Downtown parking: eateries overtaxed for library deck?

Ted,

Thanks for opening this debate about the library deck and its necessity. You are on the right side of this issue if you take it a little further and say you are AGAINST IT!

It is well know in town that the Napergate Man has told many friends and neighbors that he is against this library deck for the following reasons.

1.It destroys the beauty of the very serene setting of this library which includes large trees on one side and the Riverwalk on the other side.

2.There already is adequate parking and 2 additional decks already planned will give us more than enough parking.

3.This building is a masterpiece of architecture.

4.The library is in a residential area and should be the line in the sand for commercial encroachment west of the downtown areas.

5.It is also well know that this Napergate Man has historically had excellent vision for our town and has usually been right on issues of development.

If the Napergate Man is AGAINST it, I am AGAINST it!

I hope you are too, Host Ted!!!

Response from Ted:

My position is as I stated it: I'm for waiting until the other two decks are operational to see whether the Nichols deck is still needed. If there's still a critical downtown parking shortage two years from now, I might accept it.

I love this post Ted. I believe I suggested something along this line especially after the Napergate Man started planting seeds that is he totally against this library parking deck.

I am totally against this ugly deck over powering our library on the river.

I am hopefully that are we will see another reversal by our Council Members whether the Napergate Man resurfaces or does not.

Thanks Ted for giving us an avenue to vent our frustration against City Officials.

This is the next best thing to Napergate Ads and since we can't afford those we are going to have to live with your threads and hope our City Officials and Council read them!

Please drive the bus to City Hall just this one time, Ted!

And thanks so much for deleting that massacre thread

I am totally against this library deck around our gorgeous library. As Eli said there had to be a bag stuffed with money that circled around City Hall to have this disaster approved.

This will be one meeting I will show up to get a REVERSAL!

I hope we can get our first reversal ever without the Napergate Man.

We have to at least try! This library is a treasure to our town and the most beautiful library in America.

The residents must have been sleeping when that fateful decision was made by our incompetent council members.

Some of the things they do make no sense.

They are returning to their pre-Napergate Era ways of utter stupidity.

NO! NO! NO! NO! To a library parking deck!

Our City Officials must have been drinking the night of that fateful decison!

Their judgment was impaired worse than a drunk with a 4.0 on the Richter Scale!!!

I've said it before and I'll say it again. I've been living in the downtown Naperville area for years now, and the only time I've ever been unable to find a parking spot in ten minutes of circling either of the three garages (Including the city hall parking, which is almost ALWAYS available.) is during the Flings. Instead of screwing up the library building a parking deck of questionable need, why not build a parking deck which serves two purposes at the Metra station?

Think about it. Prime time in downtown Naperville starts at around 7:00 at night, long after most of the Metra commuters have gone home for the day. Parking at the station is sorely needed. How long is the waiting list now for a pass? I know it's at least a year if not much more than that. During the day the garage could be used by commuters, and at night it could be overflow parking for downtown Naperville businesses.

This would be the ultimate win/win situation if the city is dead set on building another parking garage.

I agree with everyone who posted so far and the Napergate Man that we have to condemn this parking library deck.

It would be the ungliest thing Naperville has ever seen in its history.

Spare us please, City Council Members!

Please save this impeccably beautiful library.

Absolutely no to any deck on top or or next to the library!

Leave this spectacular view alone. This has to be the prettiest part of Naperville.

Do we not care about our rating of 2nd most beautiful city in America?

Are the council members clueless as to why we got that very high rating?

I guess it is becoming obvious that it is the Napergate Man that got us that 2nd place rating and not our City Officials who never think before voting on any development project! Always rubber stamping Brestal ever since the Napergate Man retired. So obvious!!! Let us not forget Spring Green and fight just as hard to save this magnificent library as we saved our subdivisions!

I am not convinced we need more parking downtown. I've never NOT been able to find a space there. True, you sometimes have to look for a couple of minutes, but so what? If the city does go ahead with this, though, then the restaurant tax is the best way to pay for it, since the restaurants and their patrons will be the primary beneficiaries.

That said, can we PLEASE leave the Napergate Man out of this discussion for now? His opinion on this matter carries no more (or less) weight than that of anybody else. If he has an opinion, let him come here and post it himself.

It sounds to me that if people want to stop construction of the Nichols deck they need to stop this downtown food and beverage tax from being approved. Because if the tax is approved and there's language in the ordinance that specifies the funds raised be used to build a parking deck, then a parking deck's going to be built. No point standing of front of the bulldozers. It's like 204's Metea Valley -- pointless now to debate whether a third high school is needed, the referendum was approved.

So, this sounds like a fairly easy one, people. All you have to do is convince 26 percent of the downtown restaurants to oppose it.

As for my opinion, I'm against spending money when it's not absolutely necessary. At this moment I don't think the Nichols deck is absolutely necessary. I'm not opposed for aesthetic reasons. It's not like the library is a historic building from the 1880s or anything. Building dates to 1986, I believe, and I've never been that smitten with its architecture. Inside it's fine, functional. But from the outside it's just a flat-roofed brick-and-glass walkout monolith built on a hillside. I'm not against the deck because it would be ugly; I'm against it because it's expensive.

I support the Napergate Man's vision for the library as detailed perfectly by the first blogger Cindy. I am assuming she is a good friend of his to have been able to get that detail, but it does make a lot of sense what he is saying thru her.

But truthly this Napergate Man has always been concerned about the beauty of Naperville while Brestal has always been concerned about his wallet.

The Napergate Man gives to the residents...Bretal takes away from the residents..

Absolutely no library parking deck!

And I disagree with Ted.

This building is set beautifully to fit in the natural environment. Sorry Ted, but you have bad taste in architecture!

"Brestal has always been concerned about his wallet."

"Bretal(sic) takes away from the residents.."

Actually, Brestal has given much to the residents of Naperville. Anyone who lives in a subdivision built in the last 30 years can thank Brestal for working to turn all the former farm land into your subdivision. I mean, you all had no problem with the former open space being turned into your new housing, right?

Hi, folks. Lot of vitriol flying around lately. In an effort to return an air of civility to this board I junked about half the comments today, many from people who have posted previously. Let's try to confine the discussion to the topic of the thread, refrain from personal attacks and BE CIVIL.

I am not going against the Napergate Man after Ted allowed us to review and revisit this guy the last 3 months. Betting against him seems like a 100% sure loss.

I was indecisive but after I heard the Napergate Man is against this parking deck, I decided I am against it.

The arguments laid out by his worshippers make sense. He appears to have always been right in the past on all development projects.

Ted,
I just got back from visiting the library. I had to see what all this Napergate Man rave was about. Here are my conclusions:

1. Ted is right that it is not a gem on the North side of the building along Jefferson.

2. The Napergate Man is right that it is a beauty on the South side along Jackson and facing the river. Very breathtaking!

3. The Napergate Man is right about all those trees and one appears to be at least a century old in the parking lot. We would have to kill a few dozen pretty trees for this ugly library parking deck.

4. It does have a nice serene setting.

5. I noticed the City Hall parking lot is one block south of the library. Are people so lazy that they can't go one block south to park at City Hall? The walk is spectacular. You get to cross a beautiful bridge over the flowing river and get a peek at that American Hero's Memorial of Commander Dan Shanower that is behind City Hall.

6. I guess if we gave the North Side of the library a little face lift the Napergate Man would be 100% right.

7. The entrance on the North side is extremely appetizing which makes up for the bad architecture on the North side.

8. I think we need this extra 1.5% from the restaurants to pay for the other 2 garages and older garages.

9.I think you're feeling sorry for the downtown restaurants is not justified, Ted. Other restaurants in shopping centers have to pay something called CAM(Common Area Maintenance) for their parking lots provided by their landlords. This CAM can range anywhere from $2.00 to $4.00 a square foot per year. So restaurants in plazas that are between 5000s.f. to 10,000s.f. pay between $10,000 to $40,000 dollars for use of their parking lots. This includes maintenance such as parking lot repairs, snow plowing, daily cleaning, lighting, seal coating , striping, etc. When a new parking lot is needed the humongous cost is passed on to the tenants and can be between $5-10 a square foot to replace. This occurs once every 20 years and is a one time expense of $25,000 to $100,000 per restaurant mostly depending on size of restaurant and quality of the plaza. As a commercial realtor I can tell you, it is very obvious that the downtown restaurants and bar owners are being subsidized at taxpayers expense. This is very unfair and in my opinion none of the existing council members can comprehend the factual knowledge I am offering. (I have verified that the Napergate Man does in fact own a commercial retail center in Naperville so I am sure this knowledge entered into his decision before making it. I am sure he would comprehend what I am talking about very easily unlike our council members who depend on the very biased Brestal for all their information)

10.It is not fair to subsidize the downtown restaurants when the non-downtown restaurant are paying thru the roof for their parking lots. A downtown restaurant doing a half million dollars in retail sales is only paying $5,000 at the 1% tax to use our public taxpayer funded parking lots. Even at 2.5% tax rate, it would only be paying $12,500. This is in the low range of plaza restaurants. Plus it is much more expensive to build a parking lot garage than pave a lot on an acre or 2 of land. About 10 times as expensive! I can see why some Napergatian in an earlier post said to charge them 10%. I must admit these Napergatians seem to be very bright like their well known leader. He must have taught them will in the 90s while he was leading them in battle after battle to control the Brestal Law Firm.

In conclusion, I feel very strongly against this parking lot library. I see why everyone is supporting the Napergate Man. He has always been a logical common sense thinker. Our City Council Members have never thought in their lives. They rubber stamp this Brestal guy who does them favors such as hiring their children since the Napergate Man caught him giving them significant campaign contributions all published in his Napergate Ads. It appears by exposing these contributions, the Napergate Man was able to shame our council members and they no longer accept them as they were a serious conflict of interest.

I am sorry Ted but this parking lot should never be built at this location which is very residential as Cindy said. Never in any circumstance! That is where I vehemently disagree with you! There are other options if we truly needed more parking which we don't. We should build the other decks a story higher and save the library. If we need a 3rd deck there is a lot the city owns across from Hugo's and behind Lou Malnati called the Paw Paw Lot. Why not build there? It is on the right side of the line drawn in the sand between residential and commercial in that area.

It is so easy to understand why this Napergate Man developed a cult sort of followers. He is intelligent, does his research before he talks and historically has been proven right and led us in the right direction.

Can anyone really trust our City Council Members after they tried to put a gas station/shopping center between Pembroke Commons Subdivision and the pool at the Huntington Estates Subdivision on the residential side of Hobson Rd. I think this stupid, very stupid decision by the City Council was in fact stopped by the Napergate Man and his supporters. The City' stupidity over and over again has given this Napergate Man an ICONIC status of sorts. His supporters did not make him famous. Our dumb city council members made him famous! As Ted, I believe noted somewhere, on another thread their lack of credibility made it easy for the Napergate Man to systematically put holes in everything they said, in his long sequence of Napergate ads.

Heck no, to the library parking lot! All the way with the Napergate Man on this specific issue!

PS. Maybe if we offered a little more compensation for these council positions we could begin getting top of the barrel people instead of the current bottom of the barrel people. Can you tell me Ted, if any one of our council members voted against this library parking lot. If there was one I would like to vote him in for Mayor next time! I am hoping there was more than one so we can have some exceptions to what I said above.

I am a first time blogger and I want to congratulate TED for a well done job and the openness he provides on his threads to both side of the aisle. I have been reading these blogs for over 3 months but I felt it was to write on a very important issue like the library parking deck!
Thanks for allowing me to express my opinion on your thread, Ted!

There is a big distinction here that that the blog narrative fails to make. The blog narrative states that implementing "a 1.5 percent downtown food and beverage tax that would generate revenue from property taxpayers."

This is incorrect and misleading. First this particular food and beverage tax would not be placed upon the "property owners." Secondly, the tax would be directly paid for by customers of these eateries.

Should the menu prices remain the same and assuming that this is revenue neutral related to the amount of food consumed by the patrons, there would not be a diminishment in the amount of profit made by the eateries. The tax is an extra charge.

Now, if the eateries paid the tax themselves (and not allowed to make it an add-on to the bill), then the eateries would need to increase their menu prices to recoup any such tax paid. And, then their profits could possibly be affected both by the increased expense directly to the eateries and if the patrons decide that prices were too high (menu prices) and then decided not to have a meal in downtown Naperville.

Of course, I am aware that the downtown eatery would pay a slightly higher property tax bill for the portion of the parking deck costs to be recovered by property tax. Compared with the additional property taxes inflicted upon all the properties outside downtown Naperville, the total amount of increased real estate tax paid by the downtown Naperville eateries would be rather small.

Unless the customer base becomes smaller for the eateries, the eateries are not being affected by this new food and beverage tax. So, where is the "burden" on the eateries? The patrons and the non-eatery property taxpayers get to pay for the majority of the costs of the parking deck.

You all think the parking deck is going to be bad at the library (btw I agree), but wait till you see the one that gets built on Water Street as part of that development. Council agreed to narrow the street 9' so they could get 100 more spaces. Huge, dense development, denser than anything that has been built in Naperville, with hardly any green space, actually none, if you remove what's left of the riverwalk..

We will have the narrowest street downtown on what will be the tallest, densest block. All of it will be 5 floors and it will be right on the riverwalk too from Main to Webster.

It will ruin the riverwalk, and all that traffic from a 550 car parking lot, narrow streets, no green space. Brilliant!

Ted,
This Ryan guy makes the most sense out of anyone so far. Even more than Eli and Cindy.

Obviously, as a commercial realtor he gave us the insight we were lacking as to how plaza restaurants pay for parking compared to downtown restaurants pay for parking.

And since the Napergate does own a plaza I am familiar with and it does contain restaurant(s) he obviously understands how things operate. More so than most of us who don't have the insights of Realtor Ryan or the Napergate Man.

{This is a very small world. As you recall I was investigating the Ponds of Hobson West where my dentist Dr. Soper lived. Yesterday, a friend told me that Dr. Soper rented retail space from the Napergate Man in a plaza he owns for a quarter of a century and had a very close relationship with him. While I was familiar with this plaza, I never knew the Napergate Man owned it until yesterday. As I said this is a small world we live in!}

Back to the current subject: I think Ryan asked a question that I think many of us would like answered if possible.

That question is how did the council vote on this library vote. Who voted for it and who voted against it by name if possible? I subscribe to the Naperville Sun and never caught anything about this vote. Did not even know it was being voted on?

In the Napergate Era we would have been warned by the Napergate Man in advance. No one would have missed such a meeting. And if they ruled the wrong way in his next ad he would tell us who ruled how and what we must do to overturn it.

I have to agree with so many that the Naperville Sun is not doing its duty. It is a shame that we had to depend on one guy running Napergate Ads in the Sun for this function. Of course he had to retire sooner or later. So did Dr. Soper after 40 years and I had to find a new dentist. I found a new dentist. But us residents have not found a new watchdog since the Napergate Man retired. This is very disturbing and killng our town. It seems like we are heading to a concrete and cement town especially if we lose this library to a Huge Parking Deck!

This function should have never been delegated by the Naperville Sun to one person. Now we are all hanging because of this. None of us know how the City Council pulled this library stunt on us. Can anyone in the Naperville Sun let us know how it happened so we could be educated? Obviously there is no longer a Napergate Man to educate us. He must have spent hours digging all this information up, writing about it and publishing it!

But someone has to take over what he did for the community! He has been retired for over 6 years and no citizen has stepped forward to replace him. I don't expect any citizens to step forward as none of the surrounding suburbs ever had anything similar to this Napergate Man. Or even, most likely, no other city in the entire country ever had a man that was willing to spend so much money to be a Watch Dog for his community when the local and regional newspapers were failing them. We were just lucky in the Napergate Era that we had such a person. But now we don't have him and must find a way to move forward without him!

It just seems reading all these Sun threads the past few months, he left a massive void and residents are frustrated by the void he left. Additional frustration is developing as a result of the unwillingness of the Naperville Sun to step up to the plate and fill his big shoes.

I agree with all 14 bloggers and especially Realtor Ryan and the Napergate Man that this parking deck is costly, not needed, an eyesore, and destroys the beautiful serene setting of this library on a beautiful river and Riverwalk. I respectfully disagree with Ted that a parking deck should only be built there as a last resort. I say not that location. Never as another blogger stated!

AGAIN TED, PLEASE TELL US HOW THE COUNCIL VOTED ON THIS ONE. I NEED TO KNOW SO NEXT TIME I KNOW WHO TO VOTE IN AND WHO TO VOTE OUT DURING MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS!!!

Last time, you got us an answer on the Ponds of West Hobson after the thread was archived and I don't think anyone saw it. As you know I was trying to help on that situation but I did not have any ammunition to work with. It also did not help that Mr. Randall only had 5-10 supporters willing to go to the City Council on a good cause. A far cry from those Napergate Days when residents ended up in hallways due to lack of capacity in Chambers as occurred in the final Spring Green Battle.

I personally visited the Ponds of Hobson West possibly trespassing as some blogger noted. But I think that cause is lost, and want to see if we can mobilize on this library cause that the Napergate Man is saying must be addressed!

I would like to try to work on this cause. I think it is a good cause not just because the Napergate Man said it was a good cause. I think neighboring residents must be outraged their homes will be dwarfed by a huge parking lot. How could the city have not thought about these residents and the impact on their home? This also reminds me of Spring Green in that we are throwing a Commercial Use in a quiet residential neighborhood.

Anyway I am going to end this letter and go visit the library as the Napergate Man most likely did before talking. I think the power of diligent observation is crucial to understanding any issue. No one can accuse me of trespassing this time as it is a public library owned by the taxpayers. So at least I have a better chance of investigating without getting arrested by the Naperville Police! Thank God! I don't want to join the Napergate Man in that distinction. Plus like Ameena I don't have much money to fight in the court system and would probably have to plead guilty whether I was innocent or guilty!

And Ted I want to tell you I am very grateful that you created these blogs to allow us to debate, vet and influence decisions. I do suspect this thread will be a very important and successful thread after the Napergate Man tipped his friends who then tipped the bloggers of this wrongful decision made by our city council!

Note from Ted:

The library deck issue was reported extensively by The Sun. I recall we ran a front-page illustration before the vote. I don't remember the vote, and I don't have access to archive right now to look it up.

I was able to find this editorial by searching the 30-day archive on our Web site:

Council smart to take a look at postponing new deck

January 23, 2008

THE ISSUE: The City Council is looking for capital improvement projects it can postpone or even cancel.

OUR VIEW: The Nichols Library deck might be one that could be scaled down or not needed after other planned decks are built.

The Naperville City Council is doing what it must as it looks to postponing or even cancelling various items from its capital improvement program.

Critically, some $51.4 million worth of projects in the plan are currently unfunded.

With the economy in its current state of flux, the council is wise to consider that city revenue - especially in such areas as sales tax and real estate transfer tax - will probably not be as robust as the city would like it to be.

And while the city must keep up with growth and resident expectations in its capital improvements, taking a look at projects with an eye toward seeing if they are truly necessary or at the least can be put off for a year or two is a wise course.

One expensive project that the city staff and council are looking to push off for a year is construction of the Nichols Library parking deck.

With the Water Street deck and the Van Buren deck addition to be built in the next couple of years, the city staff considers that deck can be postponed from 2009 to 2010.

As for proposed changes to the Central Parking Facility, the one between Chicago and Jefferson avenues, these have been proposed for 2011-12 and the council may push that out another year or, at the suggestion of Councilman Richard Furstenau, not even keep it in the plan at all, at least for the time being.

As much as we consider downtown parking to be vital, we would note that the deck that is the most controversial with residents is that to be built at the library.

Many folks consider that it will be detrimental to the appearance of that area and that it is too close to residences.

Perhaps the city would be wise to postpone the library deck until both the Van Buren and Water Street projects are done and even the Central Parking Facility revamped and then see what the need is before the library deck is built. Maybe by that time a smaller library deck or no deck at all will be deemed a better solution.

Update from Ted:

It took a while to search the archives because The Sun did SO MANY STORIES on the Nichols Library deck, but the Sunday editor finally managed to find the one with the vote, and it's published below. Sorry you missed all the articles Melissa, but The Sun did its job on this issue, giving residents plenty of notice about what was happening and when.

I like your post Melissa!

I hope Ted can get us the names of the Council Members who voted for and against this insane deck!

I think we learned from the Ponds and Spring Green we need to get one Council Member who voted "for" to reopen the issue in a Council Meeting.

And then we have to try to obtain a REVERSAL. We just can not be paralyzed forever just because the Napergate Man retired. He was notorious for these reversals.

We just have to find a way to proceed without him instead of yearning for him daily and never getting anything accomplished.

I think he spoiled us by doing all the work for us for a whole decade. It is time us bloggers got off our butts and go to City Council and do what he did time and time again.

Hopefully, these blogs will get powerful and have thousands of readers so we can use them to fill City Chambers like the Napergate Man filled them with his Napergate ads that called residents into action over and over again obtaining reversal after reversal!

We are lacking action and I hope a new leader surfaces soon.

I wish Dick Furstenau would lead us like the Napergate Man did.
I understand the Napergate Man was involved in tons of litigation while running those Napergate ads and leading us.

DF only has a baby case compared to the Napergate Man's numerous cases. He needs to lead us just like he led us to reduce our Water Bill by millions of dollars. That was awesome what he did and I give him credit.

This is a call to Mr. Furstenau for help. Please help us stop this library deck. Please blog with us and tell us what we need to do!

Also please tell us how you voted on this deck! I hope you voted no but I missed this story in the Sun. It most have not been on Page 1 or prevalent like those subheadings in those Napergate ads that stuck out like sore thumbs and not one seemed to have ever missed!

I am just going with all the bloggers above and the Napergate Man.
There seems to be no debate on this issue.
It appears city officials did what Eli said. I won't repeat what he said. Look it up!
I especially agree with Ryan and Melissa who both made much sense!

Betting against the Napergate Man is like going to Las Vegas and trying to beat Casino odds! It ain't happening!

I am not betting against this guy. He has won all his cases in court and before the city council.

And based on my limited knowledge about the library it does seem very unfitting to put a parking deck that would block the view of that gorgeous atmosphere in that part of aresidential neighborhood.

It is hard to miss that very large tree that the Napergate Man mentioned to one of his friends. I am also against killing trees especially century old trees.

And I hope Ted lets us know Monday who voted for that ugly deck to be put on top of a library or next to it.

If our city officials had half a brain they would have demanded that that Promenade Building with Hugo's would have had 2 undergroud parking levels for vehicles to park.

But Brestal got them off the hook for having to come up with their own parking and us taxpayers have to pay for THEIR parking costs! How unfair!

Is anyone still wondering why the Napergate Man was always calling Brestal out in his Napergate ads. He knew something 15 years ago and we are just finding out about it now!

How unjust how these City Council members operate! They do not watch out for us taxpayers like the Napergate Man use to.

They only watch out for Brestal's wallet hoping he will reciprocate somehow someday. We all saw how he gave Rosanova's son a job in his law firm. If that does not tell the taxpayers something nothing will!

Does anyone for a second believe when the Napergate Man was running those full page Napergate Ads that Brestal would have dared hire a City Council Member's Son? Not a chance in a million!

I asked the Sunday editor to look in the archive and she found many articles in The Sun related to council discussion of the Nichols parking deck including this one from July 19:

”Parking deck plans advancing”

Residents, you're one step closer to parking your car in a new downtown parking deck.

The City Council voted 6 to 3 at Tuesday's meeting to approve a grouping of ordinances related to construction of the Nichols Library parking deck. Councilmen Doug Krause and Bob Fieseler and
Councilwoman Darlene Senger voted against it.

Together the ordinances consolidate the three properties on the library block into one, rezone a corner of that block and approve a conditional use for the deck as a planned unit development.

The three-story parking deck would span the length of Jefferson Avenue from Eagle to Webster Street. A fourth floor would be underground. Three stories also would run along Eagle Street to Jackson Avenue. About 540 parking spaces would be available upon the garage's completion.

A handful of opponents, many of whom have spoken out previously against the location of the deck, came forward again to make their voices heard. This time they called on the Plan Commission's recent denial of the ordinances to help bolster their case.

Susan McNeal-Bulak implored the council to move forward with other parking projects, such as those in conjunction with the Water Street redevelopment or the addition to the Van Buren parking deck.

"You probably never want to see or hear about the Nichols Library parking deck again," McNeal-Bulak said. "But we urge you to step back."

Christopher DeVane, an ardent opponent of the deck, said the garagecould "quite possibly be the most unpopular civic project in Naperville history."

However, resident Thomas Harris called the deck a compromise, and something rather than nothing needs to be done.

"While this isn't the best solution, it is a solution," Harris said. "Some of us who drive to downtown Naperville see the need for the parking deck."

Councilman John Rosanova said while it's true the deck might be a controversial issue, when the Municipal Center was being constructed at its current location, it drew an earful of criticism as well.

"This is the best option," he said. "People will be able to park in the deck and not have to walk outside to get to the library. What kind of statement does that make about a city and its reverence for libraries? I'd say a pretty solid one."

City Finance Director Doug Krieger said an outline of future funding options for all the downtown parking projects will come before th ecouncil in late August.

"70 percent of the 42 downtown businesses must agree to collect that money," Krause said. "If we don't get 70 percent, where are were going to get the money?"

The deck now stands to cost $16.5 million, up a few million dollars from previous costs because of delays in construction.

Contact Kate Houlihan at khoulihan@scn1.com or 630-416-5224.

Rachael,

http://www.naperville.il.us/emplibrary/ccm032206.pdf

March 22, 2006.

Item K5 Consideration of reconstructing the Central Parking Facility in Advance of the Nichols Library Parking Deck.

...Furstenau moved to continue to endorse the library site as the first new parking structure in the downtown. Second, Boyajian.

The only NAY vote was from Krause.

Looks like DF isn't the man to stop this.

Joe,
You know what is so ironic about this Dick Furestneau council member and his new pro-establishment postions....Let me tell you.

The Napergate Man pumped him up real good in 1995 but could not get him elected despite giving him his highest rating which I recall was a 9 out 10 in his numerous Napergate ads. He pumped him up again in Napergate ad after Napergate ad in 1999 and finally got him elected.

And what does Dick Furstenau do! He betrays the Napergate Man and takes $2000 dollars from the Brestal Law Firm something the Napergate Man preached against.

So now we have John Rosanova and Dick Fursteanu betraying the Napergate Man who pumped ten of thousands of dollars in his ads to help get them elected.

I think I finally understand why the Napergate Man retired. He must have felt he was fighting a losing battle as he would work hard to elect these candidates who he must have thought were good people, and as soon as they are in office, they betray him, stab him in the back and start taking dough or favors for relatives from this Brestal Character.

I really feel he tried to help our town and we let him down. No wonder he is walking his dog Abby and not worrying about us anymore. He just gave up on us! Can anyone blame him???

Count me in as one more voice against the Nichols Parking Deck.

What bothers me is the idea that the deck would prevent growth of the library, which ostensibly would be addressed by building yet another library building on the north side. That would be an expensive mistake.

I've lived here over 15 years. My experience since the Naper Blvd and 95th Street libraries were built is that most items I'm looking for are completely checked out at Nichols but available at the other two libraries; often ALL copies are available. That means the library has a redundancy of materials but that the popularity of the Nichols library still far exceeds that of the other two. Building another library would be wasteful and, has been shown twice before, ineffective at reducing Nichols’ traffic. People like going downtown – and the library can be part of a days outing.

I’ll also add that often, when it appears there are not open spaces around Nichols, I’ll pull into the Community Center lot, just across the street, to find it practically, even completely, empty.

Therefore, building a parking deck at the Nichols library is unnecessary and a flat out mistake.

Joe,
I think you are wrong and DF is the only hope to stop this.
Here is why! If you have been following Ted's threads for the last few months you need a guy from the winning side to bring an issue back up for debate and a new vote. A guy from the losing side of a vote can't do anything!

If you think about it he is the most likely guy to flip and agree to reopen this library debate and put it to a new vote.

It is apparent that the Napergatians are against this library almost unanimously. Who put DF in office? They did! So I would think they have a chance of getting him to change his mind. A much better chance than any other conservative members of our current council.

It appears you disagree with Ted who said there were 3 council members who voted against the library and not just one. Them being Councilmen Doug Krause and Bob Fieseler and Councilwoman Darlene Senger. I am going with Ted as being more credible than you Joe. as he is the Host and knows what is going on in our town plus has old articles to his disposal. He is usually right and very credible!

Even though both Doug Krasue and Darlene Senger were endorsed by the Napergate Man, they can not help here becasue they are on the losing side. Of course Bob Fieseler, a non-Napertagian can't help either as he is also on the losting side.

Thus you have some establishment council members who will not change under any circumstance and a wishy washy guy named Dick Furstenau who blows with the flying money blowing in the wind. He goes with which ever direction the money is blowing.

So I think you are wrong, Joe! DF is actually the only HOPE to get this library back on agenda so we can get a reversal. It would be nice if the Napergate Man would give him a call and discuss LOYALTY with him! He needs to be reminded he needs to be loyal to his constituents, voters and those Napergate Ads that placed him in office. We all saw how bad he failed in the state elections without the Napergate Man's help or endorsement. And he tries to blame it on an incidents of touching or not touching with a cop. Just seems ridiculous he can't let the puck stop at him for his failure in the state election.

I think people saw his lack of loyalty to the agenda of the Napergatians and they dumped him in the State Elections. That is only my personal opinion.

I hope he can redeem himself with the Napergatians by coming thru on the libraray. Of course I am against this deck like all others who have posted. It would so distasteful in the middle of a residential neighborhood.

Eli,
I think you are a little off with your plan. A parking deck at the train station would not be able to serve the dual purpose you are noting.

That parking deck would be much too far of a walk to downtown especially in the winter.

I just don't see why we can't build the 2 decks we are building one or two stories higher. In Chicago they build them 12 and 15 stories high. Land is expensive, so we need to build higher!

I am going to make a guess and say if the Napergate Man was around he would just say build one parking deck high enough to accomodate all the parking and spare us the other two.

If you are concerned about height. Forget about that issue! Look it how high the city officials led Edward's Hospital go up. I can't even count the stories when I drive by as there are so many. Over 9 stories I believe!

So that is my solution one deck and build it high. The Van Buren Deck is the one I would recommend to build as high as necessary to accomodate all parking. What is wrong with having one skysraper in downtown Naperville? If built properly it actually may look pretty at that location.

But please leave that library alone. I am sure the Napergate Man knows what he is talking about as he has proved himself over and over again to be right on all issues he has taken sides on!

I am with the Napergate Man and the unamimous opinion of all bloggers so far that building a deck on this library site is disastrous.

It shows you how incompetant our City Council can be when someone like the Napergate Man is not watching them.

I urge the Naperville Sun to start keeping an eye on our city council. They do not think! They go with Brestal if he pressures them. In the old days when the Napergate Man pressured them a little more they went with him.

Absolutely no brain power on this council!

You have two unofficial council members and 9 official but useless council members.

It just seems the only 2 real council members we have in this town are the Napergate Man and the Brestal Man. The other 9 just react to pressure! No logical thinking or common sense! Very sad!

9.I think you're feeling sorry for the downtown restaurants is not justified, Ted. Other restaurants in shopping centers have to pay something called CAM(Common Area Maintenance) for their parking lots provided by their landlords. This CAM can range anywhere from $2.00 to $4.00 a square foot per year. So restaurants in plazas that are between 5000s.f. to 10,000s.f. pay between $10,000 to $40,000 dollars for use of their parking lots. This includes maintenance such as parking lot repairs, snow plowing, daily cleaning, lighting, seal coating , striping, etc. When a new parking lot is needed the humongous cost is passed on to the tenants and can be between $5-10 a square foot to replace. This occurs once every 20 years and is a one time expense of $25,000 to $100,000 per restaurant mostly depending on size of restaurant and quality of the plaza. As a commercial realtor I can tell you, it is very obvious that the downtown restaurants and bar owners are being subsidized at taxpayers expense. This is very unfair and in my opinion none of the existing council members can comprehend the factual knowledge I am offering. (I have verified that the Napergate Man does in fact own a commercial retail center in Naperville so I am sure this knowledge entered into his decision before making it. I am sure he would comprehend what I am talking about very easily unlike our council members who depend on the very biased Brestal for all their information)

__________________________________________________________________

This above quote from Realtor Ryan convinced me that this parking we are building for the downtown restaurants is a subsidy paid by the taxpayers and not the restauarnts or their patrons.

Ryan made so much sense. Please read his post. I did not want to repost the whole post because it is too long. But it is right on the money. He knows what he is talking about. No doubt!

Absolutely against the library parking deck!

Just an absolutely insane decision by our council!

Someone misled them and they took the bait.

I want to add my voice to all those opposed to the library deck.

I do not feel I have to elaborate as all the bloggers and Ted did a great job pointing out the utter stupidity of the council decision.

As one blogger said our council members were drinking in executive chambers before making this dumb decision. They never fail to surprise us!

I have to go with my fellow Napergatians on this one. It really seems like a no brainer!

Our council can't even make the right decision on a no brainer!

But in the end it is our fault for electing them. We have to be more diligent in the next elections and know who we are voting for!

I am going with Cindy, Melissa, Realtor Ryan and the Napergate Man on this one. It really seems like an obvious decison.

But how could our council screw up such an obvious decison! No library deck please!!!

This battle for the library reminds me so much of Spring Green.

In both cases they are trying to build a commerical building in a residential area.

The only difference is the Napergate Man lived in Pembroke Commons and he had the power to rally the troops and stop the Council on that disastrous decision.

In this case as in the Ponds of Hobson West there seems to be no leadership or organization to fight City Hall. Unless residents start finding their own Napergate Men the city council will destroy our beautiful town. It is really so sad that people like the Napergate Man and activist Donna Rogers worked so hard for the beautification of Naperville and our City Council works for the sole purpose of putting a smile on Brestal's face.

I have to laugh out loud when I hear our city officials patting themselves on the back because Naperville came in 2nd most beautiful town in America.

Sorry council members but the credit goes to great citizens like Donna Rogers and the Napergate Man who devoted the better part of decade trying keep Brestal from destroying our town. Brestal appears to have re-energized himself to battle again with the retirement of the Napergate Man. We need to re-energize and stop him!

Ted,

It seems like you gave the Napergatians a new forum to express their opinions to replace those Napergate Ads.

I think you are doing a disservice to our community and would like to see you close down your entire blogs and return to reporting the news in the print newspaper.

Your threads have been a disaster. All they have done is reignite the 3500 Napergatians that have been sleeping.

Give me one good reason how waking them up has helped our town?

They are against everything our wonderful council members do.

The Napergatians are nothing but trouble makers and you are catering to them and encouraging them!

Herbert,

This is probably what Ted was refering to:

July 17, 2007
Item N1.
DF makes the motion to set it in motion again with approving rezoning of the area, conditional use and PUD for a parking deck. Motion carries with DF visting AYE.

(That's now 2 times FOR the parking deck for DF, solidifying the position I posted from him back in 2006)

Nays on that vote (7/17/2007): Krause, Senger and Fiesler.

Because of this (2 times for the deck, 0 times against it), I still say DF is not the one to stop it and won't stop it. What's the status of his lawsuit against the city?

I worked with the Napergate Man during all those subdivsion wars in the 90s and early 2000s. I can say one thing about this guy; he would never mislead us.

I can assure you that no one can pass him an ENVELOPE stuffed with anything to change his mind. Unlike some of our council members who accept favors from this infamous Brestal Law Firm, Mr. Napergate is one person who can never be influenced with money or favors to go against the best interests of the taxpayers and residents of Naperville.

During our subdivision wars, I recall him asking hundreds of questions at meetings as he wanted to know every little detail before he put his reputation on the line for us.

Since he is putting his reputation on the line regarding this library, I am sure he vetted it out every which way possible before he came to the conclusion that it was a bad decision.

I can assure you this man does not have an ego. He does not attempt to reverse every City Council decisions for no reason. Only the few that are atriously wrong. That is why his success rate is so high. He only takes on developments projects that make no sense! Development projects that were made that have no practicality due to such things as conflicts of interest and influence.

He must have seen something awful wrong with library project to speak out for the first time in nearly 7 years. He obviously has much better things to do than fight our city council members day and night. But this time he was a little upset and spoke up. I am glad we finally heard from him albeit it was indirectly from his friends and neighbors.

So I am going with him and all the other bloggers who obviously feel a fatal error was made here. I hope we can get our first reversal post-Napergate Era.

And Ted thanks for allowing us to express our opinions freely on your blgs.

PS. I am also glad the Napergate Man is still living in Naperville and not retired in Arizona as has been widely rumored on these blogs a month or so ago!

Like everyone else I am against this parking deck at the library.

We really don't need it. We heard from so many including the Napergate Man and his friend Bob, Eli, Melissa, and numerous people that I can not name or remember, that they don't have trouble finding parking in downtown Naperville even on a Friday or Saturday.

I usually don't go downtown on weekends but I do go on weekdays and there is plenty of street parking. I recall Bob stating that he and the Napergate Man never had to use the parking garages even once. They always find street parking. Eli, who lives downtown, has always found a parking spot in less than 10 minutes. If we don't want to believe the Napergate Man and his buddy, do we not believe Eli who has always been credible on these blogs. And since he lives downtown, if anything he would want parking at taxpayer expense for himself. He does not want it, because he truthfully knows it is simply not needed.

Now we need to investigate Eli's allegation of envelopes stuffed with cash being passed around. Who passed these envelopes, Eli?
I believe you but you need to back up what you say like the Napegate Man always did in his Napergate ads so we can have the evidence to take to City Hall and confront our council members. Without solid evidence there is no confrontation! That is the difference between us and the Napergate Man. He always had the evidence from somewhere before he went to the City Council to obtain his numerous and historic reversals.

Note from Ted:

McFarland, Go back and re-read what Eli wrote about envelopes. He doesn't say what you think.

What makes the Taxpayers of the City of Naperville feel that they have a right to question the City Council and the decisions made regarding the design and future of the Downtown Area. There is a direct need for hundreds of parking spaces and high rise decks are the only answer. As for the businesses operating in the Downtown area, you can either adapt or go out of business. The only answer is more parking, more bars and lounges. There are alot of friends of the Council that will benefit by there leadership. So if you are the typical ignorant Taxpayer such as I am, do not question what is best for you and the City. THEY KNOW BEST HOW TO SPEND YOUR MONEY.

I still am not sure where the extra cars are going to come from to fill up this garage. I've never had a problem finding a parking spot, even on busy Friday nights. If the Chicago Ave garage is full I head over to the Van Buren garage and always find something there. It might take ten minutes to find a spot during peak hours, but is that worth spending millions of dollars and goofing up the library?

Can't you also park at City Hall after hours as well? Does ANYONE ever park there? This whole fiasco is really starting to make me wonder if someone on the council isn't going to be on the receiving end of a cash stuffed envelope from whatever contractor is responsible for the construction of the new garage.

But since the garage is being built, I agree with everyone saying local businesses should finance it. If I open a business on the outskirts of Naperville, can I depend on the city and residents of Naperville to whip me up a posh parking lot... or would providing parking for my customers be my responsibility as a business owner? The double standard the city has for the downtown area is getting expensive.

Posted by: Eli Hodapp | January 28, 2008 11:15 AM

__________________________________________________________________

Ted,
I was speaking from memory but I found this post from Eli. It can be found on the thread of Parking Structures that you put up last month. As you can see your bloggers do read your threads religiously. I hope this enhances my credibility just a touch with you, Ted!

McFarland

PS. I am not a Napergatian but I respect and support them as they seem to care and love Naperville much more than Brestal and Friends!

Note from Ted:

I'm not questioning your credibility, but alleging bribes is a serious matter, and in response to your question asking Eli for names I wanted to point out that Eli never actually said anyone was taking bribes.

I think it's too late to debate the deck -- the council voted for it and has repeatedly defended its decision.

That said, I am very afraid that the special tax to pay for it will not be approved and the cost will be added to our real estate tax bills.

This is what happened at Van Buren, as I recall. The merchants supported the concept. They agreed to pay the majority of the costs. The council approved the deck. The merchants decided that the deck benefited the entire city, not just the downtown. The council agreed and the funding method was changed so that more of the cost was borne by the taxpayers via property tax. As a final gift to the merchants, the city council excused them from paying the first annual payment -- it came from city "surplus" instead.

I am tired of having my property taxes used for the benefit of private businesses in the downtown. Councilman Krause pointed out, at a hearing for a new restaurant in downtown, that the builder was providing zero parking spaces and that it seemed unfair. Staff disagreed, stating that the owner was making a payment in kind instead of providing spaces. If that payment was high enough, we wouldn't need the special taxes -- Obviously, the in kind payments are not high enough. If they were, we wouldn't need this special tax.

Residential taxpayers are going to pay for this, too. Count on it. It's too easy to bill the residential taxpayers.

I believe I said before that it wouldn't surprise me if the main motivation behind building the parking deck happened to be cash stuffed envelopes. I really can't come to any other logical conclusion as to why the council is so adamant about building this garage. No I don't have any evidence behind that, it's just what my gut tells me. What other motivation could there possibly be? The council's job is to represent the residents, is it not? When was the last council meeting where a resident stood up in support of the parking garage? It seems like every meeting I go to or watch online almost always has at least one person who went felt so strong about the issue they decided to take time out of their day to come to a council meeting to try to talk some sense in to them.

Let's look at the facts:

-Has ANYONE here ever been unable to find a parking spot in downtown Naperville? Granted, you might find yourself circling for a few minutes waiting for something to open up during prime time on a Friday or Saturday night... but have you EVER just decided to go somewhere else because you were literally unable to park?

-If they're building the parking deck as a preventative measure to allow for future parking when more businesses move in, where are these businesses going to go? If anyone hasn't noticed, what we consider "downtown" Naperville is land locked by residential housing and parks. The only major construction I can think of is the Water Street buildings, and they're building their own garage! Are there other future downtown Naperville sites I'm not aware of which are going to result in an explosion of traffic and parking requirements?

Kathleen, from your post earlier-

"I think you are a little off with your plan. A parking deck at the train station would not be able to serve the dual purpose you are noting. That parking deck would be much too far of a walk to downtown especially in the winter."

Either way, I don't know about it being "too far", when was the last time (without being incredibly lucky with street parking) you were able to park within a half mile of your destination for free when you went to Chicago? Besides, in my plan, this garage would serve more to alleviate the Metra parking problem and overflow parking for downtown Naperville. Obviously not the first place you would park your car, but if you find yourself downtown at 6:30 on a Friday and are tired of circling the garages you could just park there and walk a little farther.

The main benefit of building a dual-purpose garage is instead of tax payers footing the bill, Metra commuters who have been on year long waiting lists would be OVERJOYED to pay for parking. Don't believe me? Go to the downtown Naperville station during rush hour and ask any person chaining their bike up if given the opportunity they would pay double or even triple the current parking pass cost to not have to ride their bike in this weather.

On a day like today, when it was -2 degrees out at 7:30 AM, do you really think you would find anyone who would say NO to that?

So let's see... Build a parking deck chopping down trees which are hundreds of years old, creating a massive disturbance to the library, potentially destroying some of the Riverwalk, AND costing tax payers millions of dollars OR build a parking deck where it is sorely needed, and have it paid for either entirely or almost entirely by commuters desperate for parking. Sure it might be a little too far to walk without a coat in high heels to the downtown Naperville bars in the winter, but how many centuries of free shuttle service from the heart of downtown to the Metra station garage could the millions of dollars the library parking garage was going to cost buy?

I am totally against paying a single red cent towards subsidizintg these parking garages.

To previous blogger Sam, let us not lose hope!

I believe the Napergate Man and his followers were able to reverse the Spring Green Vote not once but 3 times!

That is why Spring Green/Gate has become the rallying cry and the meausuring rod for our expectations in Naperville!

It has also been done before by the Napergate Man. He reversed a decison against ATT from 7-0 back to 0-7 when our nutty council members in 1993 decided to give the City Phone Contract to MCI despite ATT providing 7600 jobs to our City. Our council members have been historically as dumb as they can come. At that time we only paid them an annual salary of 5000 dollars per year and we got what we paid for....nothing!

I recall the Napergate Man and his ATT supporters were ready to launch an electronic attack on the City of Naperville by tying up all city lines unless the city succumbed. The city eventually succumbed to the massive pressure brought forward by Mr. Napergate and his tactics! The Napergate Man ran many Napergate Ads to support the ATT employees and they also filled up the chambers that night just like the great Spring Green folks. I worked for ATT at the time and joined the parade to the City Council. The Napergate Man did help us full the chambers that night to the point they were overflowing with ATT employees. I have to say we had a lot of fun that evening. That Napergate Man knew how to turn screws right into our City Council Members heads until they screamed for their Mommy's to come help them. Kid you not!

While I am not a commercial realtor, I was a small time residential builder in the 1980s in Naperville. I do know enough though that I know Commercial Realtor Ryan is right on the money as to how parking works for downtown businesses as opposed to businesses in plazas.

I used to be a frequent visitor to Mr. Esmail's liquor store on Bailey Rd. He was a fixture there in the 1980s before he delved into many other businesses. I was always curious how shopping centers worked. He owned that Bailey Rd. plaza so he had the knowledge and I remember him explaining to me in this way:

1. Tenants pay a flat rent based on a rate per square foot.

2. Tenants pay their pro rata share of CAM based on their square footage as a per cent of the entire square footage of entire plaza.

3. Tenants pay their pro rate share of Real Estate Taxes based on their square footage as a per cent of the entire square footage of the entire plaza.

4. Tenants pay their pro rata share of Insurance based on their square footage as a per cent of the entire square footage of the entire plaza.

The kicker is in #2. Businesses in plazas take full responsibility for their parking(majority of CAM) and pay for it in full based on their square footage and not sales as is being discussed in downtown. It seems this approach is fair and is handled that way by all plazas and not just Mr.Esmail's Maplebrook Plaza.

In downtown our successful merchants, restaurants and bar owners who are reaping very good revenue expect us to pay for their parking. We have been subsidizing it for many years. Now this higher tax to pay for this parking is another form of taxing the residents of Naperville for their parking problems. Yes, we will pay for these taxes with our receipts given to us upon the completion of our meals in addition to higher real estate taxes on our homes.

These businesses downtown should be assessed a tax based on square footage occupied like not only Mr. Esmail does but every plaza in the United States.

For example if it cost us to $100,000,000 to have built all these 5 or 6 decks we must bill it to the downtown businesses based on their square footage occupancy. (Actually to the landlords who have a duty to pass it thru to their tenants based on square footage they occupy in their respective plazas.)

Assume for arguments sake there is 1,000,000 square feet of retail space in downtown Naperville. Then every business's true cost for parking is $100.00 per sq.ft.

For example I was once in trying to convince a prospective tenant to move into the former Oswald's Pharmacy which is now Ted's Grill or Buffalo Steakhouse. I recall it being about 5,930 s.f. So if we want to be fair, Ted's Steakhouse should be paying $593.000 dollars to subsidize these garage charges. That is his true fair share!
Now if I am wrong and there is only 500,000 s.f. of retail space in downtown Naperville, his true cost would be $1,186,00.00. On the alternative if the total square footage of retail space in downtown Naperville is 2,000,000 s.f., Ted (not Host Ted but Ted's Steakhouse..no pun intended) should only be required to pay $296,500.

While these numbers seem outrageous they are accurate if my estimates are accurate. Hopefully Host Ted can provide us with the real numbers and I am at his service to do all the computations. But if you assume the cost of all the garages past and present is 100,000,000( which I believe is conservative) and if you assume the total square footage of retail space downtown is 1,000,000 sq. ft we have Ted's Steakhouse paying $593,000 for his share. That seems unbearable! I understand! But if we let him pay it over 20 years it is only $29,650 dollars. However we have to add about $2.00 per square foot for annual maintenance of these parking garages which is an additional $11,860. That brings us to $41,510 dollars. Is that all? No, since we are allowing Ted to make payments is anyone willing to finance the interest on these payments for the businesses that are making huge money downtown. I don't think so! If we were to finance this $100,000,000 at 7% to help our downtown business owners out, this would be roughly another $7,000,000 dollars in interest expense per year. Just by some weird coincidence this brings it up another $41,510.00 (7,000,000/1,000,000 X 5930 sq. ft.) Yes, I am amazed as you bloggers are that this number equals the other $41,510 dollars right down to the last dollar. Trust me it was a rare coincidence that just happened as I was computing.( a one in a hundred thousand chance...I am ready for Las Vegas) So if you multiply $41,510.00 X 2 = $83,020 dollars. That is Ted's true annual cost for parking per year. Is Ted' s Steakhouse paying this amount. I highly doubt it. We the taxpayers are footing the bill!. He would have to have revenue of $8,302,000 at 1% food and beverage tax to be paying his fair share thru our receipts to come up with his share in this way which is not fair anyway since we the taxpayes as customers are paying it. I highly doubt Ted is doing $8,302,000 in business. My suspicion is he may be doing between 1 to 2 million. The city and state know for sure what he is doing in volume and know if we are subsidizing Ted ( believe he may be the CNN guy ) or not. If we are subsidizing him, the City Council needs to take corrective action and stop subsidizing Ted's Steakhouse and all other businesses downtown. I know nothing about Ted or his steakhouse. I just chose it at random because I knew the square footage from a window sign when it was vacant and attempted to show it to a prospect. Yes, sometimes residential realtors do supplement their income with some commercial if we can get it.

This seems like a fair way to appropriate fair costs to business owners. The calculations are my own but the lesson was taught directly to me by Mr. Esmail(also known as the Napergate Man for some reason on these threads). I had inquired because at one time I was interested in leaving residential and going into commercial retail.

I suspect Mr. Esmail more than anyone knows about the chaos going on downtown with the parking decks not only based on aesthetics at the library but unfairness to Naperville Taxpayers who are unknowingly footing all the bills while the downtown businesses reap all the profits and take it to the bank.

For example it is well known that the owner of Jimmy's Grill or his son, made a statement that he pulls in $80,000 dollars in revenue alone from his outdoor patio on weekends in the warm weather months. I heard it from many reputable sources and it was actually made in Council Chambers. So contrary to what bloggers are saying most downtown businesses are very healthy and reaping WINDFALL PROFITS.

It is high time they pay for their own parking. Residents need to wake up and smell the coffee. It is really a shame that the Napergate Man as you all call him is not running those Napergate ads to educate us taxpayers how we are being scr*wed every which way possible by our City Officials. Our City Officials are clueless in their decision making.

I was fortunate enough to have dozens of conversation with the Napergate Man in the 1980s and early 90s in his little liquor store on Bailey Rd. named Extra Value Liquors. I learned much from him how our city operates. I am not surprised most of you are trusting his decision. You don't have to trust his decision blindly. He has the knowledge and expertise to back anything he says or tells to a friend.

Now that I have given you this information, I hope you all confront your city officials at the next city council meeting. It is not that hard. You just need numbers of people and for each speaker to speak for the entire 3 minutes until you wear your City Council Members down. Bring a 100 speakers and let each one speak for the whole 3 minutes....not part of them! Let the Mayor finally order him to sit down after he asked for an additional 30 seconds! That's at least 5 hours of speakers. Another hour will disappear between speakers. The City Council needs a 15 minute break. They also need 3 additional hours to discuss other issues on the agenda.

If you add all this up, you will get 9 hours and 15 minutes assuming no speaker was allowed to go overtime. Another 50 minutes if each is allowed the extra 30 seconds our kind Mayor Pradel allows. That give us 10 hours and 5 minutes. If the City Council meeting starts at 7pm it will be over at 5:05am. That would be the strategy of the Napergate Man. Wear them down and teach them to do research before they make decisions. If they don't do their research force them to stay up till 5:05 am until they start dozing off at each meeting. Eventually if you wear them down enough, deprive them of sleep, they will finally make the right decision so they can go home.

It is really that simple! If the residents of Naperville can no longer mobilize a hundred speakers, that means they lost interest of their town and surrendered to a few incompetent city officials loyal to the Brestal Law Firm.

I read all the blogs before I posted. This quotation from Ted's post form a Sun Reporter really caught my eye and devastated me.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

A handful of opponents, many of whom have spoken out previously against the location of the deck, came forward again to make their voices heard. This time they called on the Plan Commission's recent denial of the ordinances to help bolster their case.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________