The comments posted on this message board represent the individual opinions of their respective posters only and are not to be construed as statements of proven or alleged fact.
Thanks for posting this. After looking at the budget, a couple questions come to mind.
1. The budget reflects an expected increase in tax receipts for 2009 ($5.8 million vs. $5.1 million in 2008). Is this realistic once you see all other governmental bodies (the village, D87, D41) are expecting revenues to drop?
2. Cash on hand at the beginning of the year is $13 million, Expected cash received is $10 million with expenditures to be $20 million. Where did all this cash come from? Is this from the bonds to pay for the Ackerman megaplex?
Wondering if someone can confirm or deny the following rumors floating around about some Park District issues during this time of tightening ones belt...
Rumor #1, GE Park District owns a house over by Babcock Park and a Park District employee lives in the house. Does he/she pay rent?
Rumor #2, 3 GE Park District employees drive village owned vehicles to and from work. 2 of the employees live south of Plainfield and the village pays for their gas and depreciation due to excessive mileage. Do these employees use the vehicles for personal use, or is it strictly for park district business?
Is there a strategy to owning the house by Babcock? If not sell it, and put that money into the PD. Is there a reason why these employees can't use their own vehicles to get to and from work? And if they need the village vehicles for work related transportation, drive to where they are parked, pick up the car, and then return it before you go home.
Hopefully, these are truly just rumors and not fact.
Last time I looked, the Park District is not a investment house, law firm, or the best insurance company in North America, that needs to provide perks to keep talented individuals from leaving for Carol Stream, or Oak Forest.
Originally posted by Clamato: "Under the resignation agreement, he is not allowed to make disparaging comments about the park district."
This is standard boiler plate for a severance agreement. When I was laid off the b*%tard that ran the company had this written into my severance agreement.
While such "illicit" activities do no "elicit" a strong reaction from me, I agree that "because that is how we have always done it" is not an adequate explanation.