Chicagoist: Cutting to the Bone

guest

Sat, 28 Jul 2007 04:27:27 -0600

Say dumbass, Movies in the Park are sponsored, no tax dollars are used to support it.

guest

Fri, 27 Jul 2007 15:39:48 -0600

Yes, Hired Trucks was privatization, and no doubt there were many people that didn't like where in the private sector those contracts went. Hired Trucks was a scandal however, not because city work was privatized, but because it was discovered that private firms were being paid by the city for doing little or no work, had mob connections, orwere tied to city employees, who were supposed to be barred from participating in the program. So you mean this scandal had absolutely nothing to do with the same "let's get to Daley" mentality to seems to permeate everything you and your type writes, while yanking it under the table to a fantasy of Fitz showing up with an indictment? It's time to be honest with yourself K-Rob. Everything your particular type of person has cooked up over the last 20 years has been geared to getting to Daley. And everything you've done has been a miserable failure. Better government and quality public services are supposed to be the provence of Democrats, not the GOP. Yeah, Yeah!!! Let's make it partisan. Once again, what would your beloved labor types say if you were to get your wish? Do you, Mr. Labor-Lover, really want to privatize things?

Kevin Robinson

Fri, 27 Jul 2007 15:27:22 -0600

Hired trucks was essentially turning to the private sector though, right? It was just that some people didn't like which side of the private sector got the call. Good question. Yes, Hired Trucks was privatization, and no doubt there were many people that didn't like where in the private sector those contracts went. Hired Trucks was a scandal however, not because city work was privatized, but because it was discovered that private firms were being paid by the city for doing little or no work, had mob connections, orwere tied to city employees, who were supposed to be barred from participating in the program. I'm not advocating broad privatization of city services; I think there are certain things that are inherently governmental, and probably are best kept in the hands of the public sector, even if it costs more on the bottom line. Managed Competition sets publicly owned units up to build competitive bids against the private sector for public work, and gives public employees the freedom to make changes in how the work is done, often leading to substantial cost savings. The government, of course, has to empower those workers, and back them up when they want to make changes to their work. I raised this example not as a blanket pronouncement that privatization and managed competion are intrinsically good, but rather to point out that new ideas and innovative management in government is lacking in Chicago. It's sad that it took an Indiana Republican to come up with a new public management theory that worked. Better government and quality public services are supposed to be the provence of Democrats, not the GOP.

guest

Fri, 27 Jul 2007 15:16:23 -0600

Hired trucks was essentially turning to the private sector though, right? It was just that some people didn't like which side of the private sector got the call.

Kevin Robinson

Fri, 27 Jul 2007 15:09:54 -0600

Guest #16: No. Hired Trucks was the contracting scandal that occured in Chicago. If you read the academic literature on Managed Competition (in particular check journal articles written by Osborne and Plastrik in Government Executive, you'll find answers to all of the rhetorical questions you've raised.

guest

Fri, 27 Jul 2007 15:01:26 -0600

Way to lift a newspaper headline, Kevin, and claim it as your own political analysis. Now can you see why people don't take you seriously?

guest

Fri, 27 Jul 2007 14:28:33 -0600

You speculated on the tax increase, or the Chicago Sun-Times, whose online article I read last night was headlined "Is Daley setting stage for tax hike?" Hear that K-Rob? Not even Chicagoist readers are buying into you now. Next stop: Chicago Reader!

guest

Fri, 27 Jul 2007 14:09:37 -0600

I did however speculate on a tax increase, and I stand by that. I hope I'm proven wrong. You speculated on the tax increase, or the Chicago Sun-Times, whose online article I read last night was headlined "Is Daley setting stage for tax hike?"

guest

Fri, 27 Jul 2007 14:02:42 -0600

Wow, 2%, Big Freaking Deal. How about Kevin take the lead on this one and cut 2% from his always long-winded columns.

guest

Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:58:03 -0600

In 1992, when Stephen Goldsmith became mayor of Indianapolis, he presented both the city government and public sector workers with a new challenge: managed competition. The essence of this management experiment was that public sector units would compete with the private sector for contract work in the city. Wasn't that called hired trucks? And if we were to open it up to actual competition, wouldn't you baffled Nort' siders just complain about how it's 'only Daley's pals' who get the contract? And how would the sub-human, knuckle dragging, blue collar union thugs (that the K-robs of the world adore) be a little upset to find out that their 45 minute coffee breaks are now part of a management competition?

guest

Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:56:21 -0600

Civic progress sounds creepy. I prefer they stay our of my life entirely.

guest

Fri, 27 Jul 2007 12:45:44 -0600

2% cut in spending = "cutting to the bone" Hyperbole maybe?

guest

Fri, 27 Jul 2007 12:27:29 -0600

Yep the Terroists are winning they are bleeding us dry. Stupid Bush/Chaney!

guest

Fri, 27 Jul 2007 12:10:31 -0600

In fact, the cost of the Iraq war to the City Chicago alone is currently $4.67 BILLION.

guest

Fri, 27 Jul 2007 12:09:00 -0600

By the way, according to the linked site, the cost of the war is actually coming up on HALF OF A TRILLION dollars. We passed $500MM long ago.

Kevin Robinson

Fri, 27 Jul 2007 12:05:24 -0600

guest #9: I made no insinuations that Movies in the Park were going to be cut. Rather, I used a popular and unique Park District program as a jumping off point to illustrate the potential that Chicago has to lead the rest of the nation in doing many of the things that governments do best, while also commenting on the lack of management science and innovative techniques and experimentation that our city suffers from. I did however speculate on a tax increase, and I stand by that. I hope I'm proven wrong. As guest #4 pointed out, this administration is quite reactionary, and any notions of civic progress are hard to come by.

guest

Fri, 27 Jul 2007 11:55:59 -0600

So you think it's responsible to just suggest that Daley is going to cut Movies in the Park when no one's even heard a whisper of that? What if someone wrote an article suggesting that you are going to be convicted of a felony in your lifetime and, to back it up, they said "some things you just know."

guest

Fri, 27 Jul 2007 11:37:15 -0600

The CME/CBOT are laying off 400 with our without the Tiff. It's laughable to give a company like the MERC 40 million. Do people in Chicago realize how many not millionaires but multi-millionaires where created by the MERC demutualized and going public in the first place? It really pisses me off that Daley would even consider giving them any money. I think he is reached his expiration date and I voted for him. I think we need term limits on all elected positions.

Kevin Robinson

Fri, 27 Jul 2007 11:37:02 -0600

guest #6: Somethings don't require a Magic 8 Ball to speculate on. Really, it would be nice if this mayoral administration relied a little more on management science, and less on robbing Peter to pay Paul.

guest

Fri, 27 Jul 2007 11:10:04 -0600

Given Daley's near-fanatical commitment to outdoor entertainment as evidenced by the creation of Millenium Park I highly doubt Movies in the Park is in any danger. Kevin, this is the second time this week you've speculated about what horrible thing "may" happen to Daley or what he "may" do in the future. Not quite playing fair in my opinion.

pantagrapher

Fri, 27 Jul 2007 10:04:35 -0600

I hate "Double Indemnity." But I love movies in the park.

guest

Fri, 27 Jul 2007 09:53:54 -0600

How about putting a tighter lid on the TIF funds, for starters? That could release some tax money. That stands as much chance of happening as managed competition, though, which would force the city to really look hard at patronage, something Daley will never do. Still, the idea that some $40 million, likely from a TIF fund, will go to the CBOT and Merc for their highly lucrative merger should make any true supporter of capitalism and free markets--as well as honest govt--sick to his stomach. I love how those trading type glorify the free market but have no problem taking a government handout. "Why can't Chicago be a model for other cities? Why do we always have to lag behind when it comes to new ideas, even ones that are risky? Raising taxes on city residents while cutting back on services might balance the budget in the short term, but wouldn't we all be better off if the chief executive of the City of Chicago, our elected leader, proposed and supported more imaginative ways to deliver the best of what we all dream of?" Great sentiments, but you are just pissing in the wind. This city is reactionary and, despite claims to the contrary, lacks anything resembling a progressive civic culture--or even a healthly civic culture. Blame it not only the selfish, cynical leaders, but on the residents, who allow these jackals to remain in power. Don't worry: We will all get a wake-up call soon enough, whether through skyrocketing property taxes (renters, take note--you pay as well, indirectly) or continued decreases in services we used to take for granted--transit, police, fire, infrastructure, etc. And once Chicago's bonding authority degrades, then you are in real trouble.

Benjy Lipsman

Fri, 27 Jul 2007 09:39:07 -0600

The managed competition idea sounds good in theory, but wouldn't all the patronage employees weigh down city departments' abilities to compete competitively?

Julene McCoy

Fri, 27 Jul 2007 09:37:24 -0600

I have an idea - how about cutting out the companies that get paid to go over the bills that go to the city and then forward them to the city, where they then go over them themselves and decide what to pay. Of course, that system may have been hampered by the patronage list outing that had the names of at least two people in the one company (that I know of) that provided that service at insane fees. Ha. Doubt that will happen.

guest

Fri, 27 Jul 2007 09:12:47 -0600

Even in your odd hypothetical, all that would probably happen is they would cut one movie from the schedule. I'm sure we can all live with that.