Jump to content

Metra Governance


MetroShadow

Recommended Posts

I tweeted to Preckwinkle that I am openly applying for board appointment. So far, no reply.

Maybe you have to Facebook and e-mail her too.* Or use a pen. :rolleyes: Or write a check.

In that ryanbytes said they were down to us, maybe you have a chance. :P

In that the Tribune probably also wants Arlene Mulder out,** that gives you another shot (assuming that you live in Wheeling Township as opposed to Maine). Contact your county commissioner.

_______

*To quote what some restauranteur on chicagonow.com said about the Olympics.

**In that the Metra site says she was on the board since 2005, but was mayor until 2013, according to the Daily Herald. But not double dipping at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe you have to Facebook and e-mail her too.* Or use a pen. :rolleyes: Or write a check.

In that ryanbytes said they were down to us, maybe you have a chance. :P

In that the Tribune probably also wants Arlene Mulder out,** that gives you another shot (assuming that you live in Wheeling Township as opposed to Maine). Contact your county commissioner.

_______

*To quote what some restauranteur on chicagonow.com said about the Olympics.

**In that the Metra site says she was on the board since 2005, but was mayor until 2013, according to the Daily Herald. But not double dipping at the moment.

Everyone wants Mulder out. And reading some comments in local media, it sounds like, despite all the reported love for her, there are a large number of Arlington Heights residents who are more than happy she is no longer mayor there. As for my tweet, I am sure no one would take me seriously, which is no surprise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tribune has a report that the RTA did an audit and essentially found that Metra should have let liability insurance take care of it, instead of saying that the severance agreement was more financially prudent than defending a suit by Clifford.

I'm not sure where that gets anyone, though. I doubt that the RTA has the legal authority to make Metra rescind the agreement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tribune has a report that the RTA did an audit and essentially found that Metra should have let liability insurance take care of it, instead of saying that the severance agreement was more financially prudent than defending a suit by Clifford.

I'm not sure where that gets anyone, though. I doubt that the RTA has the legal authority to make Metra rescind the agreement.

This does confirm something we all ready knew.That Metra wasted over a million on this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This does confirm something we all ready knew.That Metra wasted over a million on this.

How did we get to a million where the ceiling was already $718K? Granted, still doesn't make it any better.

(Still, if the insurance was to cover it, the most they've would be on the hook for was a smidge over $100K anyway)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How did we get to a million where the ceiling was already $718K? Granted, still doesn't make it any better.

(Still, if the insurance was to cover it, the most they've would be on the hook for was a smidge over $100K anyway)

If you look at the cost for PR Firm,Consultants,and of course Lawyers for it.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you look at the cost for PR Firm,Consultants,and of course Lawyers for it.

Today's Tribune editorial sets out a basis for filing a malpractice suit against the outside lawyers. Maybe their malpractice insurer will defend them and pay up, if the remaining members of the Metra board figure it out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Tribune story on the RTA meeting pretty much backs up what mkohut said, except that it could be more, because of reimbursement for relocation expenses and Clifford's attorney's fees. The auditor suggested that Metra can now make an insurance claim, but personally I don't think so, because the insurance company would have the defenses that Metra did not notify them when Clifford threatened litigation and settled without the insurance company's consent.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As the crawl at the bottom of the channel 32.1 news indicates, did you use enough hashtags? #metra #job #board. :lol:

I did use #metra :)

I also took your advice and sent a message to someone who in a recent Trib article said she didn't think she could find anyone to take the job. To date, no reply. To date, no surprise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Tribune story on the RTA meeting pretty much backs up what mkohut said, except that it could be more, because of reimbursement for relocation expenses and Clifford's attorney's fees. The auditor suggested that Metra can now make an insurance claim, but personally I don't think so, because the insurance company would have the defenses that Metra did not notify them when Clifford threatened litigation and settled without the insurance company's consent.

The story also said that there was enough on Clifford to not renew his contract, so for that, at least I am happy. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did use #metra :)

I also took your advice and sent a message to someone who in a recent Trib article said she didn't think she could find anyone to take the job. To date, no reply. To date, no surprise.

On this point, anything else that I would say would be too silly.

The story also said that there was enough on Clifford to not renew his contract, so for that, at least I am happy. :D

That gets back to the first comment I made in this thread. If there had been an objective job performance review and the reviewers found grounds, such as bad advice about the fare increase or not moving on the open fare mandate, that would have been one thing, and either the board could have decided not to renew the contract or to buy out the remaining year at about $125K and tell him to sit.

However, once O'Halloran and Huggins injected illegal criteria into the job evaluation, and the board became the rubber stamp that pretty much all the boards except Pace have become, some mess was inevitable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On this point, anything else that I would say would be too silly.

That gets back to the first comment I made in this thread. If there had been an objective job performance review and the reviewers found grounds, such as bad advice about the fare increase or not moving on the open fare mandate, that would have been one thing, and either the board could have decided not to renew the contract or to buy out the remaining year at about $125K and tell him to sit.

However, once O'Halloran and Huggins injected illegal criteria into the job evaluation, and the board became the rubber stamp that pretty much all the boards except Pace have become, some mess was inevitable.

Oh go ahead and say it...I need a good laugh !!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh go ahead and say it...I need a good laugh !!

I don't know, something between did you post the tweets or do you have a resume in proper pdf format?

Maybe you can be like @kasijackson or @jaun2three45 and get on a Honda commercial.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know, something between did you post the tweets or do you have a resume in proper pdf format.

Maybe you can be like @kasijohnson or @jaun2three45 and get on a Honda commercial.

Didn't do the resume, figured if they wanted one, I'd send it...but like I said, no

reply of any kind. Yes, I did post the tweet to Preckwinkle, just a reply that it was seen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the next twist of "As the Stomach Turns"* the Daily Herald reports that Shakman says Clifford is willing to come back if the board renegotiates the severance agreement into a new contract.

However, I still believe that Clifford is only interested in the money and that there aren't enough board members left to rehire him.

I do concur with Shakman that "Metra has no basis for canceling the agreement given it was made by a government body that had the proper authority to enter into such an agreement..."

*A Carol Burnett parody of the soap opera "As the World Turns."

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Daily Herald is reporting that the Cook County Commissioners want the Cook County Metra Board members to resign.

It took me a while to think this one over.

The articles indicated that among the Cook County Commissioners calling for the resignations was Doody Gorman, who put O'Halloran in the position in the first place merely for political considerations, there being no indication that he had any particular qualifications for the job, as opposed to Widmer, who is a labor lawyer and may have exercised some expertise in dealing with the rail labor unions.

While this call is undoubtedly in the aftermath of the RTA "you didn't know you had insurance" preliminary audit, it should be noted that most of those forced out up to now were on account of legal technicalities, such as holding a municipal office or not residing in the district from which appointed, and not malfeasance in the job as director. The one exception may be Emanuel telling Huggins to go after the Bobby Rush/National Chamber of Commerce disclosures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think if more then anything else.All the College Clowns want to make thenself look good by saying they were involve in the cleaning house job of Metra.

The only way that works if if all the appointing authorities have a vetting process to make sure that the candidates are qualified. In that these authorities had previously given out appointments purely on a political basis (as noted above with Doody Gorman with respect to Metra and Quinn with respect to CTA) I don't think that is going to happen.

Maybe they want to give the illusion of being involved in cleaning up Metra, but the inspector general laws after Pagano's "suicide by Metra" sure didn't prevent this mess, and appear to help in giving people like O'Halloran an excuse while this mess was being covered up.

In short, it depends on how much Illinois believes in CYA.

By the way, Bozo and Krusty take umbrage at your "college clowns" statements. :o:rolleyes: Well, maybe not Krusty. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Nothing saying that an applicant is entitled to consideration. Only question is whether the prospective appointee is statutorily qualified. Only way to take care of this (as pointed out by the appointment of the Debonheirss of Mellatonia) is to enact an enforceable merit system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In another one bites the dust, Tribune reports that Widmer is eventually leaving, once a successor is named.

Also, the articles mentioning appointment of Barbosa and Oberman point out that they don't have transportation experience, but unlike the CTA Executive Director, that isn't statutorily required.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...