Thursday, October 27, 2005

* Only THIS Plan Is Shelved

Guest Blogger

I got a call Monday from Angela Caputo with Pioneer Press, who asked if I thought that people came away thinking this marina idea was sunk. I told her that I thought most did, and pointed to Moore's e-mail saying the proposal was "permanently shelved".

She (Caputo) told me, "Well, that's not what he's saying today!"

Same crap, different day.

Meanwhile, the development juggernaut marches on, next to Edgewater. We need to make sure THAT meeting is well attended, too. Especially since Mr. Rejman said they were "looking at maybe moving up the North Side planning process".

According to today's article, Moore said he's "not putting too much stock in blind referendum results as a gauge of popular opinion."

The only thing blind here is Joe Moore. He must have been too blind to see the sign I held up when he spoke at last week's meeting so I'll post it here again. (And remember that Joe loves to trivialize the referendum by reminding us that it was ONLY in 10 precincts!)

3,647 Voters said NO to lakefront development - Only 10 precincts
3,693 Voted for Joe Moore in his last election - 44 total precincts

DO THE MATH JOE!


Anne Sullivan

34 comments:

CommonSense said...

The more I read about Joe Moore, the more I think he has to go! He doesn't serve his constituents. His paying attention to things likes foie gras instead of local issues has now caused a restaurant to be vandalized. Thanks Joe!

dan2 said...

I'd like to see the article and read the context his comments are in. Where do you even buy this paper? I've never seen it. Can someone post the article?

Michael K said...

You can get a lot of things under the Morse El unfortunately.

I'd like to know the full content of the article as well. The Pioneer Press website contains dozens of small papers that serve the suburbs. Which one should I bee looking for? Also, seems like it is a conservative Republican rag.

Craig Gernhardt said...

dan2 said.....> "Where do you even buy this paper? I've never seen it."

You aren't alone dan2. To find the paper you have to look for the big Church Bingo photos or the Pumpkin Carving photos on the cover. They should change the name of the paper to the New-less Star.

Hugh said...

Moore's post-marina letter is still up on the splash page of his web site:

" ... the Chicago Park District has decided to permanently shelve a proposal to construct a marina on Rogers Park’s and Edgewater’s lakefront."

Hugh said...

Anne wrote...

>Meanwhile, the development juggernaut marches on, next to Edgewater. We need to make sure THAT meeting is well attended, too.

Anne,

What are the details on the Edgewater meeting? It doesn't seem to be listed on the Park District web site.

Jocelyn said...

What was "blind" about the referendum anyway? Because it wasn't a vote on a specific plan?

this is sad to me. I am not anti-progress just anti-paving paradise.

Hugh said...

Here's the Pioneer Press News Star article, courtesy of neighbor Sandy Goldman. Thanks, Sandy!

Say it Ain't So, Joe

And thanks, Angela!

Pamela said...

When I read the article on Wed. (articles such as this and the crime blotter are good reason to pay the $17 annual subscription fee for the paper), I wasn't surprised. Here's my prediction: forces somewhere (city hall, Chicago Park District, Jan. S., IL contractors, among others -- take your pick) want LSD extended. Over the lake. At some point LSD will be extended to Evanston, marinas will be built -- in RP/Edgewater, Evanston, etc. It may take 5 or 10 or 15 years but it's coming. We 60k+ residents, plus the lake front Edgewater residents are outnumbered and outflanked. Traffic patterns demand it, politocs want it for the inflow of fed funds they will get, contractors want it for the $ it will bring them. I'm not being defeatest but the forces are such that the best one can do is buy a little time and some say in how it gets done because it's inevitable.

Michael K said...

Here we go again. Where does it say anywhere in this article that there is any plan to extend Lake Shore Drive? Answer: Nowhere. When I read this article, I get a big smile on my face because I read the part that says it might be part of a larger plan to extend park space and the bike path north to Evanston. This might sound like bad news to people who live in buildings on the lake with their own private piers but it is music to my ears to think we might finally have the beautiful lakefront park space that every other part of the city south of Hollywood has.

Also, as I mentioned earlier, the Pioneer Press is a conservative suburban rag that looks out for the interests of the Republican party.

Hugh said...

>The Pioneer Press website contains dozens of small papers that serve the suburbs.

>... the Pioneer Press is a conservative suburban rag that looks out for the interests of the Republican party.

You got this out from their web site? Wow.

Are you a subscriber?

How many issues of the actual paper have you actually read?

Can you give some examples of the Pioneer Press looking out for Republican interests?

Hugh said...

>3,647 Voters said NO to lakefront development - Only 10 precincts
>3,693 Voted for Joe Moore in his last election - 44 total precincts

>DO THE MATH JOE!

Mathematics competence is NOT a requirement to be Alderman in Chicago. For more information on math deficiencies in our City Council, see the post "Math-Challenged Alderman" on Forum49.

Hugh said...

I guess the lesson is that "I am pleased to report that..." and "I am please that..." do not mean the same thing. What a weasal. I guess assuming the awesome responsibility of a high office like Chicago Alderman means that from time to time you have to rise above vagaries like referenda with 88% concensus.

Michael K said...

Pioneer press endorsed President Bush in the 2004 election. They also censored a Doonesbury strip that poked fun at Karl Rove. Also, those in the industry will tell you that the Pioneer Press takes a generally conservative political slant. Being as they are a suburban newspaper that has a mostly Republican circulation you can be assured that they will do their best to provide the kind of news their readers want to hear.

Hugh said...

Craig quipped...

>They should change the name of the paper to the New-less Star.

Sure you're not just a little sore Angela got a juicy quote from Moore?

Pamela opined...

> ... articles such as this and the crime blotter are good reason to pay

Michael,

You are denying yourself an important source of information about our neighborhood. You get all the news you need from blogs?

Every week someone from the News-Star pulls the shift logs from the 24th District and prints items of benefit to the community. This is very important work, and no one else is doing it. It is difficult to consider yourself an involved citizen, concerned about crime, without at least perusing our one and only local newspaper every week.

Let's focus on Pioneer's Rogers Park paper, the News-Star, and let's focus on the news reporting, not the editorial page or the comics page. Can you please share with us some recent examples of conservative or Republican influence in the news reporting in the News-Star, from your experience?

Michael K said...

Hugh,

As the discussion was circulating around what I believed was the actual Pioneer Press, that's what I aired my opinion on. To be honest, I have never read the News Star as I have never seen it on a news stand. Others here have stated the same. I may have looked through a copy left on the train once but cannot recall any of it's content.

In answer to your other question, I get my news from the Tribune, The Sun Times, The Reader, The Washington Post, Chicago Tonight, The News Hour with Jim Lehrer, BBC World News, some of the freebie papers at the bus stop (not the Red Eye as I do not care to know who Justin Timberlake is boinking) and from my neighbors. My coffee table is a mess. If I have time and I can find an issue, perhaps I will give the News Star a look see.

I do not generally believe anything that I read on blogs until I have done a little research.

Michael K said...

>DO THE MATH JOE!

I'd just like to point out that I think it is funny that the wishes of the voting public are only valued when it comes to this referendum but not to selecting an Alderman.

Charlie Didrickson said...

Friday Follies are in full swing!

Pamela said...

{Michael K wrote: Here we go again. Where does it say anywhere in this article that there is any plan to extend Lake Shore Drive? Answer: Nowhere. When I read this article, I get a big smile on my face because I read the part that says it might be part of a larger plan to extend park space and the bike path north to Evanston. This might sound like bad news to people who live in buildings on the lake with their own private piers but it is music to my ears to think we might finally have the beautiful lakefront park space that every other part of the city south of Hollywood has.]

I don't depend on politicos and beaurocrats to spell out what they are going to do and when they are going to do it. And I don't depend on most reporters to be able to ferret it out, no matter how talented they may be. Politicos are not forthcoming and reporters often under deadline pressures that don't give them time to dig as deep as necessary. But the bike path line was a bit of a clue. What runs along the bike path south of Hollywood? Why LSD! I will bet $100 that there is no bike path north of Hollywood without also a thoroughfare for cars. The Chicago Park District may be flush and the city of Chicago and our various elected officials may be good at getting transport dollars out of the Feds but there is no way they are getting the BILLIONS they will need to do landfill over the lake to make more parks and a nice bike path only. The funding for the green space will only be accompanied by funding for a major thoroughfare.

Do people really think that Joe and Jan, etc. didn't know about the LSD study? Please. They knew. They just preferred that certain noisy voters not know as long as possible. They also wanted deniability.

Hugh said...

>I value the 3600 plus idiots who voted for Joe like...

hate the sin, not the sinner

Michael K said...

There was an in depth article in the Reader this week referring to the issue of Rogers Park being paranoid as to the extension of LSD. Read it here:

http://www.chicagoreader.com/pdf/051028/051028_works.pdf

Enjoy!

Michael K said...

There was an in depth article in the Reader this week referring to the issue of Rogers Park being paranoid as to the extension of LSD. Read it here:

http://www.chicagoreader.com/pdf/051028/051028_works.pdf

Enjoy!

Michael K said...

This is an instance of Don Gordon and others praying on the fears of others to promote their own agenda. It is shameful and embarassing. It makes the people of Rogers Park look like a bunch of paranoid nut jobs.

Hugh said...

So you won't be joining the Rogers Park Conservancy any time soon?

Craig Gernhardt said...

Michael K. said......> "This is an instance of Don Gordon and others praying on the fears of others to promote their own agenda."

Have you ever personally met Don Gordon?

Sat down a talked with Mr. Gordon?

Called or e-mailed Mr. Gordon?

What is Don's agenda?

Let's not be hypocritical Michael K. Have you done your research before you made this post? You are a blogger, you should know this!

Craig Gernhardt said...

Michael K. said......> "This is an instance of Don Gordon and others praying on the fears of others to promote their own agenda."

Have you ever personally met Anne Sullivan?

Sat down a talked with Anne Sullivan?

Called or e-mailed Anne Sullivan?

What is Anne's agenda?

Let's not be hypocritical Michael K. Have you done your research before you made this post? You are a blogger, you should know this!

Craig Gernhardt said...

The same goes for Fran Tobin. Did you talk with Fran before making such a comment? What is his agenda?

Michael K said...

I didn't make a remark about Anne or Fran. I made a comment about Don Gordon. It is apparent that planting seeds of paranoia has served him well in convincing the community that any development on the lake is tied to LSD expansion.
Pamela's comments seem to be evidence that this idea is fairly widespread. I have heard this same argument over and over again in this community. People have been talking about it for years. How many projects have been killed because of this urban legend? How many of those may have benefited the community?

Michael K said...

Another thing that this article mentions is that the referendum that is often referred to here covers a rather broad range of topics. If what they say is true, then this referendum may have been so popular because voters agreed with any one part of it but not necessarily in its entirety. It would be like having a referendum that asked, "Would you like to see a new marina built and kill puppies?" If anyone can provide a copy of the actual language used in this referendum, I would really like to see it.

Pamela said...

To clarify, I know very little about Don Gordon and his activities, and have barely read anything he or his group might have issued. I've hardly even spoken of LSD extension with anyone. But here is what I do know: it's folly to take what politicians (of all stripes) tell us at face value. There are always agendas. Jan S's request for $1mil to study extending the park just doesn't pass the smell test with me. That city park officials "don't like to talk publicaly about the issue. . ." also leaves a faint odor. This may all be perfectly innocent and coincidental but citizens should be ever vigilent. It's not that the politicos have some secret cabal going -- it's that there are competing agendas. The Park District wants more land to control and revenue-generating land (which gives them a bigger budget -- you don't gain more power or even keep your power by standing still). North Shore denizens hate the traffic on Sheridan, and that area continues to grow in population, particulary with the new building in Evanston. Chicago citizens want more park land. No doubt developers in RP (and Edgewater) would like to see a bigger/better park which would be a nice selling point for them. Certainly there are plenty of contractors who would love the job! Government loves getting fed $ to finance big projects that dump money into communities so they can say they helped create jobs. There are no shortage of reasons to extend the park over the lake and while one is at it, extend LSD (the thoroughfare, not the drug). Whether any one dept. or politico is currently working to make it happen, well, maybe, maybe not. But I still predict it happens, and in my lifetime.

Hugh said...

>If anyone can provide a copy of the actual language used in this referendum, I would really like to see it.

but you're having such fun without it!

Michael K said...

I read the SOL website and the conservancy's website and they don't want any landfill in the lake at all. They don't want the parks to be bigger. Why? Supposedly for environmental issues. That is why they try to tie in LSD expansion with every suggestion that we improve our lakefront park system. There really is no reason to expand LSD as there is already a 4 lane highway that cuts through our neighborhood. I want a bike path and more park space. The SOL and conservancy folks don't and they have a right to their opinion but using scare tactics to get their way is dirty.

Hugh said...

>I will bet $100 that there is no bike path north of Hollywood without
>also a thoroughfare for cars. The Chicago Park District may be flush
>and the city of Chicago and our various elected officials may be good
>at getting transport dollars out of the Feds but there is no way they
>are getting the BILLIONS they will need to do landfill over the lake to
>make more parks and a nice bike path only. The funding for the green
>space will only be accompanied by funding for a major thoroughfare.

Pamela,

I have been thinking a lot about your earlier post. Let me see if I can paraphrase.

A lakefront bicycle path from Hollywood to the City limits would involved adding landfill at least a few feet wide for some parts of the lakefront. Then you have to worry about the landfill staying where you put it, so you need serious revetments of concrete or stone or whatever, sufficient to hold up when the winds of November come pounding. So even the most humble plan is a massively expensive project. Then the incremental cost of widening the landfill just a bit and slapping in a six-lane highway becomes negligible. Federal transportation dollars will be used, and the project will be pitched as a free park.

This makes a lot of sense to me.

Hugh said...

Anyone who thinks some nice politicians want to build the nice people of Rogers park a nice bike path without a six-lane highway next to it is delusional.

'Broken Heart' Past Blogs