list of child-centered activities budgeted in 2010 by Park Ridge Park District.

Soccer	Football
Basketball	Hockey
Fencing	Volleyball
Racquetball	Lacrosse
Archery	T-Ball
Flag Football	Etc.

Personally, I’m all for each of these activities, and more! Problem is, “and more” has a cost. The Plan now being executed was put together in 2008, a time when things were looking better. I am sure, the Dick Barton led PRPD board never envisioned the financial or conflicting inter-generational needs facing the current Board or Management. So, what do you do?

Some say, those seniors receive enough perks already!

A list of senior “perks” .

Social Security	No COLA’s for years.
Pensions	Lost $$ like everyone else.
Medicare	Supplemental Insurance Required.
Medicaid	If you qualify.
Senior Services	Such as they are.
Senior Discounts.	Use every one we can get.

These are not “perks”. Ok, you got me, senior discount is a perk used by businesses to attract more customers. The rest on that list are things seniors have already paid for or are currently paying for. At the Park Ridge Senior Center, they even have to pay yearly dues as part of their contract to defray Park District costs. This is not always the case with many other area Senior Centers.

Executing the plan.

Earlier, I asked “what do you do?” Do you execute a Strategic Plan that is out of date and out of sync with current events? Or do you adjust it, hoping to implement great ideas in better times. Do you destroy one valuable entity to create one of unproven value?

Time is running out!

The Park Ridge Park District through Executive Director Ochromowicz is said to have indicated a willingness to share the facility with Park Ridge teens in 2011. How thoughtful. I wonder how the Board, Mr. “O” and other Park District users would feel having to share all of the other Park Ridge Park District facilities and services with those same seniors?

I can see it now. Park Ridge Park District leading the way with a senior’s only soccer league. You can bet those are going to be very slow games. The new Depends ® changing stations aren't going to be cheap either.

But what about 2012? I believe Mr. “O” is determined to do his job as specified by the Strategic Plan. If I were in his shoes that’s exactly what I’d be doing. Remember, they own the property and they have a right to do with it as they please.

That said, closing or “duel-using” the Senior Center is not a good idea at this time. The idea of creating a teen-center at this PRPD facility may have merit. However, the implementation method currently in play is smarmy at best and shameful at worst.

A little forethought, a little communication, a little courtesy and a whole lot more PRPD transparency could have eliminated this delicate situation altogether.

What needs to be done.

The Park Ridge Park District Board needs to contract with the seniors for one more year. Doing so would give the Senior Center Members and PRPD Board the opportunity to identify their future options thoroughly. This courtesy would place this aspect of PRPD’s Strategic Plan just one year behind schedule. Would it be a win-win for everyone? No! It would however, go a long way in removing the foul taste of PRPD deceit seniors are now experiencing.

Last word.

Seniors, you can bet your Social Security checks that the duel-use facility idea is the first step toward eviction. You’d better have a Plan-“B” for 2012’s contract termination.

Of course, it’s just my opinion.

Note: The views in this post do not necessarily reflect the views of the Senior Center.

In my prime…

2010-09-22T08:28:00.001-07:00

My name is Kenneth Butterly and I am now a self-acknowledged senior. A very special demographic classification where everyone not yet “old” thinks you are senile, infirm or over the hill. A category pandered to by politicians seeking your vote, while at the same time hoping you croak quickly, because to them, you are a pain in the ass and a drain on their precious bloated budgets.

A friend in need is a friend indeed.

I was encouraged to join the Park Ridge Senior Center (PRCC) this morning by an old friend. To my amazement, I accepted, and did so for a couple reasons. First, being the frugal old cuss that I am, found the price of membership affordable. More importantly, I found the the Center had need of my skill-set.

Why the blog?

The idea of blogging is nothing new. I already have one site: Butterly on Education. But I thought it might be kind of interesting to write about the things I see going on in and around the community, of course, from this seniors perspective.

You can blog too!

I encourage my readers, that’s you if you havn’t forgotten already why you are here, to become full participants in this site. If you have something to say about or just want to add to something I’ve posted, then of course, add your comments to the post. However, if you have something of your own to publish relating to senior community issues and need a venue, then send me an email with the article attached. So long as it is appropriate and relevant, I will publish it for reader comment. However, you must include your full name and phone number so I can confirm authenticity.

So, while I’m still in my prime, let’s begin the journey.