Even as the inspectors and the director were touring the facility they differed on interpretations of city code, according to Leverenz. Specifically the inspector said each client's food needed to be locked up separately in the cooler. Leverenz said the director overrode the inspector's interpretation.

“There is still a big disjuncture between the bosses of these departments and the people on the ground,” said Lazar. “We just want them to be consistent with their rules and to let us see the code so we can follow it.”

This certainly does support the "city can't muster a coherent answer on the rules" supposition, but the thing that really strikes me is that Lazar's comment--when she implores the city to "let us see the code so we can follow it"--implies strongly that the code is being withheld from Lazar, like it exists under lock and key and is not published for the public to read. Can this really be so? (I'm not ruling anything out, but that would really be scary.) Interpretations differing on the code is one thing; making the code something only the inspectors can see, but not businesses, would be another.

Those city inspectors are a train wreck. I was involved in opening a restaurant and on the final inspection, they flunked us because one of the sinks was dripping. So the owner bought a washer at Ace and fixed it. He went to City Hall to get the license, with the receipt for the washer, and told them the sink was fixed. They said they needed to see a receipt from a union plumber showing it had been fixed "properly." So we had to hire a plumber and it ended up costing almost $200, not to mention almost an additional month before they got around to coming out to reinspect it. The people involved were looking to get their palms greased, but the owner refused, so they jerked him around. Unfortunately, there's not much you can do about it. Maybe this was a grease job gone awry?

riddlemay wrote:

Even as the inspectors and the director were touring the facility they differed on interpretations of city code, according to Leverenz. Specifically the inspector said each client's food needed to be locked up separately in the cooler. Leverenz said the director overrode the inspector's interpretation.

“There is still a big disjuncture between the bosses of these departments and the people on the ground,” said Lazar. “We just want them to be consistent with their rules and to let us see the code so we can follow it.”

This certainly does support the "city can't muster a coherent answer on the rules" supposition,...

I suppose that's one interpretation. Another is that the city realizes that its current rules are to ambiguous when applied to this new-to-them situation, and is responding as quickly as possible to rectify that - going so far as to have the department director accompany an inspector on a visit.

I suppose that's one interpretation. Another is that the city realizes that its current rules are to ambiguous when applied to this new-to-them situation, and is responding as quickly as possible to rectify that - going so far as to have the department director accompany an inspector on a visit.

My interpretation of that would be a lot more likely to include the phrase "trying to stem a PR debacle."

Cynthia wrote:And then they wonder why Illinois has been experiencing a decline in population.

As Thomas Jefferson noted, “When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."

The population of Illinois is not declining. Here are the population counts from each census from 1990 to 2000, plus the 2008 population estimate:

Year Population

2008 12,901,563
2000 12,419,660
1990 11,430,602
1980 11,426,518
1970 11,113,976
1960 10,081,158
1950 8,712,176
1940 7,897,241
1930 7,630,654
1920 6,485,280
1910 5,638,591
1900 4,821,550

These numbers are easily found on the Census Bureau's website, census.gov.

Plus, there is no evidence Thomas Jefferson actually said what you've quoted him as saying. This statement was most likely made by a guy named John Basil Barnhill in 1914. See http://wiki.monticello.org/mediawiki/in ... otation%29.

I can throw out witty quotes too, such as "Education is a better safeguard of liberty than a standing army." - Edward Everett

Cynthia, there is a reason we try to keep this forum focused on food and not interject politics. Should you feel the need to made these snide political statements, though, please make an attempt to get some of your facts straight.

cool, I was beginning to worry I might lose the over/under bet on when this thread would have to be locked.

Mike G wrote:

I suppose that's one interpretation. Another is that the city realizes that its current rules are to ambiguous when applied to this new-to-them situation, and is responding as quickly as possible to rectify that - going so far as to have the department director accompany an inspector on a visit.

My interpretation of that would be a lot more likely to include the phrase "trying to stem a PR debacle."

Either being ecumenical or indecisive, I agree with both of you. There's no way the department director would be getting involved with this if the Tribune and others weren't making it a cause. But now that the Tribune and others are shining a light on it, the department director has realized there's a problem and is trying to do the right thing to make rational this and other such future situations.

Darren72 wrote:

Cynthia wrote:And then they wonder why Illinois has been experiencing a decline in population.

The population of Illinois is not declining. Here are the population counts from each census from 1990 to 2000, plus the 2008 population estimate:


Cynthia, there is a reason we try to keep this forum focused on food and not interject politics. Should you feel the need to made these snide political statements, though, please make an attempt to get some of your facts straight.

I do understand that we try to stay focused on the food, but this entire thread (which I did not start) is about politics that relate to food.

As for the decline, articles have been coming out for a couple of months now about Illinois losing population. The New York Times reported that Illinois could lose a seat in Congress. The Chicago Tribune recently wrote that the decline in Illinois's population was not as sharp as was feared, but it is still a matter of concern. Perhaps it's just during 2009, and since your figures stop at 2008, before the economy really tanked (and even then were just an estimate for 2008), perhaps they do not take into account whatever figures the MSM is currently reporting on. (They refer often to the census.) Of course, if you told me that MSM had gotten their facts wrong, I don't suppose I'd be shocked.

I know we've lost a lot of food shows because of silliness about foie gras and such (plus union issues and hotel prices and other things -- I know it's not just foie gras), and a number of food companies have moved out when they've been bought by other companies. So at least some of the decline is food related.

But I don't see how my comment is more political than any of the others being made about the city government.

Last night's "Chicago Tonight" covered this issue with a panel discussion. Unfortunately, the city declined to attend and sent a statement instead.

10-minute segment can be viewed here:

http://www.wttw.com/main.taf?p=42,8,80& ... TCsFAFGnal

Best,
Michael

Cynthia wrote:As for the decline, articles have been coming out for a couple of months now about Illinois losing population. The New York Times reported that Illinois could lose a seat in Congress. The Chicago Tribune recently wrote that the decline in Illinois's population was not as sharp as was feared, but it is still a matter of concern. Perhaps it's just during 2009, and since your figures stop at 2008, before the economy really tanked (and even then were just an estimate for 2008), perhaps they do not take into account whatever figures the MSM is currently reporting on. (They refer often to the census.) Of course, if you told me that MSM had gotten their facts wrong, I don't suppose I'd be shocked.

In most cases where states have lost a congressional seat, the state has experienced a population growth but at a rate much slower than the national average.