Manhard to provide community development services to Oak Forest!!

[Stanleys]

Sure is an interesting article about a service that could be provided by many other firms. Why again was it not bid out to see how other firms could have priced these services? Other firms that have many more dealings with South and Southwest Suburban communities, than Manhard (Vernon Hills) would be accustomed.

I guess if there was a press release from the city, they must have some interest in explaining what happened in executive session!! Good job of finally trying to explain something Administration! To bad it seems fairly tainted because it all was discussed behind closed doors in executive session. Where were all the questions from the Aldermen again, oh maybe all their questions were answered in executive session.

[Wake up Oak Forest]

What's done is done, how would you suggest changing it?

[FYI]

Services such as engineering, legal, bond consuls, and many other professional services are never let out to bid, not only by Oak Forest, but all towns. The companies involved, for the most part will not even bid against each other. As far as a company having to be local in order to operate, the standards are so equal, they can operate in just about any community in the state. The city's engineering consulting company(Baxter Woodman)has towns all over Cook, Dupage, Will, counties and more further away, as does Robinson Engineering. The Attorney firms are the same way.

[Fast Eddie]

FYI wrote:

Services such as engineering, legal, bond consuls, and many other professional services are never let out to bid, not only by Oak Forest, but all towns. The companies involved, for the most part will not even bid against each other. As far as a company having to be local in order to operate, the standards are so equal, they can operate in just about any community in the state. The city's engineering consulting company(Baxter Woodman)has towns all over Cook, Dupage, Will, counties and more further away, as does Robinson Engineering. The Attorney firms are the same way.

FYI, if you have time, here is some interesting reading...

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs3.as...

[FYI]

Fast Eddie wrote:

<quoted text>FYI, if you have time, here is some interesting reading...
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs3.as...

This has nothing to do with my last post. I fully agree that the contract should have been discussed in open session. From what I understand thru talking to friends, the contract was not discussed in closed session, only the personnel involved. Personnel issues are legal to discuss in closed session. Actually I Agree with the comments sometime ago by somebody named Sideliner. The contract should have been discussed openly, and the need for more than one full time employee in C.D. cannot be justified, one of the Alderman voted no on the contract and stated he/she was uncomfortable with the whole thing. I already posted my knowledge on going out to bid for professional services. After a period of time the executive session minutes will be released, that should satisfy your curiosity

[wow1]

FYI wrote:

<quoted text>
This has nothing to do with my last post. I fully agree that the contract should have been discussed in open session. From what I understand thru talking to friends, the contract was not discussed in closed session, only the personnel involved. Personnel issues are legal to discuss in closed session. Actually I Agree with the comments sometime ago by somebody named Sideliner. The contract should have been discussed openly, and the need for more than one full time employee in C.D. cannot be justified, one of the Alderman voted no on the contract and stated he/she was uncomfortable with the whole thing. I already posted my knowledge on going out to bid for professional services. After a period of time the executive session minutes will be released, that should satisfy your curiosity

So your "Friends" told you that? So a contract of that size was not discussed in OPEN session, by your friends account - not in CLOSED session, so when was it discussed? Personal Service contracts like other services are excluded by law from being bid out. Legal Services, Bond Services, Insurance Service and Garbage Services are all personal services that although may have some content discussed in executive session - must be opened up on the council floor for discussion and if necessary bid to the specifications placed in any government open bid document! Unless maybe this was not an OPEN bid for services rendered, is that what you are saying here?

When in the past 4 to 5 City Government administrations have you seen executive minutes released? They can be, but in most cases are not due to personnel moves that implicate certain Aldermen, Employees or administrative staff!

In this case if they wanted to make sure they were clean on this contract it would have been best to bid it out, since it may be the 3rd largest city contract after garbage and insurance. Why don't you let us know your friends names, we could call them to see where they get all their information. I wonder why your "Friends" did not go up to council meeting to question the point about having this discussed in open session? In the best interest of the whole community it would have been great if the alderman that voted know would have started a discussion on the floor to answer any of his concerns? Maybe he voiced those concerns in other communications? Do you think? Maybe the Atty General's office should request those Executive Session minutes to see that your "Friends" are telling you the correct story?

"If the fish smells bad, it usually starts at the head!"

[FYI]

If you are so concerned, why don't you call or e-mail city officials yourself and ask your questions, don't expect me to do your dirty work. Perhaps you are fearful of doing that.

My knowledge is actually limited on city inner workings, I rely on what I am told. If you think posting on this blog will make a difference, you are naive. The officials I know intentionaly, do not even read this blog.

As far as naming my friends on this blog you have to be nuts. Why would I violate a friendship, I owe you nor the city nothing, but as soon as you publish who you are, I will put you in touch.

I only popped in to help provide some information that it seemed nobody else had. You act as though there was no public discussion of the contract. It was discussed, but not as fully explained as I would have liked.

Under the latest version of the sunshine law exutive session minutes are required to be released after the issue is resolved. I have been told this happens yearly. Once again I cannot speak to this, but if you call or e-mail Clerk Burkhardt I'm sure he would be happy to fill you in.

[hello OF]

I am not sure what you are saying here and why you ocntradict yourself from the last posting? You sure do seem alot like the rest of the politicians in that community.

Fast Eddie, you seem to have a grasp on these things shed some light on these poor souls will you!!

[Fast Eddie]

hello OF wrote:

I am not sure what you are saying here and why you ocntradict yourself from the last posting? You sure do seem alot like the rest of the politicians in that community.
Fast Eddie, you seem to have a grasp on these things shed some light on these poor souls will you!!

Qui contributeur sont vous réfère à?

[FYI]

Fast Eddie wrote:

<quoted text>
Qui contributeur sont vous réfère à?

What?

[Fast Eddie]

FYI wrote:

<quoted text>
What?

That is what I was asking, but, no response..... I think, not sure, that "Hello OF", is stating your posts concerning open discussion of Manhard Services contract are contradictory in your #5 and #7 postings. Hence a credibility issue which COULD be considered a generalization of a politician speaking... My point to you concerning the Open Meetings Act link that was posted is there are specific parameters concerning the use of the word "personnal" for an "executive session." Obviously you've read the link and agree with the city councils' use of secrecy in this instance... FYI, you are admirable in defendeing your friend/source...I would do the same. "Sunshine" that you reference, I believe, means that council is required to review for release "executive session minutes", not necessarily release those documents. Believe it or not, "naive" about elected officials reading these threads on blogs, I am not. I find it easy to understand why they wouldn't read these postings. I'm not convinced yet that they all read, research, and digest the information they ARE given prior to spending more taxpayer dollars.

[OF Resident]

Fast Eddie wrote:

<quoted text>
That is what I was asking, but, no response..... I think, not sure, that "Hello OF", is stating your posts concerning open discussion of Manhard Services contract are contradictory in your #5 and #7 postings. Hence a credibility issue which COULD be considered a generalization of a politician speaking... My point to you concerning the Open Meetings Act link that was posted is there are specific parameters concerning the use of the word "personnal" for an "executive session." Obviously you've read the link and agree with the city councils' use of secrecy in this instance... FYI, you are admirable in defendeing your friend/source...I would do the same. "Sunshine" that you reference, I believe, means that council is required to review for release "executive session minutes", not necessarily release those documents. Believe it or not, "naive" about elected officials reading these threads on blogs, I am not. I find it easy to understand why they wouldn't read these postings. I'm not convinced yet that they all read, research, and digest the information they ARE given prior to spending more taxpayer dollars.

It is time to really ask some hard questions, because the spin machine wants you to believe that this deal is saving the city money, but how is that justified, who knows what service above and beyond this contract the city will use at a price list type service? Another website used to call the council the Bobble-Heads, now what are they, maybe the 7 blocks of Silly Putty, since it is starting football season. What are these folks smoking? Blindly following a mayor and assistant mayor that leads them around by the nose. Now after all the great things this administration has done - What? Time to raise the Water Rates again, interesting. Previous administration bonds out water system improvements and raises the rates for their administration, over 50%, now this new administration is going to add a flat fee on top of that? I may need a few more Rain Catchers to hold any water I will be using! This administration has not done anything to improve the living conditions of this town, when will people really see that? All the fluff and fests aside, you can't cover up an unproductive government with flowery prose!

Best Day of my Life Administration, but for Who??

[FYI]

OF Resident wrote:

<quoted text>
It is time to really ask some hard questions, because the spin machine wants you to believe that this deal is saving the city money, but how is that justified, who knows what service above and beyond this contract the city will use at a price list type service? Another website used to call the council the Bobble-Heads, now what are they, maybe the 7 blocks of Silly Putty, since it is starting football season. What are these folks smoking? Blindly following a mayor and assistant mayor that leads them around by the nose. Now after all the great things this administration has done - What? Time to raise the Water Rates again, interesting. Previous administration bonds out water system improvements and raises the rates for their administration, over 50%, now this new administration is going to add a flat fee on top of that? I may need a few more Rain Catchers to hold any water I will be using! This administration has not done anything to improve the living conditions of this town, when will people really see that? All the fluff and fests aside, you can't cover up an unproductive government with flowery prose!
Best Day of my Life Administration, but for Who??

Six, one opposed it.

[OF Senior]

FYI wrote:

<quoted text>
Six, one opposed it.

I just don't believe the city government is telling us the whole story here!! I just don't see the savings they are talking about because they have no businesses or store beating a path to our doorstep. I am still waiting for the new Gold's Gym so I can work out when I come downstairs from my new condo, and after that run over to the new OF Train Station or not!

[Questions]

OF Senior wrote:

<quoted text>
I just don't believe the city government is telling us the whole story here!! I just don't see the savings they are talking about because they have no businesses or store beating a path to our doorstep. I am still waiting for the new Gold's Gym so I can work out when I come downstairs from my new condo, and after that run over to the new OF Train Station or not!

You make some great points, I was looking for a restaurant to go and eat dinner last and there are really only about 4 or 5 and some of them were not open, when will we be getting a sit down restaurant other than the one on Central?

[FYI]

Not till the economy picks up. Restaurants have been among the hardest hit industries with all the lay-offs, and people worrying about being laid off. Strange, the bar business if flourishing.

[Oh Boy]

FYI wrote:

Not till the economy picks up. Restaurants have been among the hardest hit industries with all the lay-offs, and people worrying about being laid off. Strange, the bar business if flourishing.

I see liquor stores and bars, is there any plan to try and entice a family restaurant to OF? Or do we have to wait until this Manhard sees that the economy is picking up? Who tells Manhard who and when to try and attract any of these businesses? How do they go about marketing our town? Sure seems like a confusing way to work with Community Development in a trying economy.

[Grandpaw]

It is almost impossible to answer your questions on this thread. To much info to print on here. I would suggest you set up an appointment with Adam Dotson at city hall and I'm sure he would answer all those questions. The city has been trying to entice a family restaurant for years, but they cannot force it to happen. Our problem has always been that when we get a decent establishment you people don't support it, just like other businesses.

[Questions]

Grandpaw wrote:

It is almost impossible to answer your questions on this thread. To much info to print on here. I would suggest you set up an appointment with Adam Dotson at city hall and I'm sure he would answer all those questions. The city has been trying to entice a family restaurant for years, but they cannot force it to happen. Our problem has always been that when we get a decent establishment you people don't support it, just like other businesses.

What do you mean - "You people don't support it." Sure is a broad stroke of the paint brush with that one!! Where do you get your information from on that one? It surely is not a true reflection of Oak Forest to claim we don't support our businesses. We visit our bars and liquor stores, breakfast and lunch is always available! Three different drug convenient stores, Dollar Store, Auto Parts and grocery stores all get our business, how could you ever say that we don't support our businesses? Many businesses leave due to higher taxes passed on from landlords to tenants. Some very well may have left due to bad business practices, so why would you paint such a broad stroke over our community? Why?

[FAST EDDIE]

Just noticed this. Does anyone happen to know why this Manhard outfit is on the agenda again for tues meeting? I get it that the town politicians don't read this blog so I have no intention of trying to get my aldermaniac rep on the phone to ask for info. I hope they aren't coming back for more money already. Have they even done anything for Oak Forest yet for what we are paying them ? Just asking?