Robinson at the taxpayer money well a...

Robinson at the taxpayer money well again.

Posted in the Shorewood Forum

First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#1 Nov 6, 2012
Look at tomorrow's agenda resolution 12-09. Did we go for out bid on this, if so post all the bids. Of course lets go back and realize that CMT was already paid to do a I&I study and that is how the increase in water bill came about along with the water studies that was already done.

So if anyone out there truly believes that the HEAD COWARD does not owe Robinson for their help in his election campaign, you have drank the kool-aid already.

The countless studies that Robinson has been paid to do in the last 2 years is mind boggling. What are we up to now, over $800,000.00 in studies. Think back when the HEAD COWARD and lapdogs told us only need to spend $280,000.00 to close wells 5&8 along with pay Robinson $18,500.00 for their time. So far, nearly a million dollars to Robinson, wells 5&8 still not officially closed and capped.

Thanks HEAD COWARD and fellow lapdogs.

Where's are lower water rates?
Chumbalone

Sycamore, IL

#2 Nov 7, 2012
thoughts or ideas wrote:
Look at tomorrow's agenda resolution 12-09. Did we go for out bid on this, if so post all the bids. Of course lets go back and realize that CMT was already paid to do a I&I study and that is how the increase in water bill came about along with the water studies that was already done.
So if anyone out there truly believes that the HEAD COWARD does not owe Robinson for their help in his election campaign, you have drank the kool-aid already.
The countless studies that Robinson has been paid to do in the last 2 years is mind boggling. What are we up to now, over $800,000.00 in studies. Think back when the HEAD COWARD and lapdogs told us only need to spend $280,000.00 to close wells 5&8 along with pay Robinson $18,500.00 for their time. So far, nearly a million dollars to Robinson, wells 5&8 still not officially closed and capped.
Thanks HEAD COWARD and fellow lapdogs.
Where's are lower water rates?
When LOWER RATES were proposed and approved by this council.....IT WAS VETOED BY THE MAYOR....more than once. The votes were 5 to 3 to lower the rates...therefore....no lower water rates.
Super 77

Lemont, IL

#3 Nov 7, 2012
Chumbalone wrote:
<quoted text> When LOWER RATES were proposed and approved by this council.....IT WAS VETOED BY THE MAYOR....more than once. The votes were 5 to 3 to lower the rates...therefore....no lower water rates.
True!
Do you feel the water plan that the old council approved was right or wrong?
Dick and Mike D

Homer Glen, IL

#4 Nov 7, 2012
Chumbalone wrote:
<quoted text> When LOWER RATES were proposed and approved by this council.....IT WAS VETOED BY THE MAYOR....more than once. The votes were 5 to 3 to lower the rates...therefore....no lower water rates.
IS THE WATER BETTER TO DRINK NOW ? NO!!!
Chumbalone

Oak Park, IL

#5 Nov 7, 2012
Super 77 wrote:
<quoted text>
True!
Do you feel the water plan that the old council approved was right or wrong?
Just answering the question posed by the poster about water rates. The old council does not exist anymore.
Chumbalone

Sacramento, CA

#6 Nov 7, 2012
Dick and Mike D wrote:
<quoted text> IS THE WATER BETTER TO DRINK NOW ? NO!!!
That was not the question I answered. You want "Chicago" style water...install a super filtration system in your own home...or stay in Homer Glen where water is like gold and folks pay hundreds of dollars a month for piped in Chi-town water! Wait til Emmanuel needs more cash for Chicago's water system....you all will thank the Lord for the "bad" well water in Lockport when he drops the hammer down on folks sucking all that Lake Michigan water that Chicago pumps to places like Homer Glen ! For me ....no thanks ! No town needs to spend millions of dollars for super reverse osmosis systems that requires expensive maintenance just so folks can was their cars and water their lawns. Like I said...you want Evian out of your faucets...install your own private system. Don't ask 20,000 residents to pay for it. Ask the Mayor...Lockport water is safe to drink.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#7 Nov 7, 2012
Chumbalone wrote:
<quoted text> When LOWER RATES were proposed and approved by this council.....IT WAS VETOED BY THE MAYOR....more than once. The votes were 5 to 3 to lower the rates...therefore....no lower water rates.
There has never been a proposal yet to lower the rates from this council or mayor. All proposals were only going to putoff the next increases until after the election. The only proposal to lower the water rates came from the other 2 districts, only to be shot down.
Super 77

Lemont, IL

#8 Nov 7, 2012
Chumbalone wrote:
<quoted text> Just answering the question posed by the poster about water rates. The old council does not exist anymore.
I wanted to know if you thought fixing the water system was necessary. Clearly you don't. Your answer is: If people want clean water that doesn't trash their laundry and smell, they should buy a filter.

Why have local government at all? We should all fix the roads in front of our house ourselves, hire personal body guards instead of police. I think you are on to something. Run for mayor!

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#9 Nov 7, 2012
Chumbalone wrote:
<quoted text> When LOWER RATES were proposed and approved by this council.....IT WAS VETOED BY THE MAYOR....more than once. The votes were 5 to 3 to lower the rates...therefore....no lower water rates.
What is your opinion on the rest of the topic, beside the water rates. Do you agree that Robinson is being paid to study a project that was already paid for. Do you agree that we were told we didn't need to fix anything, just give Robinson $18,500 and close wells 5&8 and all is well. Please explain why all this money has been given to Robinson.

Remember there have been no new projects undertaken by this present council. All projects were already on the books.

Oh wait, I'm sorry, after costly studies, we did turn the benches around!! My bad. That had to be worth at least couple hundred thousand in studies alone.
CMON

Chicago, IL

#10 Nov 7, 2012
thoughts or ideas wrote:
<quoted text>
What is your opinion on the rest of the topic, beside the water rates. Do you agree that Robinson is being paid to study a project that was already paid for. Do you agree that we were told we didn't need to fix anything, just give Robinson $18,500 and close wells 5&8 and all is well. Please explain why all this money has been given to Robinson.
Remember there have been no new projects undertaken by this present council. All projects were already on the books.
Oh wait, I'm sorry, after costly studies, we did turn the benches around!! My bad. That had to be worth at least couple hundred thousand in studies alone.
Some things has become even more clear after tonights meeting. 1) Robinson has established a pattern of giving us low bids/estimates only to add additional costs during or after the project has been completed. It was good to see Denise question this. 2) The folks on MacGregor obviously were correct in their complaints about the street widening project. The same issues seem to be coming up again on other projects. 3) Tom Kelley needs to retire. He attacked the resident talking and called him a jerk when the resident wasn't even talking to him. 4).Kelly Turner has NO business running for Mayor.
Chumbalone

Oak Park, IL

#11 Nov 8, 2012
thoughts or ideas wrote:
<quoted text>
There has never been a proposal yet to lower the rates from this council or mayor. All proposals were only going to putoff the next increases until after the election. The only proposal to lower the water rates came from the other 2 districts, only to be shot down.
You are absolutely WRONG ! If you are a resident...go ask whoever your alderman is to VERIFY what I have said. There was a resolution proposed to lower and or stop the rate increases....the council voted yes by a 5 to 3 margin....and the resolution was subsequently VETOED by the Mayor. I personally do not care if the rates were lowered or stopped.....but this issue WAS VOTED ON AND VETOED. You obviously have no idea what has gone on with this current council. Please attend meetings or watch them on LCTV 6 to fully understand what is REALLY going on.
Dick and Mike D

Homer Glen, IL

#12 Nov 8, 2012
Chumbalone wrote:
<quoted text> That was not the question I answered. You want "Chicago" style water...install a super filtration system in your own home...or stay in Homer Glen where water is like gold and folks pay hundreds of dollars a month for piped in Chi-town water! Wait til Emmanuel needs more cash for Chicago's water system....you all will thank the Lord for the "bad" well water in Lockport when he drops the hammer down on folks sucking all that Lake Michigan water that Chicago pumps to places like Homer Glen ! For me ....no thanks ! No town needs to spend millions of dollars for super reverse osmosis systems that requires expensive maintenance just so folks can was their cars and water their lawns. Like I said...you want Evian out of your faucets...install your own private system. Don't ask 20,000 residents to pay for it. Ask the Mayor...Lockport water is safe to drink.
I LIVE in LOCKPORT and the WATER sucks,you can't use it too wash the car it takes the PAINT OFF.why not FIX it and be DONE .YOU said CHICAGO water not ME.you don't KNOW what you are talking about you should LEARN what the PLAIN was !!!!!!!
Chumbalone

Oak Park, IL

#13 Nov 8, 2012
Dick and Mike D wrote:
<quoted text> I LIVE in LOCKPORT and the WATER sucks,you can't use it too wash the car it takes the PAINT OFF.why not FIX it and be DONE .YOU said CHICAGO water not ME.you don't KNOW what you are talking about you should LEARN what the PLAIN was !!!!!!!
TODAY....Lockport's water is SAFE TO DRINK...not my words...the Mayor's. Install a water softener for a few hundred dollars like I did and have no problems. The city only owes you water that is "SAFE" to drink....and it is ! Like I said...if you want EVIAN water out of your faucet...YOU PAY FOR IT...I'm not willing to pay for some super filtration system just so YOU can have Champagne coming out of YOUR faucet and then wash your silly car with it. Hard water is NOT poison....Lockport has ALWAYS had hard water...and people drink it every day. Tax the people to fix and maintain the CURRENT system....don't ask them to install a Mercedes when a Chevy is all you need ! I DO know what the plan was....and We still don't like it....want it...or NEED it ! Relax....and have a drink of tap water !
Super 77

Lemont, IL

#14 Nov 8, 2012
Chumbalone wrote:
<quoted text> Tax the people to fix and maintain the CURRENT system....don't ask them to install a Mercedes when a Chevy is all you need ! I DO know what the plan was....and We still don't like it....want it...or NEED it ! Relax....and have a drink of tap water !
Funny you should put it that way. The plan was to fix the current system. And they didn't pick the "Mercedes." CMT proposed three plans: a "Mercedes" a "Chevy" and a "Gremlin" The old council picked the "Chevy." It's Turner and Van Dyke who's run around claiming the old council tried to implement the most expensive and excessive plan. That was just a lie told by Kelly to (finally) get elected to an office. Now he is trying to convince everyone that we can get by with a "Big Wheel."

The water plan isn't just about drinking water. Some of it included running water up to the ML Reality property (which we had an agreement to do). Kelly lined it out of the budget. The fallout was a loss of 400 jobs and a FedEx depot at 143rd street. When FedEx came to develop, ML Realty had to turn them away because of the dispute Kelly instigated by telling them he and his majority weren't going to run the water mains out there. Now it's being built in Romeoville.

Ironically, we still have to run the mains to the property under a threat of a law suit as the City had a contract to do it. And now we get to spend the money and get no development as well. Way to go Kelly, Van Dyke, Turner, and Denise!
Lockport

Lockport, IL

#15 Nov 8, 2012
People fail to understand that the raise in the water rates had little to do with the quality of water. The majority of the projects covered by the increased rates was improving deteriorated water and sewer lines. This was work that should have been done decades ago.

Fixing the problems would have cost millions of dollars less if they had been done decades ago. Why weren't they done? Because they aren't free. That's what is so disturbing about the Turner propaganda. He really believes that this work can get done for free. He's even got a few people in town believing that he can fix this stuff for free. After all, he has wasted 18 months trying to convince himself and the residents of Lockport that reducing the water rates leads to fixing the problems. He forgot to factor in that the people laying the pipe don't work for free. The cost of the pipe isn't free. The fuel to put the pipe in the ground isn't free.

Therefore, when the Mayor vetoed the irresponsible votes to lower the water rates he did the right thing. The Mayor made sure that there would be funding for the very projects that needed to be done decades ago. And yes, the previous council after nearly a year and a half of public hearings decided on fixing the worst of the worst. Part of that project involved increasing the quality of water.

There are consequences for every action. Lowering the water rates guaranteed that NOTHING would get done. That also guaranteed that every penny paid to Robinson to study what had already been studied was and has been a WASTE OF MONEY.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#16 Nov 8, 2012
Chumbalone wrote:
<quoted text> You are absolutely WRONG ! If you are a resident...go ask whoever your alderman is to VERIFY what I have said. There was a resolution proposed to lower and or stop the rate increases....the council voted yes by a 5 to 3 margin....and the resolution was subsequently VETOED by the Mayor. I personally do not care if the rates were lowered or stopped.....but this issue WAS VOTED ON AND VETOED. You obviously have no idea what has gone on with this current council. Please attend meetings or watch them on LCTV 6 to fully understand what is REALLY going on.
Now we know you are really Ald Van Dyke. That was your view during all the proposals. Your idea of not raising the rates is equal to lowering the rates. Oh well Dick, now we know who Chumbalone is. Lets truly lower the rates, put them back to rate after first increase, lower the surcharge back. This should all be done, since Robinson originally said, just close wells 5&8, and give us $18,500.00. That is lowering our rates. Remember, every resolution put forth by you, all included the option to reinstate the rate increase after the election. So no, you are wrong.

You and the rest of this majority can try all you want, but will never convince the public that any resolution to lower our rates has ever been put forward. Again not increasing them is NOT the same as lowering the rate.

Nice try Ald Van Dyke.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#17 Nov 8, 2012
Lockport wrote:
People fail to understand that the raise in the water rates had little to do with the quality of water. The majority of the projects covered by the increased rates was improving deteriorated water and sewer lines. This was work that should have been done decades ago.
Fixing the problems would have cost millions of dollars less if they had been done decades ago. Why weren't they done? Because they aren't free. That's what is so disturbing about the Turner propaganda. He really believes that this work can get done for free. He's even got a few people in town believing that he can fix this stuff for free. After all, he has wasted 18 months trying to convince himself and the residents of Lockport that reducing the water rates leads to fixing the problems. He forgot to factor in that the people laying the pipe don't work for free. The cost of the pipe isn't free. The fuel to put the pipe in the ground isn't free.
Therefore, when the Mayor vetoed the irresponsible votes to lower the water rates he did the right thing. The Mayor made sure that there would be funding for the very projects that needed to be done decades ago. And yes, the previous council after nearly a year and a half of public hearings decided on fixing the worst of the worst. Part of that project involved increasing the quality of water.
There are consequences for every action. Lowering the water rates guaranteed that NOTHING would get done. That also guaranteed that every penny paid to Robinson to study what had already been studied was and has been a WASTE OF MONEY.
Sadly you speak with common sense. We can tell you have not drank the kool-aid. The main question is since Turner has made it very clear in the beginning, that no work other than closing wells 5&8 needed to be done, then why on earth has Robinson been GIVEN so much money already for studies that were already done and paid for with CMT which is how the rates came about. Alos why has Robinson kept stalling on producing this so called study showing all the work that needs to be done. Oh that's right waiting till after the election, otherwise Turner and his gang have no valid points.
Chumbalone

Sacramento, CA

#18 Nov 9, 2012
thoughts or ideas wrote:
<quoted text>
Now we know you are really Ald Van Dyke. That was your view during all the proposals. Your idea of not raising the rates is equal to lowering the rates. Oh well Dick, now we know who Chumbalone is. Lets truly lower the rates, put them back to rate after first increase, lower the surcharge back. This should all be done, since Robinson originally said, just close wells 5&8, and give us $18,500.00. That is lowering our rates. Remember, every resolution put forth by you, all included the option to reinstate the rate increase after the election. So no, you are wrong.
You and the rest of this majority can try all you want, but will never convince the public that any resolution to lower our rates has ever been put forward. Again not increasing them is NOT the same as lowering the rate.
Nice try Ald Van Dyke.
Anyone reading what you post...and knowing anything about what has occurred during the last year with this Council...will fully understand that you have absolutely no idea what has transpired. Right or wrong...good or bad....you DO NOT know what has gone on. No..THOUGHTS...and no IDEAS...just the same old nonsense. After a period of time...it becomes completely useless to engage in any form of discourse with a person or persons who have an absolutely closed mind. Now the result is calling me Ald. VanDyke. Before.. it was "you are truly Turner". Even the people I disagree with seem to know what is going on...and has gone on. So..may I suggest you review the last 12 months or more of meetings...or contact your current alderman..or the Mayor himself for a "briefing" to set you straight. Until then....you may keep your thoughts and ideas to yourself. For the LAST TIME...I am not an alderman...or the Mayor...or anyone else associated with our dysfunctional city council. I am a concerned resident who trys very hard to pay attention to what goes on.
Super 77

Lemont, IL

#19 Nov 9, 2012
Chumbalone wrote:
<quoted text> Anyone reading what you post...and knowing anything about what has occurred during the last year with this Council...will fully understand that you have absolutely no idea what has transpired. Right or wrong...good or bad....you DO NOT know what has gone on. No..THOUGHTS...and no IDEAS...just the same old nonsense. After a period of time...it becomes completely useless to engage in any form of discourse with a person or persons who have an absolutely closed mind. Now the result is calling me Ald. VanDyke. Before.. it was "you are truly Turner". Even the people I disagree with seem to know what is going on...and has gone on. So..may I suggest you review the last 12 months or more of meetings...or contact your current alderman..or the Mayor himself for a "briefing" to set you straight. Until then....you may keep your thoughts and ideas to yourself. For the LAST TIME...I am not an alderman...or the Mayor...or anyone else associated with our dysfunctional city council. I am a concerned resident who trys very hard to pay attention to what goes on.
So he is a loon. Don't respond to his post. What are your thoughts on my post #14?

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#20 Nov 9, 2012
Chumbalone wrote:
<quoted text> Anyone reading what you post...and knowing anything about what has occurred during the last year with this Council...will fully understand that you have absolutely no idea what has transpired. Right or wrong...good or bad....you DO NOT know what has gone on. No..THOUGHTS...and no IDEAS...just the same old nonsense. After a period of time...it becomes completely useless to engage in any form of discourse with a person or persons who have an absolutely closed mind. Now the result is calling me Ald. VanDyke. Before.. it was "you are truly Turner". Even the people I disagree with seem to know what is going on...and has gone on. So..may I suggest you review the last 12 months or more of meetings...or contact your current alderman..or the Mayor himself for a "briefing" to set you straight. Until then....you may keep your thoughts and ideas to yourself. For the LAST TIME...I am not an alderman...or the Mayor...or anyone else associated with our dysfunctional city council. I am a concerned resident who trys very hard to pay attention to what goes on.
Okay, lets talk facts. What was the resolution you are referring to that was vetoed by the mayor which LOWERED our water rates. Remember not increasing our rates is not the same as lowering our rates. If you can respond to the ordiance that was vetoed that LOWERED our current bill at the time, then I will be the first on here to apologize to you. I have no problem admitting when wrong, but trust me when I say, you will not be able to provide the ordinance that LOWERED our rate. I will be patiently waiting for your reply. No name calling, no slandererous remarks nothing, please tell us all the ordinance you refer to. In order to LOWER the rate, would mean the per gallon charge or surchages would have to be lower than current bill at time or ordinance. There was plenty of last minute proposals that was presented, but surely one that LOWERED. You must also remember, that since the council never discussed these with the other 2 districts it was also a mute point as well. Safe to say neither of the 2 districts would have objected to any ordinance that LOWERED our rate.

Ok will be waiting for your reply.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Shorewood Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News New Lenox has paid nearly $1 million in police ... 49 min Welfare Country 15
Investors never invest their own money (Apr '11) 4 hr another sucker 10,612
News Stateville gets new lease on life as Pontiac pr... (May '08) 20 hr sad mommy 50
Car show is starting to blow 23 hr cellobowstrings 5
Tariq pinnick (Jan '16) Fri blat 18
Neighborhood family puts on 1 1/2 hr fireworks... Fri bomb sniffing dog 16
Lakewood Trails Special Assessment (Nov '10) Jul 21 Dont lie 122

Shorewood Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Shorewood Mortgages