F07, Forest Park Review endorses Doolin [FP]
Someone--but not someone for the Forest Park Review--told me the Review was planning to endorse two candidates for mayor in the primary, and then endorsing one of the winners before April 17.
So I was surprised to read the Forest Park Review endorsed Commissioner Patrick Doolin for mayor.
It's easy to complain about the options available. Forest Park and Proviso Township have been governed in a partisan way. There aren't going to be a whole bunch of "above the fray" individuals who have gotten involved in local issues. So almost any candidate will be vulnerable to the criticism of not having enough experience being involved or having been somewhat uncivil at some point.
Dan Haley, the publisher, and Bill Dwyer, a columnist, have criticized the commissioner form of government. And their take on the commissioner form of government is more on target than off target.
However, I would offer this caveat. Many Proviso communities have village manager forms of government on paper, but have "mayors" (really they are village presidents) that govern by fiat when they want to. I expect that if Forest Park had a village manager form of government for the last four years with the same five commissioners we would have gotten about the same as what we got. Calderone would have told Mike Sturino what to do at key junctures and Sturino would have gone along.
What parts of the endorsement resonated with you? What parts seemed wrong or off-the-mark?
So I was surprised to read the Forest Park Review endorsed Commissioner Patrick Doolin for mayor.
Forest Park needs one more candidate who demonstrates an unselfish and wholly mature character and is willing to serve the greater good.
It's easy to complain about the options available. Forest Park and Proviso Township have been governed in a partisan way. There aren't going to be a whole bunch of "above the fray" individuals who have gotten involved in local issues. So almost any candidate will be vulnerable to the criticism of not having enough experience being involved or having been somewhat uncivil at some point.
Forest Park's commission form of government is antiquated and inefficient. As Doolin has rightfully pointed out, policy makers have no place meddling in the day-to-day affairs of municipal government. Giving our elected officials administrative control blurs the lines of authority and adds chaos to the flow of information. The ability of department heads, the village administrator and others working in an oversight capacity to effectively manage their staff is severely undermined by the constant threat of political interference. Nowhere in the state laws that prescribe the five departments that must exist in the commission form of government does it say that each commissioner must be knowledgeable.
Dan Haley, the publisher, and Bill Dwyer, a columnist, have criticized the commissioner form of government. And their take on the commissioner form of government is more on target than off target.
However, I would offer this caveat. Many Proviso communities have village manager forms of government on paper, but have "mayors" (really they are village presidents) that govern by fiat when they want to. I expect that if Forest Park had a village manager form of government for the last four years with the same five commissioners we would have gotten about the same as what we got. Calderone would have told Mike Sturino what to do at key junctures and Sturino would have gone along.
What parts of the endorsement resonated with you? What parts seemed wrong or off-the-mark?
Labels: Bill Dwyer, commissioner government, Dan Haley, Forest Park Review, Patrick Doolin
posted by Carl Nyberg at
9:29 AM
7 Comments:
Why would anyone be surprised by this? Haley has had his head so up Doolin's behind for so long, he wouldn't recognize he's own face if he saw it in the mirror.
I, for one, am waiting until after 2/27 to predict who the next mayor will be but at this point I don't expect Pattrick Doolin to be an option at that time.
By
Anonymous, at 10:20 AM, February 14, 2007
Refer to above comment as "waiting until after 2/27".
In the future pick a pseudonym. Discussions get confusing with more than one "anonymous".
By
Carl Nyberg, at 10:23 AM, February 14, 2007
Is this better?
I am not sure what you mean by "refer to above comment as 'waiting until after 2/27' "
But if you need clarification of what I meant, I don't believe that Doolin will survive the primary. My prediction is that the general election will be between Calderone and Steinbach.
By
Anonymous, at 10:28 AM, February 14, 2007
What constituencies will come out for each candidate?
Who will come out to vote for Calderone? Steinbach?
Why will Doolin place third?
By
Carl Nyberg, at 10:35 AM, February 14, 2007
Maybe someone could expand on the following text from the Review's endorsement ?
Under the commission form of government, Calderone did not overstep his bounds in attempting to broker a punitive agreement with a former police officer. By stepping into the fray only to later bow to his police chief, which he claims is the case, Calderone does nothing but muddy the waters. Employees are left wondering who to turn to for the final word.
If this is the best example of what's wrong with commissioner-style government -- it doesn't seem all that terrible.
By
chris miller, at 11:05 AM, February 14, 2007
Patrick will make a fine Mayor and quite frankly, I am grateful he was endorsed by the FPR.
Dan Haley is no shrinking violet and has a real grasp of FP issues and has had ample time to observe all of the candidates.
Calderone has done a good job and we thank him. Terry is a good Commissioner and we will miss her but time brings about change.
By
Anonymous, at 7:33 PM, February 16, 2007
O.K. carl loves Doolin. Great. Now Carl, as an unemployed 39 year old who lives in his mommy's house, how exactly do you plan to... well...work? You knowbeing a commissioner is a JOB! (Job being Carl's kryptonite)
By
Anonymous, at 5:21 PM, February 17, 2007
Post a Comment
<< Home