At the last City Council meeting it was decided that the estimated $400,000 cost to hire outside attorneys to defend the city against Councilman Dick Furstenau's federal civil rights violation lawsuit will be borrowed from Naperville's capital projects fund. But, the tax levy for fiscal 2009-2010 would have to be bumped up by that amount to pay back the fund. After all the math is done, that translates into the owner of a $400,000 home kicking in $8 toward the defense fund. At the meeting a couple of councilmen alluded to the fact that this $400,000 was just an estimate and that the costs could, indeed, go higher. Given the fact that Mr. Furstenau has a high-profile attorney, Shawn Collins, and that the councilman - by every indication - seems to have every intention of taking this case to the bitter end, who knows how much the city will really have to spend for outside counsel? And how do Naperville taxpayers feel about being put into the position of having to kick in their hard-earned dollars to pay for the defense of the city against one of their own elected officials? Tell us what you think.
Is city's Furstenau legal defense fund enough?
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Is city's Furstenau legal defense fund enough?.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://blogs.suburbanchicagonews.com/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/1358
Not with the City facing at least a $2 million deficit and proposing a 10% tax increase next year after 6.5% increase last year. The $400,000 (if it grows to that amount) would normally be paid out of the City's self insurance fund. But this latest twist to further raise the property tax increase is to deflect attention away from the fiscal mismanagement of the City to Dick Furstenau. Since Dick brought up the deficit in November, all of these other events have transpired and escalated. Settle with Dick, don't pay Burchard anything, and solve this looming financial crisis. Burchard put up this smoke screen to hide his mismanagement (he is quick to take credit, so I know he will accept responsibility for this problem now).
As a self proclaimed advocate for taxpayers over the years, how can Furstenau live with himself by allowing this petty suit to proceed. Everything isn't some sinister plot against Furstenau, as he tries to purport. If he doesn't get his way, he keeps up his attacks on others. It's another example of what Burchard was exposing about Furstenau in his letter. If he cares at all about the taxpayers, he will drop the suit. He will try to turn it around and blame the City for not settling with him, but he needs to look in the mirror at who is to blame.
The city should settle with Dick pronto. Why doesn't the city take its proposed severance package for Burchard and use that to help settle this lawsuit? How come Burchard waited until he resigned to bring this all up?
First, find out who in the City would agree to put in writing that "even if you decide to leave we will pay severance" If it is more vague than this, then find the loophole to not pay anything and get a check when he goes out the door for $50 grand. How can anyone hold this person in high esteem when he quit, asked for money, and then wrote a letter condemning a member of the City Council?
ps: City Council should be picking up the tab for legal fee's agains Mr. Furstenau, then let's how fast they are to sue when it is their $$.
The whole idea of this whole thing is absurd. There really should be some serious examination of the council authorizing the expenditure. So they instead of paying $135k to settle his dispute, they are going to pay $400k minimum. That is real fiscal responsibility. The board should be ashamed of itself. The taxpayers should not have to pay for this fiasco.
"that the councilman - by every indication - seems to have every intention of taking this case to the bitter end"
Of course they ACT like they are willing to fight to the bitter end. That's what parties in litigation always do. It''s just posturing.
It's obvious the bloggers encouraging the City to settle with Furstenau and pay him with Burchard's benefits have missed the point. The $400,000.00, and subsequent tax increases needed to defend the city is the result of a petty suit against the City by FURSTENAU. It has NOTHING to do with Burchard. Furstenau can easily stop the need to pay the estimated $400,000.00 of taxpayers' hard-earned money, and any associated tax increases by simply DROPPING the suit.
Furstenau is a hypocrite of the highest degree (and apparently a scumbag). He portrayed himself as "fiscally conservative" and now blackmails the city. He is clearly violating his oath of office and should be removed from the council. He obviously loves only himself and money. I'd love to see him run out of town.
Take the hint Dick (no pun intended) and go far, far away.
Since when does it take $400k to defend against a "frivolous" lawsuit?
Law suits with no merit are kicked out of court by the judge on the first opportunity. The City can't have this both ways... if the City believes it is a frivolous suit, they should budget about ten thousand dollars to fight the case. If the city believes it will really cost $400k to fight, they are admitting that they have "some explaining to do" or "something to hide".
Let's ask Peter Burchard to explain this issue. Oh... that's right, he just quit his job. And he's asking for a golden parachute to boot.
We're falling further and further down the rabbit hole!!! City, don't fight this case! Settle with Furstenau RIGHT NOW.
good one fast eddie. did you think of that pun all by yourself? what, are you in 3rd grade.
just because a councilman has a record of being fiscally conservative doesn't mean he doesn't have the right to sue theindividuals who framed him and the government that supported them and didn't do anything to stop them.
furstenau may or may not win the case. but, if you think the lawsuit is frivolous or petty then you simply don't know the facts of the case. the case has merit. and, the allegations against the officers are serious and legit. whats is most troubling is that the allegations made in the suit filed, are based on facts, documented facts uncovered from npd investigation files themselves, included the incident reports (3 different variations) and dispatch tapes, and the refusal to interview eye-witness who said they saw the whole thing and furstenau never laid a hand on him (remember this took place in the middle of the street on the day of a parade along the parade route with hundreds of people around). combine that with the fact the cops couldn't produce one eye witness on their behalf. non of these have been denied by the npd. they can't be. there documented. the arresting officer was caught in a lie and then refused to be an eye-witness and testify under oath. that is the reason the city asked for a bench trial; they had no witness. NOT EVEN THE OFFICER WHO CLAIMED HE WAS HIT. margo ely says the arrest was legal because it was based on probable cause. well it isn't legal if the probable cause was made up. and their is documented, concrete evidence that is was.
if you are upset at the lawsuit, blame the cops and the people (peter b., margo ely) who supported the sham "investigation". it should be obvious now they have wanted him gone for along time. just because he is an elected official doesn't mean he surrendered his civil rights when he took office. instead of worrying about the 5 bucks this might cost everyone, you should worry about whether or not it is all true. and if it ends up being true, then you should be grateful that one of your elected officials had the guts to stand up to the smear campaign and the bully, get-him-out-of-office campaign and expose the corruption in the npd and the city. the next person they might screw, is you.
If the facts are true, the City needs to clean house - starting with the Police Dept - including the Chief on down the line. While I don't care for Mr. Fursteanu personally, he didn't give up his civil rights as an elected official. And, as an attorney, I agree - if the City is estimating $400,000 for a defense fund, something is amiss. Federal Court judges are generally smart enough to see a flimsy case when it comes up - and act accordingly. The size of this reserve and the allegations are very serious - we as taxpayers should be demanding answers to these questions.
Peter leaving is a good thing (even better without his payoff). Perhaps more people need to follow.
Excellent comments Tom W. I couldn't agree more with everything you said. It obvious some of the poster don't know the facts/details of the case. Those upset with Dick Furstenau for suing the city have mis-directed anger. It should be directed at the Naperville Police Department and the officers who violated Frustenau's civil rights. The treatment of Dick Frusteanu by the NPD and the City should be cause for concern for all residents. I think the city should settle with Frustenau. If they insist on taking this all the way and lose (which I think they will) then they will have cost the taxpayers not Furstenau. The City Council is so out of touch with the residents I think it's time for all of them to go -- even the Mayor. Stand tall Dick Frusteanu you have a lot of support out here.
Readers of the Sun know the facts of the case. For example, as stated in Burchard's Open Letter, "During the stipulated bench trial, Judge Pierce said, 'First of all, there’s no wrong or inappropriate behavior shown by Officer Hull. In fact, he probably demonstrated restraint.'” How is it that undisputed statements of facts in Burchard's letter become labeled a "smear campaign" because he calls it like he sees it, then Furstenau's lawyer questions the handling of Burchard's pay because Furstenau calls foul. HE wants his money. Talk about smoke screens. It's another attempt by Furstenau to deflect the attention away from his bad behavior, but it actually exemplifies it. The City has every right to defend itself. Who's the dirty guy here?
Peter Burchard has no credibility. He clearly has a personal vendetta against Dick Furstenau. Could it be because Dick wouldn't approve the $175k Peter wanted to voluntarily quit his job? The only thing Peter's letter proved is that he was a poor City Manager. Why didn’t he act on these accusations when they occurred? Why didn’t the City Council act? Peter is an immature coward to write his letter and then run off to another job. I’m happy to see him go. Ten years of service warrants no special severance package. Residents should be outraged that Peter is getting any severance. Whether you like Fursteanu or not he has a right to this lawsuit. The city can chose to settle and save the taxpayers money or they can fight it and let the courts decide. I vote for settling.
Sorry I posted the below on the wrong blog originally but now I am posting it on the right blog...
___________________________________________________________
The city should settle with Mr. Furstenau. To spend 400k in legal expenses and than lose would be like a double settlement and a half.
The city learned nothing from that long Napergate battle. They spent over a million dollars in legal fees to prevent Mr. Napergate from getting a second liquor store and still lost and had to settle with him as well as granting him the liquor license.
Why does the city want to repeat the same mistakes of the 1990's. They should take Peter's severance pay which he should not be getting anyway for quitting and give it to Fustenau and we can all go home.
How dare they give our hard earned tax money to Peter for quitting?? I hope we all make them pay by voting them out of office.
I wish I had the money to expose them in Napergate ads like that liquor store owner did. I would be writing ads daily as he did until they are all ousted from office. Maybe Furstenau should do a sequel to Napergate and force them to settle by exposing them and ridding us of this wasted time.
Amy
PS. And how dumb of the city that they need 400k to defend such a simple case. Don't they know how to negotiate with good attorneys. That should be no more than a 10k or 20k case. Another waste of taxpayer money due to incompetence of city officials. Can't even bargain with attorneys...how shameful!!!
mac, Furstenau's conspiracy theories claim Burchard, police officers, the police department, city staff, city lawyers, city council members, and even the mayor have "personal vendettas" against him for a multitude of reasons, including cover ups of wrongdoing. Just because they dispute or challenge him doesn't mean they are embroiled in a sinister conspiracy against him, or cover up. Maybe they have good reason to challenge and dispute him. Seems Furstenau can dish it out, but he can't take it. While he is suing the city, and taxpayers he is sworn to serve, his presence on the council is a conflict of interest. Let's get real. He should resign, or drop the suit.
Posted by: fasteddie | December 7, 2007 10:00 PM
Since when does it take $400k to defend against a "frivolous" lawsuit?
Law suits with no merit are kicked out of court by the judge on the first opportunity. The City can't have this both ways... if the City believes it is a frivolous suit, they should budget about ten thousand dollars to fight the case. If the city believes it will really cost $400k to fight, they are admitting that they have "some explaining to do" or "something to hide".
******************************************************************
I BELEIVE THE ABOVE BLOGGER WAS RIGHT ON THE MONEY TRAIL. FURTHER, I BELIEVE THE CITY CAME OUT WITH THIS HUGE FICTICIOUS NUMBER OF 400K TO ATTEMPT TO TURN THE TAXPAYERS AGAINST FURSTENAU BY PLANTING A SEED IN THEIR MINDS THAT TAX INCREASES ARE SUDDENLY THE RESULT OF THE FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE FURSTENAU...LOL!!!!
AND 400K TO FIGHT A "FRIVILOUS LAWSUIT" IS RIDICULOUS. HIRING AN OUTSIDE LAW FIRM DOES REMIND ME OF THE NAPERGATE DAYS WHEN THEY HIRED 2 OUTSIDE LAW FIRMS PLUS USED AN IN-HOUSE STAFF OF SEVERAL ATTORNEYS WITH A BUDGET OF NEARLY A MILLION TO FIGHT A LONELY LIQUOR STORE OWNER....AND THEY EVENTUALLY STILL LOST! I BELIEVE HE USED ONE OR 2 ATTORNEYS AND WON. HOW MUCH COULD HE HAVE HAD TO POSSIBLY SPEND ON ATTORNEYS! 10K-20K...WHO KNOWS!!! WHY DOES THE CITY HAVE TO SPEND MORE THAN THOSE IT FIGHTS??? WHY LET LAW FIRMS TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THEM BECAUSE THEY HAVE DEEP POCKETS AS THE RESULT OF THE ABILITY TO TAX THE POOR CITIZENS LIMITLESSLY!!!
AND NOW WE HAVE DEJAVU ALL OVER AGAIN!!! DICK USING ONE ATTORNEY, I ASSUME, ON CONTINGENCY AND THE CITY RETAINING 2 LAW FIRMS PLUS IN-HOUSE LEGAL STAFF. JUST LIKE AGAINST MR. NAPERGATE! WHERE DOES ALL THIS END!!!
I AM SICK AND TIRED OF MY HOME TAXES BEING INCREASED AND IT BEING BLAMED ON THE MR. NAPERGATES AND MR. FURSTENAU TYPES. THE ACTIONS CAUSING THIS LITIGATION IS AS A RESULT OF IRRESPONSIBLE POLICE ACTION. I AM NOT CALLING FOR CHIEF DIAL TO RESIGN AS THE ATTORNEY ABOVE HAS CALLED, BUT I AM CALLING FOR HIM TO REIGN IN HIS TROOPS. THE QUICKER THE BETTER!!!
HE ALSO NEEDS TO REVIEW TOWING POLICY OF THE CITY WHICH ARE THE ROOT OF THIS PROBLEM. POLICE ARE TO QUICK TO TOW!!! IT SEEMS LIKE IT IS A RACKET OUT THERE WITH ALL THE CARS BEING TOWED IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA WITH SO MANY CONFUSING SIGNS.
I PERSONALLY EXPERIENCED BEING TOWED BY A POLICE OFFICER BECAUSE I PARKED RIGHT BEHIND THE SIGNS ALLOCATING 3 SPACES FOR CABS IN FRONT OF FEATURES AND THE LANTERN IN DOWNTOWN NAPERVILLE. I HAD BACKED INTO THE SPOT AND DID NOT SEE THE WRITING ON THE STREET. UPON GETTING OUT OF MY VEHICLE, I DOUBLE CHECKED ALL THE SIGNS AND WAS SURE I WAS LEGALLY PARKED. THE POSTED SIDEWALK SIGN WAS BEFORE MY SPOT AND THERE WAS NO WAY I COULD SEE THE STREET WHILE BACKING INTO THE SPOT AT NIGHT. UPON RETURNING MY CAR WAS GONE!!! (WITH SNOW SEASON IT WILL NOW EVEN BE MORE IMPOSSIBLE TO SEE THE WRITING ON THE STREET ALLOWING THE CITY TO PROSPER MORE FROM ILLEGAL NASTY TOWINGS...HOW SHAMEFUL THAT GOVT. WILL ACT THIS WAY AGANINST ITS CITIZENS!!!)
I COMPLAINED TO THE POLICE DEPT. ABOUT THE SIGNAGE BEING INAPPROPRIATE. THEY ASKED ME TO COMPLAIN TO THE CITY COUNCIL. I TOLD THEM THEY SHOULD COMPLAIN AS THEY ARE PRESENT BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL ON TUESDAYS AND IT IS THEIR DUTY AS PAID PUBLIC SERVANTS AND NOT MINE. THEY TOOK MY VERBAL COMPLAINT UNDER ADVISEMENT AND 6 MONTHS LATER, NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE. IT COST ME 130 DOLLARS FOR A TOW, 25 DOLLAR FOR OVERNIGHT, AND 40 DOLLARS FOR IT BEING THE WEEKEND. AND OF COURSE A 15 DOLLAR CAB FARE TO BOOT. TOTAL DAMAGE WAS $210 DOLLARS DUE TO CITY INCOMPETENCE. LAST TIME I CHECKED A FEW WEEKS AGO THE PROBLEM HAD NOT BEEN REMEDIED AND I AM SURE MORE CARS HAVE BEEN TOWED DAILY. SIMPLY A POLICE RACKET IN COLLUSION WITH CITY COUNCIL TO PUT MONEY IN CITY COFFERS AND INCREASE THEIR WAGES. NOTHING COULD BE MORE OBVIOUS!!! CHECK IT OUT YOURSELVES, MY FELLOW CITIZENS. IT IS THERE FOR YOU TO WITNESS. AND YOU ARE BLAMING MR. FURSTENAU FOR DEFENDING OUR RIGHTS. SO WHAT IF HE TOUCHED A COP TO MAKE A POINT THE COP WAS NOT COMPREHENDING!!! THAT IS NOT CRMININAL!!! COPS TOUCH US ALL THE TIME. ARE THEY GODS THAT CAN NOT BE TOUCHED BY A PERSON WHO POSES NO THREAT WHOM THEY CLEARLY KNOW EXTREMELY WELL....LOL AGAIN...HONESTLY!!!
I WISH DICK WAS THERE TO HELP ME THAT NIGHT. I WOULD NOT DARE TOUCH ANY POLICEMAN. BUT MY COMPLAINT HAS NEVER BEEN ADDRESSED!!!
I WISH CITIZENS WOULD VISIT THIS LOCATION. IT IS THE 4TH CAB SPOT GOING WEST ON CHICAGO AVE. AND SEE HOW IMPOSSIBLE IT IS TO SEE IT IN THE DARK IF YOU ARE BACKING INTO IT. TO HAVE SITUATIONS LIKE THIS, INDICATES TO ME THE POLICE DEPT. IS ONLY INTERESTED IN MAKING MONEY BY TICKETING SUCH VEHICLES AND WHO KNOWS IF THEY GET A PERCENTAGE OF THE TOWING CHARGE. IT JUST ALL SEEMS IMPROPER AND THE POLICE CHIEF AND HIS TROOPS DO NOTHING. THE CITY COUNCIL EXCEPT FOR MR. FURSTENAU DOES NOTHING!!! IT IS SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO FRUSTRATING!!!
I AM APPEALING TO MAYOR GEORGE PRADEL TO TAKE SOME IMMEDIATE AND SWIFT ACTION AND PUT SOME PRESSURE ON OUR POLICE DEPT. TO CLEAN THE POLICE DEPT. BEFORE THIS WHOLE THING GETS OUT OF CONTROL...AND IT IS REALLY ON THE VERGE OF BEING OUT OF CONTROL...
THE SITUATION IS APPALLING, MR. MAYOR!!! PLEASE HEED MY APPEAL!!!
THANK YOU!!!
you dummies. it will end up costing more than 400k just you see. and it is all because your beloved DICK is a sociopathic liar. i don't concern myself with the police case, that is all hogwash. it is the new allegations brought fourth by mr. burchard. don't you see the pattern of DICK ? wait and see this week when DICK amends his lawsuit to include peter burchard. he will sue the individual police officers, the police department and peter burchard. if you ever cross paths with DICK, never look directly in his eyes, he will slap a lawsuit on you before you can say, "what a DICK." he will never step down, he will never admit wrongdoing, he will die a bitter lonely DICK. via con dios.
If you believe that police never abuse their power against city outspoken councilmen - you absolutely must watch these videos!! The videos show two different public meetings in different cities where antagonistic city councimen (David Snyder & Bernie McCabe)are aggressively arrested while arguing against government spending!!! This stuff really happens. Don't worry Furstenau - McCabe already won his "substantial" lawsuit. And, it looks like Snynder will win big.
Mayor & City Council - I make a motion that we name Roseland, Indiana as Naperville's next sister city!!
David Snyder - City Councilman arrested and beaten for debating government budget.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3683134755807044919&q=Roseland+Snyder&total=14&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=4
Bernie McCabe - arrested & pepper sprayed for objecting to budget proceeding without proper notice
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-224459454652903418&q=pepper+spray+councilman&total=11&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0
Please let me know if you enjoyed the videos. And, while you are watching these videos ask yourself if it is in the "realm of remote possibility" that Naperville Police Officer's Michael Hull, Michael Cross or Chief David Dial over reacted when they arrested Furstenau?? If you think it is in the least bit possible, I think you will agree that Furstenau needs to pursue his lawsuit. Police power must always be kept under control. That is the purpose of our court system. Win, lose or draw, Furstenau has a right to file his suit. The process and the check & balance helps us all!
Hey Ameena, ever consider getting an eye exam? The cab stand is clearly marked!! Doc Smith
Maybe the city should be resposible for their actions in the future. The city brought it upon themselves. Dont make your actions taxpayers problem .
yes, the city should take responsibility for their actions. guess what, no one cares ! look at that debacle the carillon. OUR public servants, deciding in private to purchase a crumbling wreck. they did not ask me if i wanted it. now, who pays to maintain it ? the good people at the council also decide on mr. burchard. you can't blame peter for trying to get as much as he can, by most everyones opinion he did a awesome job as manager. and as for DICK. wow, alot of you people are complete knuckleheads ! DICK is suing the city, the police dept., several individual police officers, and guess what ? he will be suing peter burchard personally next ! just you wait and see. and he still wants to sit on the council ????? what is wrong with this man ? do you not see a severe conflict ? there needs to be 1000 people strong at the next council meeting DEMANDING censure, DEMANDING recall ! the problem is NOT the police, the problem is NOT peter burchard, the problem is DICK !!!
If Dick thinks he's got such a good case and was framed from the start, shouldn't he be trying to get the State's Attorney to investigate the officers for perjury instead of suing the city? Or is Joe Birkett part of the conspiracy?
And Dick's attorney's letter to the city accusing Burchard of using his allegations to get a severance package is exactly what Burchard was complaining about to begin with--cross Dick and he'll accuse you of something unethical or illegal.
First, this is our legal system. It may not be perfect but this is the one we use. We won't discuss lawyers.
Second, let me see, we have involvement by both government AND lawyers - ain't no way 400k is enough!
Hey Ameena, ever consider getting an eye exam? The cab stand is clearly marked!! Doc Smith
Posted by: Dr. Smith/Eye Doctor | December 10, 2007 01:01 AM
******************************************************************
Dr. Smith,
Thanks for your kind remarks! Yes, I have regular eye exams and my vision is 20/20 with my corrective lenses.
Once again there are 3 cab spots that are clearly marked by sidewalks signs and all 3 of these spots are between the 2 sidewalk signs. A 4th cab spot was behind the Western sign and parking spot is only indicated by white paint writing on the street. When backing into that spot, it is impossible to see the writing on the street. My vehicle even has a rear view camera and I could not see this writing. Upon getting out of the vehicle, I double checked the signage and it indicated I was parked legally. Of course since my vehicle was parked over the writing on the street I could not see that or even know it existed.
There are only 2 possible scenarios to your letter. That in the last month or two after my numerous verbal complaints to the police dept. they moved the sidewalk sign to cover the 4th spot or your eyesight is in need of correction.
The policeman even agreed with me that the situation was unfair and asked me to appear before the city council. He pretty much stated he was only enforcing the law even though he understood the trap situation of that spot. I guess it is an easy way for him to get his quota of tickets so when I asked him to appear himself before the city council he stated that was not his duty. He said it was my duty even though he is a paid servant of the public and I am not. Since this became a heated argument right in front of Features(no touching involved by either party...thank God!), everyone who witnessed the argument with the officer, agreed the 4th cab spot was not labeled properly.
I will visit the spot tonight to see if the police did something about parking spot since my car was towed a few months ago. If they did, that would explain the confusion between what you are saying and what I am saying.
If it is still as it was as I suspect, I have to assume it is a cash cow for the police and city. I also would have to suspect you are a phony eye doctor trying to protect the city even when it is commits mistakes if not deliberate fraud.
Yes, I also miss the Napergate Ads in the Sun of the past like many others have mentioned. In those days the Napergate man would have run a picture in his Napergate ad showing the scam, and the citizens would march to the polls booths to elect new councilmen. I was shocked when in one election he was able to get all his 4 endoresed councilmen elected which I believe(rather sure) Dick Furstenau was one of them. One blogger on another Sun thread, stated he will be reviewing these ads so hopefully he will be able to come back with some information for us on this issue and others.
I am going to hold judgment on you Doc, until I visit the parking spot in question tonight, just in case of the slight possiblity the city took corrective action in recent days or months. In that case, I would understand why you mistakenly thought I had to come see you for new pair of glasses.
It may not be as easy as you think to get a new customer!!!
Ameena
I find Mr. Furstenau to be rather arrogant, but I do not fault him for his lawsuit. The city council should settle this lawsuit and also look into the actions of the NPD. Ask the parent of at least 50% of the teens in this town and they can tell you that the NPD abuses their power. My 20 year old son moved out of state a year ago and when he drove home recently he was stopped by the NPD the 2nd night he was home. After numerous unfounded traffic stops while he was living here, his initial statement to the police officer was "I wondered how long it would take before you stopped me." Of course, the officer found a reason to search the car and, as always, found nothing and let him go on his way with no reason given for the initial stop. He has been stopped for driving too close to the center line and asked by the officer "what have you been smoking?". When my son replied "I don't smoke anything", the officer said "That's BS, you all smoke it." On another occasion, he was hauled out of his car and told to sit on the curb because he made a "threatening gesture" as the officer approached the car...the "threat" was reaching into the glove compartment for his registration and insurance. During this encounter, the officer called for backup and stated that he could "act like a dick all night long if he wanted to." When my son brought these incidents to Chief Dial, the chief set up a time to meet with my son and then failed to show up to the meeting and didn't have the courtesy to call my son and reschedule. The NPD has very little respect among Naperville's young people and they have no one to blame but themselves. They act like schoolyard bullies and they need to be reigned in. Before we go blaming Mr. Furstenau for being irresponsible with the city's money, ask yourself if what happened to him that day could have happened to you or your child and what you would have done.
The Naperville Police Department just won the ridiculous honor of operating the State's Number One Speed Trapp!!! Check it out... it's on the front page of the Sun.
But we are to believe that the NPD would never stoop so low as to issue unfounded parking tickets or tow a car without sufficient cause???
GIVE ME A BREAK.... SOMEONE HAS TO REIGN IN CHIEF DIAL THE NAPER-GESTAPO. If it takes Dick Furstenau and a federal judge to settle issue like this, I'm all for it!
What a farce!
First, we have ALREADY paid for the $400k in legal fees --- check out the City's legal settlement fund. There is no reason to raise taxes for it EXCEPT to irritate us.
Second, Fursteneau not only has every right to sue the city AND keep his council chair, I would go further and say he has an obligation to do so. Our legal system works, and it showed that the charges were without any merit. They were suspicious from the beginning, and anyone with an ounce of analytical ability can conclude that they had a negative impact on his run for higher office.
Third, the City SHOULD just settle with the guy. His lawyer is an accomplished shark and the idea that the City wants to set aside $400k shows they know it has merit. If I recall, he originally just asked for an apology. It is time to stop this before it gets uglier.
Fourth, the Burchard Christmas "bonus" (ie his approx. $100k severance package for quiting us) comes into play for two reasons:
1) His letter on Fursteneau, gutless as it was, is magnified by the fact that he wrote it AFTER Fursteneau had issues with paying a severance packege to an employee who quit.
2)It shows a possible pattern by our Council in agreeing to unnaturally-poor economic monetary payouts, especially when they involve FOCs (Friends of Council)
Fifth, the issue should not be about whether Fursteneau is a good guy or well-liked. It is a simple issue of rights, and their violation, by a group (in this case, the police and City of Naperville). Issues like this often invole egos, feelings, etc., and they should be resolved by "running the numbers". In the end, it is a simple economic decision based on probabilities and stats.
Sixth, and finally, the issue of Burchard;s letter on Fursteneau is imperative evidence for two reasons: First, it should make us all wonder what kind of manager he really was if he sat on this info all of this time and only wrote it AFTER he quit and was turned down on his $200k request for sevcerance; and Second, if the charges in the letter are true it must have been grossly obvious to all involved so why didn't our wonderful Mayor or other Council members step in at some point and put a stop to it? Now, of course, they are falling all over themselves to look like big boys & girls mt sanctioning Fursteneau ---- I want to see them all sanctioned (if the charges aere true) for not going anuthing earlier!
Bob S,
Very well said. If only the dumb FOCs (Friends of Council) could see the big picture.
If, for the sake of argument, you take every single accusation against Furstenau as true, then you are saying:
1) Furstenau sticks up for the little guy: Furstenau offended a Naperville Policeman by touching him while Furstenau was arguing with the Policeman for towing cars without proper signage.
2) Furstenau holds city staff accountable: Furstenau on numerous occasions has threatened city staff with terminating their employment if they don't do their job.
3) Furstenau fights for the taxpayer: Furstenau said no to Peter Burchard's golden parachute. For years, Furstenau has angered the Police Chief by complaining about inflated pensions and unchecked overtime pay.
The only time that Furstenau was accused of a crime (the police touching incedent) he fought the charges and won. No one has accused Furstenau of another crime... at its core, all of the allegations against Furstenau are that he fights for taxpayers and others not getting a fair shake by the City. That should be applauded not Censured.
Again, if the Dumb FOCs could only see the big picture.
hey bob, burchard did not sit on this. it was all discussed in closed sessions long before it was made public, ask the mayor, ask doug mush-mouth krause, ask your uncle DICK. he knows what he did. he should GO ! there is no excuse for that man. you are comparing a man who ran the city of naperville very well, and a man who thinks he runs the city, that would be DICK.
D. Bone,
If your are right about this being discussed in executive session, then Burchard has violated the Open Meetings Act. If the Council wanted to make this public, they should have released the minutes. I have never heard of a Manager overriding his City Council. Again, if you are right, even more smoke!!
D.Bone - Your comments identify the problem much better than anyone on the blog. Dick Furstenau and eight other elected representatives are chosen by the citizens of Naperville to "run the City." Dick Furstenau thinks he "runs the city" because he was properly elected and took an oath to "run the city." He and the other Councilman get paid $10k per year for the privaledge.
Burchard, on the other hand, was never hired to "run the City". He is a direct employee of the City Council. His job duty is to implement the policy and decision of the his boss (the City Council - and, his "boss" includes Furstenau). For this, he has been paid approximately $175,000 per year.
To top it off, Mr. Burchard, while getting paid by his "boss", wrote a long whining letter about one of his "bosses" saying (after you milk it down to its pure essense) that "over the years one of my bosses makes me and my staff feel bad. He bullies us when we don't agree with him; etc, etc, etc)" It's not like Burchard was exposing some crime - it was just a long, rambling sob story. Sorry Mr. Burchard, I don't make $175 a year, but I could write a much more interesting letter about "mean bosses". So, Mr. Burchard, you should 1) fix the problem; 2) suck it up; or 3) quit and leave town. Oh, that's right, you've already chosen number 3.
d.bone, please clean it up next time, alright? I had to unpublish your most recent comment because I considered it too much of a personal attack.
D Bone,
You seem to have a problem with every elected councilman in Naperville. Believe it or not, I think they all, in different measure, deserve credit for the amount of time and energy they put in exchange for the 10k per year they receive for the job.
I don't disagree with you that the council has made mistakes over the years. But, if you think for one minute that a paid beaurocrat (Peter Burchard or anyone else) should be allowed to set policy and "run the City", you must have a fundamental problem with democracy.
My suggestion, if you don't like them, vote them out of office. But do not allow the beaurocrats to force them out of office with trumped up, flimsy allegations that will never hold up in court.
ted S - my hero! But I'd almost rather you leave D Bone's post in place. After all the final death throws of a dying argurment are always dressed in a personal attack.
t bone,
What are you, twelve years old with that capitalized reference to Fursteneau?
Unless you are a Council member, how would you know it was discussed in closed session UNLESS someone broke the Open Meetings Act and should be prosecuted/censored/fired. If you are aware of this, it is your moral and legal obligation to report it forthwith.
Your anger with Fursteneau is palpable and, clearly, clouds your ability to make rational judgements here. I would ask that you NOT confuse disgust with the Council, Burchard, etc. for admiration for Fursteneau --- they are two completely separate issues.
If it REALLY was discussed, then I would submit that the entire Council, including the Mayor, has seriously let the City down by not investigating it and should be impeached.
Of course, I suspect we will find that if it was even discussed it was looked at and found out to be as Michele B. describes, above. Nothing illegal, nothing immoral ---- just a representative that expected a full day's work for a full day's pay.
JOMO.
I'd like to second blogger Michele's request for Mr. David Dial to step down. I stated that on WBYG several months ago. Let's go with potluck question Do you support Mr. Dial's position that illegal aliens should be allowed to QUALIFY for special driving certificates. He is a leading statewide proponent of that cause,reference his SUN column last fall.
Since DF and his attorney are suing for the refund of campaign contributions, they must believe that the donors are due a refund.
If DF loses his case, will he pay out of his own pocket the $120,000 in campaign funds he and his attorney believe should be returned to his supporters and ensure that they get back every last cent?