The problem with the test track is that NO ONE uses it. It isn't that the concept or the partnership is a bad idea, the problem is that if you go into any dealership, they will tell you it is too much of a hassle to use. I suppose if some customer came in and was unwilling to buy a car unless they got to use it, the dealership would go out of their way to arrange it, but that certainly doesn't justify using that much land in exchange for zero tax revenue ..... or wasting water be it for a skid pad or the grass or anything else. Watch that place for awhile sometime - if you see even one car on it, you will be the first I have heard of.

Anon@ June 23, 2010 8:30 AM

You haven't been down Ogden Ave lately to see the empty car lots, have you?

No question that car dealers generate a lot of revenue and jobs for the city. However, they are private businesses and, in my opinion, should not be subsidized with tax money.

It is impossible to determine if the test track has attracted a single dealer, kept a single dealer from leaving or contributed to the sale of a single car. You can get lots of opinions, but no facts.

Spend a little time watching the test track -- my frequent observations, like those of others in this thread, show that the track is used very infrequently. The test track sponsors have some data that suggest otherwise, but my observations are that it is used only very rarely.

Finally, if you haven't taken a test drive on the track, I encourage you to do so and then ask yourself: Can I make a purchase decision solely on the basis of this test drive? (That was the stated intention -- to keep test drives off of local streets.) I know I wouldn't make a purchase without a much longer test drive than that afforded by the test track, but then, I like to think I'm careful about how I spend my money. I wish my government was as careful when they spend my money.

Sam,

The car dealers generate a lot of revenue and more importantly jobs for Naperville.

The test track does support their efforts and is a good example of a public-private partnership that brings in a lot of jobs and tax revenue.

Like all expense centers, costs at the track to need to me managed carefully and questions should always be asked.

If anything the dealers should have their service writers ride the track with customers who report hard to find noises etc.. if they are not already doing so.

And no, I have no affiliation with the City, the Dealers or their suppliers.

My vote would be to keep the track and to keep it well maintained.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

By sam on June 22, 2010 6:40 PM

To Seriously:

I share you views about the wasted use of tax money and while I know this won't help you, they don't water the grass at the the test track, the wet the asphalt for the skid pad. No sense going only half way when you're wasting our money. Don't forget that the test track is a valuable piece of property that will never generate a single dollar of tax revenue. But it looks good on our web page.

To Seriously:

I share you views about the wasted use of tax money and while I know this won't help you, they don't water the grass at the the test track, the wet the asphalt for the skid pad. No sense going only half way when you're wasting our money. Don't forget that the test track is a valuable piece of property that will never generate a single dollar of tax revenue. But it looks good on our web page.

There really isn't any basis for an ethical connection between women baring their breasts in a dance club (or anywhere else for that matter) and moral high ground.

Naperville might not have a single "Gentlemen's Club" yet prostitution (which is on a whole different ethical level than a Gentlemen's Club) is still very much alive and well and flourishing all over good old Naperville any night of the week.

If we are going to talk about "moral high ground" it would seem kind of silly to get worked up over a Gentlemen's Club when pretty much the same and even far more pornographic material is available over cable and/or internet 24/7. Some deranged sex offender can get their fill 24/7 yet we still have liquor laws that are out of date and out of touch regarding what time liquor can be sold.

Naperville is quick to collect fees from the cable and internet franchises and even quicker to turn a blind eye to the content being delivered courtesy of public utility easements. When it comes to tax revenue the City of Naperville never has had a firm footing on any moral high ground. Just like other municipalities the City of Naperville has their hand out and isn't one bit shy about levying and collecting outrageous "sin taxes" on liquor and smokes to name a few. And the best moral high ground defense they can come up with is "everyone else does it".

The day we start looking for the City of Naperville City Council to start defining "moral high ground" is the day we all need to seriously consider moving somewhere else. Except of course for those who seem to have no moral compass of their own and are content living in a nanny state where every last thing is decided and regulated by the government.

God help us and save us from what we have become.

When did the location of an abortion clinic become a moral issue? Last I looked, it is legal in this country, like it, or not... so we have to zone a clinic, like any other business.

As for Anon who blogged on "Mayor" Pradel. Right on. Like the person, but he has no business pretending to lead the Council. I read something about Ken Miller running. I think he'd do a great job.

What is CRAZY about this, is that a Naperville City Council meeting is turning in to a debate about abortion - especially given the fact that there is NO ISSUE to debate. No one has proposed opening such a clinic in Naperville, no one has suggested that at some point in the future they MIGHT want to open a abortion clinic in Naperville. This whole thing was started because a few councilman enjoy the sounds of their own voices and decided to make a simple item about the way something was worded into more than it was. Does ANYONE actually believe that any Naperville City Councilman has any say when it comes to this or any other Federal law? Come on - seriously???

I thought we were watching a handful of guys who thought they had a lot more power than they really do, or maybe they were preparing for some future run for higher office? Whatever the motive, they did manage to make a BIG deal out of something they have no say over, and they did manage to avoid doing anything at all useful in directing Naperville away from the major financial shortfall they helped create. A nice diversion from what they are elected to do into something WAY above their heads.

I drove by the "test track" that no one uses the other day, and the sprinkler system was on! REALLY? The test track that no one uses needs watering? I haven't had to water my lawn, which is great considering the rates of water have gone up, and I couldn't afford to water it even if I wanted to. A USEFUL debate over something the City Council actually HAS some control over would have been how to SELL that wasted asset and put the money back into the pockets of the people who are struggling day to day to survive.

Funny how that, the Smart Grid, or the money going to the Carillon never came up? MUCH more useful to debate a federal law that the councilman have NO say over, and that isn't even on the horizon in Naperville right now isn't it?

Anonymous on June 20, 2010 9:26 PM
You can go to Walgreens or CVS and get contraception right over the counter. And if you can't afford them then you shouldn't be screwing around. Nothing is 100% full proof and it even says on packages.
------------------------------

That's what I like about the anti-abortion group. Against abortion but also against contraception. Only those that can afford it can fall in love. Only those that can afford it can get the best methods of contraception. All the rest just need to keep celebate. And, damn you if you don't and get pregnant.

I feel much more comfortable that women can't bear their breasts in a dance club and that so called doctors can kill babies in Naperville.

I'm glad we are on the moral high ground.

The problem with the Supreme Court inventing laws and rights is that you never know what they will come up with next.

You can go to Walgreens or CVS and get contraception right over the counter. And if you can't afford them then you shouldn't be screwing around. Nothing is 100% full proof and it even says on packages.

Choices on June 20, 2010 8:00 AM

I had no idea that Naperville had an abortion clinic at one point. Just curious, was Edward Hospital delivering more infants than were being aborted at the clinic? It would be interesting to see the statistics from both groups.

------------------------------------

Actually no abortions were being conducted at PPH Naperville. What the "Pro Life" faction doesn't want people to know is that PPH does exactly what it names says. It allows people to "plan parenthood" through education and medicine. They allow people through contraception to decide when to become parents. These are the services that were being provided in Naperville.

If more people would take advantage of the planned parenthood services that PPH provides, then there would be no or a significantly reduced need to seek abortion services. How many of the people who "turn around" are not seeking abortions services but contraception services? How do the demonstrators know which people are the responsible ones seeking contraception services? If PPH isn't providing contraception services, where are free or reduced cost contraception services being provided in our community. The County Health Departments don't provide these services. Anti-abortion organizations don't provide these services.

Before everyone gets too carried away, here is the link to the video of the city council meeting

http://naperville.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=2&clip_id=214

Go to I21on the left and click it. You will go straight to the item. It had nothing to do with abortion. Furstenau brought up the abortion issue. Here is the beginning of the staff discussion of what they were requesting

No Changes to Existing Regulations

The proposed text amendment is only recommending consolidation of two separate land use categories: medical or dental clinics and medical or dental offices and improve the clarity of the code.

Liberty Watchman,

You are spot on!

George is a personable enough guy. However, long and dedicated service to the NPD as "Officer Friendly" is hardly what should be minimal qualification to preside over a city of 150,000 residents and an annual budget that exceeds $110 million dollars. How many corporations of the same size would allow some retired guy with no more than a high school diploma to serve on their board of directors? Not even most charities and non-profits these days would pick someone with no eduction or experience.

For George, serving as Mayor has been more of a retirement hobby for him than it has been a mission to improve the professionalism of the council... a fact that has not gone unnoticed for the last year and a half as the budget drama continues to be managed poorly. Honestly, there is simply a current void of any true leadership among all of the current elected council members.

Most of the positions George takes... that is when you can even get him to take a position... and taking a position is something George is NEVER, EVER first to come out on any issue... is like he is only capable of rekindling memories of Naperville from the 1940's and 1950's. Sorry, in my book George simply doesn't have what it takes to lead Naperville now nor into the future. George's reference point is the past. Today Naperville desperately needs someone to lead the city council who has a vision for the future.

George is an excellent cheerleader for Naperville. George is a terrible Mayor. He would be far better suited getting a job as ombudsman for the Chamber of Commerce or the Downtown Alliance. As Mayor it is time for him to go!

Right now this city is helping to bring life into the world through Edward Hospital. It is a healthy, family oriented city.

Think long and hard before welcoming death through abortion clinics. We can all pretend that science hasn't progressed, but facts are stubborn things. There are now ultrasounds and DNA that prove a fetus is a living, separate person.

I had no idea that Naperville had an abortion clinic at one point. Just curious, was Edward Hospital delivering more infants than were being aborted at the clinic? It would be interesting to see the statistics from both groups.

How do you suppose 'Officer Friendly' would have voted?

(Could we please stop calling him 'Mayor'. It's a title with no meaning. He has one vote just like every other councilman. He has no executive power at all. Councilman Pradel will do just fine, thank you.)

My Dad is a member of what Tom Brokaw called "the Greatest Generation" - he served in WWII and Korea. Before his current fight with Alzheimers he worked in the pro-life movement for 30+ years as a sidewalk counselor. He and a small group of others prayed the Rosary and witnessed to life outside clinics. They usually got several "turn-arounds" every week. He continues to get Christmas cards from families with children who are around today because of his witness.

Dad is no longer able to fight this battle... I pray that Planned Parenthood does not open another "abortion fortress" in Naperville - but if it does it is time for the next generation to step up...

Not long ago I saw a 20-something man in the airport with a shirt that said on the front "Abortion is mean"... and on the back "You will not silence my message.. You will not mock my God.. you will stop killing my generation" He was silentlly getting a lot of attention. The reality he lived I suspect is very different from late baby boomers like me. It really must have a powerful impact on how one lives their life.. "why am I around when my siblings and friends are not?"

Sounds like something Harry Potter might say
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/sep/07090503.html

This seems like yet another case of city hall staff meddling and trying to force things that may not be needed or wanted down the throat of the city council and/or the residents. When and if the residents bring this up as an issue and/or the city council needs to discuss it they should direct city staff to do something on their/our behalf. Until then, and until directed by someone, city staff should keep their nose out of things that are none of their business.

Just another case of city workers forgetting what their role and proper place is in the hierarchy of how municipal government is supposed to work. The feelings of city staff on any issue doesn't matter. It is our city not theirs.

OJ,
Exactly right. Just because someone might not use a service, or might not even like a service, doesn't mean that it shouldn't be allowed to operate, or that its location should be carefully legislated. Leads me to ask, why did the subject even come up

To the we don't need it crowd:

If you don't need it, don't use it. The problem isn't the places providing services to people after the fact. That's like blaming the pile of ash for the fire.

Do we really need another abortion facility. Have we become a society with no morals that we now need facilities popping up like Walgreens and CVS stores. Planned Parenthood already left Naperville (Ogden & North Aurora strip mall by Dominick's) to open a bigger facility near New York & Eola Rd. This new facility was pushed in Aurora to offer more than the Naperville site could. It not only offers abortion but other services (or so they say). So please tell me why we need another facility when their is already one a couple miles away. Are we that hard up for tax revenue.

Any area that votes heavily for the democrats should have a free abortion clinic on every corner!

I question the accuracy of the claim that an abortion clinic can be established anywhere in the city. For example, an abortion clinic could not be established on land already zoned for single family housing nor I suspect any other kind of housing... i.e residential zoning.

Depending upon the size of such a clinic and depending upon the nature of the exact services rendered an abortion clinic would generally either be classified as an outpatient (business) or as an ambulatory health care classification if 4 or more patients are under anesthesia at the same time. Clearly there are hundreds if not thousands of potential sites throughout the city that currently are zoned for either use.

Whether there are any medical providers currently rendering such services in any of the current medical offices, medical clinics, or hospitals might be a better question to research than to look into where future services might be located.

Despite the emotional issues associated with such services it would seem pretty hard to regulate or otherwise restrict a legal service considering the variety of existing and converted occupancy buildings that exist for other types of health care providers.

They should be able to locate any where that any other medical clinic can locate. They should not be able to locate any place where medical clinics can't locate.