McHenry County Blog

Cal,

You make some very bold allegations with nothing more than a quote from a disgrunted board members wife and you're own conjecture.

Would you care to back any of it up with actually fact, or does that not suit this blog?
 

The link to the second page now works.
 

Cal,

That is quite a conspiracy weaved. I can see why it took you the entire weekend to repost it.

Not knowing some of the timeline here, when was the Park District first privy to the Gay Games, that it wasn't until March that it was voted on for the first time?

Also, what is Lori Phelps official capacity with the process, as she is quoted quite a bit?

There's a lot ot go through there, so I will likely have to follow up with some more questions on clarification, but can you also help me understand how boats, bouys, and docks should not be used for some regattas, but okay for others? You seem to imply that.
 

Cal -

I find the concept that Crystal Lake would be used as an Olympic Venue relatively ludicrous. While the lake has a 2000 metre open space (longest race in current Olympics is 200 metre's), the amount of space available for an Olympic venue otherwise is not available. An area four to six times the current parking area would be required to accomodate the teams, craft and officials (not house them, just provide space for team and officials operations). The media would require a grandstand of significant proportion adjacent to the start and finish lines as well as support areas to broadcast from. Spectator grandstands to accomodate at least 5,000 people would need to be sited. One last thought, the space is inadequate to accomodate training that ocurrs during the weeks leading up to the games. Eah of these accomodations would mean removing existing housing on and near the lake.

And how would you accomodate the traffic?
 

Lori Phelps filed the Freedom of Information request that got the hotel tax tourism grant application of the Crystal Lake Rowing Club. For that reason, I thought her comments relevant.

The goal of the rowing club (and, maybe the city and park district) seems to be to make Crystal Lake the rowing regatta capital of the Midwest. Off-season, I could care less.

It is very strange that the local rowing club would have the Gay Games ready and willing to come to Crystal Lake before filing the rowing club's December 22nd $14,800 grant application with the city, but fail to list the Gay Games Regatta, along with all the others it could think of--including the Olympics--as possible future events.

The club has had my emailed question more than the entire weekend and has sent no reply as to why it was left out.

I have no interest in having the Olympics disrupt life in Crystal Lake, as I think I made pretty clear in my original story on the idea.

There are just so many reasons.
 

Cal -

Do you have to be Gay to participate in the Gay Games? What would I have to do to participate, just declare I was Gay? Or is there a test?

And what about Gay rowing clubs? how can you tell a Gay rowing club from a straight one? Are there "mixed" rowing clubs?

This is all so confusing...
 

Hello again esgwerg (who ever you are)-

My offical capacity is that of a lifelong concerned resident who takes offense to an out-of-town organization that wants to infringe on CL/LW residents' rights and then threatens a lawsuit when they get told "no". This group demands acceptance, yet has no regard for accepting our needs and rights.

Yes, all of my comments have facts to back them up. Am sure you can find the facts as easy as I did, though most are already shown on this blog. Try Herald's archives too (nwherald.com).

As far as "when the Park District" was first notified, I was told "about 2 weeks before the March 2nd Park Board meeting". Commissioner's (these are volunteer, elected officials who don't have an office at the Park office) received the full proposal/information 3 days before the same board meeting.

I agree with Cal...events held off-season would be more welcome. Even better...the future Vulcan Lakes would make a great spot for these type of events. It is closer to being a commercial area in comparison to the residential neighborhoods we have near and around the lake.

P.S. To Monelson: visit:
www.GLRF.info for an explanation on gay rowing organizations
 

Thanks Lori. I was being sarcastic when I made my comment, but now that I read thier mission statement...here's a quote -

"representing the interests of gay and lesbian rowers worldwide....to support rowers facing homophobia, and to serve as liaison to national and international rowing governing bodies and to other sports organizations."

What a crock of .... How the heck would I know a Gay Rowe from a straight one so I could make them face homopobia?

Ok, issue one.. Crystal Lake should no thave to lend it's lake to anyone, especially if the community does not benefit more than it cost. I would suggest the cost of halting usage by local residents in prime summer is high. The benefit - extablish the lake as a premier rowing venue - meaning more events and forcing residents to give up useage of the lake more. As they say on Howie Mandels new show...NO DEAL.

Second issue.. let the GLRF bring on a law suit. I would love to see a court rule on whether this is a protected right afforded by our constitution.

Becareful not to suggest I am Homophobic by the way, or that I am opposed to Gays. What I am is tired of groups declaring themselves picked on minorities and forming organizations to prove it.

Can anyone answer my original question - How do I tell a Gay Rower from a Straight one so i can make sure not to make them face Homophobia?
 

Lori,

Suffice it to say, your timelines don't add up with the allegations you're making. I am in the process of writing up a more thorough response to Cal's post. I will fold in the points you are making and address those as well.

This is all, of course, disregarding the fact that your own boards voted it through.

Why doesn't anyone address that point? It would seem that that should be where people's angry is focused. Yet I haven't seen one comment from people mentioning recalling a board member. Why is that?
 

How many Park Board meetings has the issue of lake usage by non-residents been discussed? Has there ever been any discussion of limiting the events on the lake? If so, when? I can totally understand your frustration. Energy should be put into changing the rules of the Park Board and limiting the lakes use for future non-approved events.

It seems a lot of energy is going into conspiracy theories and being angry. Why not offer help in making it a smooth event and getting it over and done with? It will happen and there is not changing that.
 

Dear Esgwerg -
Am interested in seeing what evidence you have come up with to dispute my claims. I am always about fairness, which is why I have an issue with how Mr. Gary handled his proposal. To Mike - my issue is not about "getting even" due to anger, it's about questioning how Mr. Gary dealt with our Park District and City staff regarding his proposals. While some people will say "no big deal", I believe that everyone should be accountable for their actions.

I believe the Park District has already started the process of looking into their Special Events policy, a good thing.
 

By everybody, you mean everybody except those board members that voted it through, right?

You didn't answer my question about why no one seems to be questioning their own community leaders as to why they let it pass.
 

eswerg -
excuse me? no one is questioning why leaders let this pass? Appparently you're not paying attention.
How bout you start answering MY questions? Who are you? Where is your evidence to dispute my claims?
 

Lori,

Since you're so impatient, I will fore go the well written prose for a dry listing of your *cough* facts. We'll fold in Cal's oversites, as well.

And for the record, both you and Cal are guilty of heavy conjecture where you fall short on actual data. That is where my issue is.

Let's start--
1) You and Cal assert that the rowing club purposely left off the Chicago games from the Hotel tax application. The application was submitted 12/22/2005. You "surmise" that it's because it was for fear that they would be denied funding because the Chicago games funding was delayed.

There's fundemental breakdown in timelines. How could the rowing club know that the Chicago Games funding was delayed when that hadn't even taken place yet?

2) Cal's sites the GLRF's Finding and Recommendation document on their site as "proof" that "planning was well under way." Well under way, perhaps, but by the GLRF. And if you take the time to read the other document on that very same page, you will see that it was a letter the the Chicago Games group expression concern over the lack of a decision on venues. That letter was from 11/22/2005. They hand't even decided amoungst themselves! So only 28 day prior to when the Hotel tax application was submitted, there wasn't even concensus within the Chicago Games organization.

3) Cal states that you were "forced" to file a Freedom of Information request obtain the application.

Firstly, do they normal just hand those things out to anybody that asks?

Secondly, that absurd description only brings into stark relief how hard both yourself and Cal are trying to make up a conspiracy where one doesn't exist. You weren't "forced," you had to follow the process just like any other citizen.

4) Cal quotes you as saying "all except the Gay Games" were discussed at the Hotel Tax workshop.

Considering the minutes from that meeting do not go into that level of detail, how do you know this? Are we supposed to take your word? Is there a different set of notes aside from these?

5) Cal goes on to cite a registration form and again quotes you. (You give great soundbytes apparently.)

My issue here is about timing and comparing apples to oranges. You've stated that you knew about the Chicago Games "two weeks" prior to the 3/2/2006 and that the Park District board knew 2 days before. I'll have to take your word on it, but one might surmise that if you knew, some on the board may have been privy as well.

That said, the GLRF jumping the gun on posting a registration form is something that nobody but the GLRF and Chicago Games would have control over. So citing it as evidence of a conspiracy after their own Findings documents makes clear there are "challenges" to obtaining approval makes little sense to me. You and Cal see your conspiracy, I see a web team that made a dumb mistake.

6) Cal goes on to state that the funding the rowing club was granted is being used to "subsidize" the Gay Games. And that the club is "in the process of leveraging Crystal Lake tax dollars into a series of profitable regattas." He sites the same Findings document.

Here, Cal uses a statement by the GLRF to indict the rowing club for holding regattas. Pure rubush. Of course, he doesn't make any mention of what kind of operating expenses there may be for running a Juniors program. (yes, they have a kids program.) He does mention a short list of expenses that the Hotel Tax is going to, but fails on all accounts to speak objectively. He continues that thought, however, by saying that those items purchased would be used for *gasp* the Gay Games. As though a boat should either a) be thrown out after one use or b) not used for "gay" purposes. Perhaps you can explain his thinking there because I'm missing his point.

7) Cal goes on to imply more conspiracy.(surprising. really.) And points back to the Findings document stating that "here’s the page 4 the organizers don’t want you to be able to see."

It took me all of 5 minutes to find the document on the GLRF site. I won't comment on peoples computer skills. Look up PEBKAC on the Wikipedia.

8) Timelines, timelines, timelines! Cal state "Not exactly the chain of events that rowing club leaders presented to the public."

Here's a classic example of hindsight. He thinks that because GLRF thought that Crystal Lake was a good place to have the event and someone said that the rowing club thought it was a good place, that it was a confirmed decision. Yet from the 11/30/2005 letter it was obviously not decided. And conveniently, as often the case in people's fantasies, there's no name of who said what here. Of course that works in your's and Cal's favor because you need only point fingers nevermind the facts.

9) Cal continues, for once, talking about the community leaders who made the decisions, but using the Mayor Shepley's quote to his on purpose. As easily as Cal implies Shepley having some mysterious knowledge, the Mayor also could be refering to the Olympics, which were in the news earlier that fall with Mayor Daley throwing Chicago's hat back in the 2016 ring. I think the Olympics are a pretty big deal.

Again. You'll see what you want to see, nevermind the facts.

10) At this point, Lori, you go on record as as accusing the president of the rowing club of "deliberately and intentionally withholding[[held] his knowledge from the public and media of the planned Gay Games event until he was guaranteed of the city hotel tax subsidy."

That is a serious accusation made without any sort of evidence. You then go on to cite that as the reason for the media "circus." Nevermind statements made by Dave Phelps in the March 2nd meeting that were contrary to state law. I believe his states rang across the internet due to the nature of them.
 

There is no doubt whatsoever that the Crystal Lake Rowing Club knew that holding the Gay Games Rowing Regatta on Crystal Lake was a possibility and, secondly, did not list that possibility, in its $14,800 hotel tax application, while listing every other possibility the CLRC could think of.

I asked for an explanation Good Friday. None has been received.

Filing Freedom of Information requests is not required by state law. My experience is that those with something to hide use them to delay handing out information that should be readily available.
 

Cal,

1) It's also "possible" that the Olympics may come in 2016, yet that wasn't on there. It's also "possible" that the annual World Cup could decide that CL is the prefect location. There are an infinite number of "possible" events that could take place. At the time of the listing, perhaps those were the most likely. It's already clear from the GLRF's letter that there was confusion on venues. Further, the issue goes both ways. By listing events, the expectation is set that the club should be able to bring them to Crystal Lake. If they do not, I would suspect that they would have to answer why.

2) Unless you represent the City Council, I would see no reason why anybody would have to answer your question. Do you have any obligation to answer me if I ask you about how much you paid in Federal taxes? No. Of course not. It's between you and the government. Same here. Your statement implies you have some inheritant right to be answered.

3) The FoIA's "maintains a clear preference for access to public documents while still protecting legitimate governmental interests and the privacy rights of individual citizens." Given the current intensity of debates, I see there being a definite interest in protecting individuals rights. So while not required, it would seem to be the responsible process to use.

Quote is from here and a PDF version here
 

Income tax information is protected by law from prying eyes.

I fail to see the logic of your comparison of a appication from a group wanting taxpayers' money to a form used to calculate how much a taxpayers owes the government.

The former should be readily available.
 

Cal,

You're not answering the question, only questioning the analogy.

What obligation do they have to answer your question?

My point is that they have none. You have no official standing in the process and are not even part of the media. So what's the point in reponding back to you. If any of them read your blog, I'm sure there's even less incentive given the obvious bias here.

To the former, just because you say it should be "readily available", doesn't make it so. In fact, if there's personal information on the application, it could even have fallen into one of the exemption categories of the FoIA. Privacy is an issue here, given that peoples attitudes and behavior about the Chicago Game has been less then civil at times.
 

eswerg -
I will not continue debating with someone as irrational as you. You demand "answers", yet can't even put your name to your questions.

You obviously are reading all of the information that has been provided, nor are you offering any evidence to dispute my claims.

My claim stands. Good bye Eswerg -
 

guess I didn't spell "aren't" very well, as in "you are NOT reading the information provided". goodbye again
 

Lori,

That fact that you didn't address one thing I said and rather decided to shift focus on me, only shows your lack of anything that's not an exageration of the truth.

I went just short of line by line to Cal's post and your comments and the best response you could convey was that I didn't put my name in the post.

Sorry, Lori. I refuted your claims and will take your farewell as the proof that you have nothing tangible or credible to offer.
 

Let me just take the time to say, as well, your tactic is a classic one of people who troll message boards and comment threads.

When authors of baseless claims are called out on outrageous claims and forced to admit where they are wrong, the first thing they do is turn to questioning the character, identity, job, intelligence, or any other personal straw they can grasp of those who oppose their view.

The second thing is that they'll claim that they are done, finished, leaving, quiting, and so forth. In an attempt to feign rightious indignation.

The reality is that when these authors are forced to own up to their own viewpoints they fall short and take to guerilla tactics to generate noise, in hopes of obfuscating their lack of real facts.
 

it's ok eswerg...I will let you have the last word. My claims stand.
 

The following quotes are from the Crystal Lake Rowing Club's application for $14,800 of Crystal Lake tax dollars:

In answer to the grant application question, "What are the opportunities that the project will attempt to attract?"

"The GCJRC will establish Crystal Lake for a race course. The Crystal Lake Rowing Club envisions not only drawing participants and visitors from Northern Illinois, but eventually the course can be used by universities (Northwestern University, Wheaton College, and North Park University have contacted us) and masters programs that draw crowds from out of state, therefore adding to the frequency and amount of patrons using Crystal Lake hotels, restaurants and other businesses."

In answer to the question, "What immediate and long-range results are expected?"

"The immediate results for the community are to put Crystal Lake on the map with regard to competitive rowing events and to bring visitors into the area. (I have noted in my article that only McHenry County Blog and a high school sports columnist of the Northwest Herald wrote articles about the high school regatta)

"The long-range results include the possibility of many major rowing events being brought to Crystal Lake. The Midwest Junior Rowing Association is interested in potentially hosting the Midwest Junior Rowing Championships on Crystal Lake....

"The potential exists for Crystal Lake to be the 2016 Olympic rowing, Flatwater Kayaking and Racing Canoe venue if Chicgo were to be selected to host those Olympics...."

= = =
So, I guess Lori Phelps pulled out better information than the critic has been able to find.

Certainly, including the 2016 Olympics as a possible future event and ignoring a group that met with the local rowing club at the Main Beach is not logical.

Part of the answer to the first question above was, ..."eventually the course can be used by..."

I would submit that the Gay Games should have been in that list...especially considering the evidence of the Gay Games desire to use Crystal Lake which was presented in the article.
 

Thanks for clarifying further Cal. Also, in addition to the CLRC (Walt Gary) leaving the GG proposal out of the hotel application, he also avoided discussing it at the City's hotel-tax-workshop held in January, according to a NWH article. Since we already know that the Herald "would put the GG event in their headlines", wouldn't they (NWH)have commented on it if it had been discussed in January?

Furthermore, Walt Gary had to go through the 3-Board approval process in January for the Jr. Rowing Event. All 3 were other perfect opportunities to mention the other "events" he was working on, especially when the GG event planning was well underway.

It is too coincidental, that an event that was in the works since August 25 was not mentioned until 1 week after receiving his free-government-tax subsidy, 5.5 months into planning.

And still no response from Mr. Gary. You know, even the George Ryan prosecutors didn't have "solid proof" of his deceptions.
 

Hey, she's back! And to think, I was afraid you wouldn't return to this thread...It's like the Dynamic Duo here, you and Cal.

Cal,

I'm at a disadvantage here seeing as that is a document I do not have immediate access to.

That said, I think it's clear from the applications questions that it waa answered correctly and in earnest.

Your quote:
"What are the opportunities that the project will attempt to attract?"

It's clear that the question is asking for a listing of potential events that the club will actively seek. Not all possible events that might occur as you would seem to imply.

To your comment about this questions answer: "What immediate and long-range results are expected?"

How much coverage do you expect a single high school event to garner? I did a simple Google search and found the GCJRC listed on 20+ sites. Perhaps your judgement on ability to atract patrons should wait for more then just one event to take place.

Your final quote doesn't really further any point aside from echoing things we've already heard.
-----------

So I would say, no, Lori's information is still devoid of anything more then speculation. All you have provided, Cal, is addition information that once again shows how hard you and Lori are reading into this to find a conspiracy.

Eveything that I've talked about can be traced back to either GLRF documentation, Park District meeting notes, City Council meeting notes, quotes from this blog, and the IL .gov site. Where are Lori's sources for her claims aside from the documents I've already referenced? I haven't seen the application, but your quote don't further her points.

Further, I still have not seen any minutes to confirm her claims of what was and was not discussed at the Hotel Tax workshop. Was she there? Did she take notes? She also still has not commented on her time travel theory where somehow the rowing club knew that the Chicago Games funding would be delayed back on 12/22/2005. Unless that was already decided then. If that's the case, I'll stand corrected. Based your posts, Cal, it does not appear to have been decided until March. 3 full months after the application was submitted.

Lori,

You last comment only continues the fantasy, 8/25/2005, since you obviously are well versused on the documents we've discussed, is when the GLRF presented to their Findings to the Chicago Games. The rowing club doesn't seem to factor in there.
 

esgwerg

Just so you don't think it's the dynamic duo only, although they certianly don't need my help, let me put my oar in this water so to speak.

The CLRC crystal clearly did the following to promote it's bid for funds:

1) suggested that Crystal Lake could be a site for the 2012 games. (this claim is ludecrious if you understand how much housing would have to be torn down to accomodate the logistics of such an event)

2) Did not include the GG when it was clearly ingaged in obtaining it as an event.

3) Clearly the Olypics makes better bait than the GG in terms of less controversy, better politician appeal.

In point of fact, it is hard to believe that CLRC could possible have believed that it had a higher likelihood of acquiring the Olympic rowing than the GG this summer.


You seem to want to pick around the core issue here.. the GG are not welcome in Crystal Lake by alot of people for the following reasons Lori and Cal have articulated:

1) Unwanted intrusion by outside organization with little economic gain by residents.
2) Loss of use of lake resources by locals during prime time July weekend.

It's that simple. The rest concerns how it was spun and packaged for public consumption.

If it's not the way I presented it, it sure seems that way and it was poorly put together for someone who wanted a piece of the public dole.

and I won't even ask my question no one will answer again....
 

WHO is this esgwerg? Just doesn't seem to get it. Lori, don't worry about him, many of us in this community thank you, and commend you for speaking up. Something is extremely 'fishy' here, and most of us know it.
 

It's time to completely debunk this Olympic Rowing in Crystal Lake 2016. Here is the last post from the CMOC blog spot regarding 2016:
We are proud to have initiated the process to consider a Chicago Olympic bid for 2008 and 2012 and will post any developments for a potential Chicago 2016 bid.

Please note the U.S. Olympic Committee (USOC) has not yet determined an official bid process for 2016. In the meantime, we welcome your comments on a potential Chicago Olympic Games.

If you would like to volunteer toward helping to strengthen the Olympic presence in the Chicago metropolitan area, email us at info@cmoc.com. We receive a high volume of email, so please be assured we read each message and appreciate everyone's interest.

We will post various news, images and information related to the Olympic Games and Chicago, so please check back frequently.

Thank You!
posted by CMOC at 12/10/2005

CMOC has been the organization that unsuccessfully bid for 2008 & 2012, and are the only organized group and logical bidder, if any for 2016.

And they don't seem very strong, they maintain a blog, which has seemed like a media outlet for the winter olympics since December. Not one word about 2016. And if you know much about the Olympics, During and after the game sis when you court IOC members about your cities merits.

Secondly, how could CLRF suggest the 2016 Olympics is a possibility in it's December request, if there is no bid for them currently?

I was previously just opposed to the GG for the reasons I mentioned in my last post and was ignoring the conspiracy theories Cal had posted untill you protested about them.

Now that I have found blantant evidence of the patently false and misleading CLRF claim, it makes me wonder......
 

Here's the ;atest from the Chicago Tribune regarding a Chicago 2016 Olympic bid (from Feb 10, 2006):
"The USOC, which has yet to decide whether to float a U.S. contender for 2016, has asked prospective host cities to put their organizing efforts on hold until after those post-Turin briefings, [Michael Segobiano] said. That means Chicago will delay the establishment of an exploratory panel that will weigh whether the city should make a bid."
 

Okay, somebody help me here. This is the link to the "Outgames 2006" in Montreal:
http://www.montreal2006.org/en_the_games_in_short.html

Whose mission is:
"From 26 July to 5 August 2006, the 1st World Outgames will do just that,bringing together lesbian, gay,bisexual,and transgender (LGBT) athletes from around the world in unprecedented numbers for a celebration of sport, culture and human rights.In the spirit of true inclusiveness, the Outgames are open to all,regardless of sexual orientation; all are welcome to participate."

What could possibly be the value of having two sets of Gay Games so close together both geographically and in time frame?
 

Hello Monelson & Jessica -
Thank you for your input..it is appreciated. Apparently you now understand what my issue is really about: cheating/deception/withholding info that could've influenced and changed the outcome they sought...the golden egg valuing nearly $15,000.

While their deception was not illegal, it was unethical...and is something that the community (to those who care to know) should know about.

I resent the "black eye" given to the Park District on how they handled this, when they were doing the best they could with what was handed to them. Jerry Sullivan, while I don't agree with his position, was innocently away on vacationing, totally unaware of what was to come.

Whether you are a supporter or propronent of the GG event, a Gay event IS a controversial issue. The 3-Boards deserved more communication and planning time to deal with this controversy. How could Walt Gary think that bringing this event to the most Republican, morally conservative area in Illinois would be easy? That this would just zip through our towns w/o any controversy or uproar?

The FAIR thing would've been for Walt Gary to CARE about our town, residents and 3-Boards and be upfront about everything from the get go. He didn't. And this is why I have no respect for him. He had none for us, the residents. He also continues to lay low, not answering Cal's or my face-to-face request for an answer.

2016 Olympics...this was a "teaser" in my opinion. A "test" to see how the community leaders would react. Given the fact that Gary only mentioned this teaser to the City & media, and not the Park District (who owns the lake the event would take place on) indicates to me that Gary was USING it as a way to entice the City to go along with his tax-subsidy-request, suggesting that "more big events" could come to CL if he receives his funding request of $14,900. The thought of the 2016 Olympics would make a lot of CL business leaders start to salivate, just what CLRC President Gary wanted.

And how ironic...the 2016 Olympics is 10 years away and NOT even a reasonable, reaslistic possibility, yet the GG event was ALREADY in the works. I suppose Mr. Gary will eventually tell us "he was confused", and/or "he forgot"???????

Monelson..sorry I can't answer your question about telling a straight individual from a gay one. Good question though, maybe eswerg will eventually answer it.

For me personally, I judge people foremost by their character; how they conduct themselves, and how they care/treat others. The Gay group may think I hate them, I don't. I don't agree with their lifestyle but don't feel it's my place in life to tell them they are wrong. I agree with the VERY sound reasons you laid out as to why this event is not good for CL/LW.
 

Aside from monelson no one still seems to be able to speak to the points.

Again, Lori, you dodged answering for the exagerations you tell. Only told another version of your conspiracy.

To your other points, the "black-eye" was because of the inflamatory comments made by Dave Phelps. He may have not wanted the event because it was "Gay", but should've been smart enough to not say that publicly and on record.

monelson-

1) 2016 is a ways out and a lot can happen in 10 years. Regardless out your logistical assessment.

2) Acutally, it's not clear they were actively engaged in planning. All we have for documenation is a Findings paper by the GLRF that was completed by 8/25/2005. As already shown with the same document, there was indecision with the GLRF and the Chicago Games organizations as of 11/30/2005. The application being submitted 12/22/2005. So we have to gaps here that we have no record of. Lori and Cal are spinning a tales of deceit. I'm suggesting the more likely answer, that the GLRF and the Chicago Games were disorganized and out of step. Plus, your point about the Montreal event only furthers that fact they their is poor planning taking place.

3) Of course the Olympics are an enticing item to list.

As far as the core issue, I really don't care at ths point. Our boards voted it through. So we can either be dignified, gracious hosts or the wingnuts can come out of the woodwork and embarass the community. Likely, it'll be a mixture of both. I wish that we could ask the extreme people on either side of this to just stay home that day, but that's obviously not going to happen.

You've taken Cal's bait, hook, line, and sinker; which is to paint the rowing club as nothing more then a shill for garnering public funds. Nevermind the fact that it has a Juniors program. Nervermind the fact that it's non-profit. Nevermind the fact that it just had the Greater Chicago Junior Rowing Championships. I'm sure that all $7000 that the club received is going toward funding gay activity and anti-family events; puppy killing and seal clubbing and such.

I've said it before, people will read into the gaps what they want to see. They will weave a complex and intrgiuing tale. While the truth is much more mundane and pedestrian.
 

Hello eswerg -
I feel compelled to mention that for an issue that supposedly has no merit (by your opinions/statements) you sure are spending a lot of time to counter them. As mentioned before, visit the NWH archives for articles. The proof lies in what WASN'T mentioned. P.S. I am proud of my husband's statement that you folks continue to use only "partially". His issue/statement is about our parks being used to promote one's sexual PREFERENCES, whether Heterosexual or Homosexual. He did not say ORIENTATION. Surely even you can understand that now the precedence has been set...so when an organization such as "Happy Threesomes" wants to have a rowing event, the answer will have to be YES now, due to the precedent that has been set.
 

This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
 

Seriously, Lori, read what is written.

I was speaking to monelson's point about the "core issue" which if you had acutally READ the text, you would understand what my comment was about.

For the record, I've read the NWherald's archives. And unlike yourself, who can't manage to reference a source, here's a link for the lazy.

Was Karen Long at the meeting? Or did she simply pull her report from the meeting minutes which lacked detail and followed up with phone calls? We could ask, I suppose. I would think she was there. Do you want me to do your homework for you or would be possible for you to actually attempt to backup your own comments? This all is taking your assumption that there was any decision that the Gay Games were going to ask for usage of Crystal Lake as the venue. There's nothing support that claim.

Also, I'm afraid to ask, what on earth is "Happy Threesomes?"
 

This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
 

sorry. double post. :\
 

esgwerg,
I agree with you... "the truth is much more mundane and pedestrian" and "extreme people on either side of this to just stay home that day".

There will always be people who see deception and corruption in everything they are against. I just wish some would have seen it in the current White House administration they supported, and maybe we wouldn’t be in the mess we are in now. But, that’s a whole different conversation. ;-)
 

Mike,

You're right. It is a whole other conversation, but perhap the more fruitful of the two.
 

Dear eswerg

Since you are the expert on everything, and refuse to look at/read my sources (minutes, archives, hotel tax application), why are you asking me anything? I don't know what I'm talking about, remember? Also...ask your mother what "Happy Threesomes" might mean. I wouldn't want to shatter your psyche any more than it is.
 

This is just getting circular now.

I'm making the effort to not only cite my sources, but also cite yours

So, one more time with feeling--

Park District Meeting notes
1/19
3/2
3/7

City Council meeting notes
1/10 - Hotel Tax Workshop

GLRF Documentation
11/30/2005 - Letter to Chicago Games, Inc
8/25/2005 - Findings doc

NWHerald
1/12 - City Council writeup

And I do not have access to the application. I would be "forced" to file a FoIA to get a copy.

So now, you can no longer pretend I'm not reading these.

And given your comments, you wonder why I care not to give my name...

sheesh.
 

esgwerg

You said: "2016 is a ways out and a lot can happen in 10 years. Regardless out your logistical assessment"

that's simply not true in terms of the Olympic movement and the selection process. The site for the 2016 game swill be set in the summer of 2008 just before or after the Olympic games in China at the regular meeting of the IOC. In point of fact, if you are not courting members of the IOC now, you are way behind.

as for "You've taken Cal's bait, hook, line, and sinker; ".. I have treated you with respect and tried to stick to issues. If you want to make this personal.. I will. You have no idea how I came to my own conclusions. I obviously did my own searches and investigation, which I am sure you will agree to. But to demean me by suggesting I cannot think and just took the bait is an insult.


you make the point "As far as the core issue, I really don't care at ths point. Our boards voted it through. So we can either be dignified, gracious hosts or the wingnuts can come out of the woodwork and embarass the community. Likely, it'll be a mixture of both. I wish that we could ask the extreme people on either side of this to just stay home that day, but that's obviously not going to happen.
" Let me disect that abit - first in our governmental system, the will of the people is to be reflected by the action of it's elected representative. If we feel our representatives got something wrong, we have the right, nay.. the responsibility to call them to task for it and suggest they redress our grievances.Would you call our founding fathers, like those who opposed the tax on tea as "wingnuts can come out of the woodwork and embarass the community" would you. How dare you suggest we do not have the same rights they worked so hard to establish?


And it is clear that we do not " see deception and corruption in" in this because we see it in " everything they are against." It is because deciet was used here. That is clear.

The problem here is you continue to dwell on the side bar issue. The "core" issue as you have stated continues to be:

1) Unwanted intrusion by outside organization with little economic gain by residents.
2) Loss of use of lake resources by locals during prime time July weekend.

It's that simple.

The Junior rowing championships were marvelous, because they did not deny acces to the lake when residents wanted access.

Continuing to try to get the decision reversed because of the two reasons listed above is both an acceptable reasonable action.
 

monelson-

If you want the decision reversed, why aren't you asking to have it added to the Park District, City Council, and Lakewood agendas?

Why are you instead, siding with Lori and Cal in attacking the rowing club?

Which of those two things is more civic minded and useful too reversing the approval?
 

esgwerg -

You have obviously hit a nerve with me. i cannot seem to let your comment "the wingnuts can come out of the woodwork and embarass the community."

Help me understand your statement. You are worried about me coming out during the GG and embarrassing you and the community?

MMMM.. please review the pictures in the following link:
http://www.sanfranciscosentinel.com/id40.htm

Now I assume that the GLRF is a legitamite rowing organization made up of Galys and lesbians. That's what thier web site says they are and I take them at thier word.

To date, most of the visual images presented to me of Gays and Leasbians have been like those on the SFpride web site I listed above. I know there are many gays and lesbians that don't ascribe to the visuals shown on that web site, and GLRF does not seem by the visuals on it's web site to promote that visual approach.

But please explain how you are more worried about me embarrassing you on the streets of Crystal Lake than the gays and lesbians in those pictures?

You suggest my rights be abridged so you can clear the streets for what?
 

esgwerg
Why would you even ask that question. You seem intelligent to understand that action takes place elsewhere. This is a place of dialogue.

The Mchenry County Blog has been a place , as long as I have been around it, where we discuss issues and formulate opinion. That's why I engage in it.

Why do you?
 

I want to take a poll of all those who read this blog - Here is a look at the images of the last GG in Sydney. You tell me who will embarass the Crystal Lake community more - us "wingnuts" who oppose this or the team from Singapore? (Singapore is in the second row, second picture from the right.)

http://www.outsports.com/ggames02/ggamesPics.cfm?date=2&gallery=2#
 

monelson-

My wingnut comment goes for both sides of the equation. Only you yourself know where you stand on the spectrum. If you want to protest, that is your right to do so, providing it is done in a respectful manner.

I'd hate to see the flaming-swishier-then-all-get-out crowd waving rainbows all day as much as I'd hate to see the fundies marching around claiming people are going to burn. Do you fall into either category?

Frankly, neither has a place at a sporting event. Neither has any interest in the sport. But, as obvious, that's not going to be the case. They'll liley show up, make a circus.

To you comment:
"The Mchenry County Blog has been a place[...]where we discuss issues and formulate opinion."

Oh, c'mon. That's being obtuse about Lori's witchhunt. There's no attempt to discuss the issue. It's either agree with her or be attacked.

The rest of the blog topics may be open for debate, but it's obvious that for this topic what the prevailing wind is. Lo be the one to question their "facts."
 

monelson,

It's funny, because I'm not measuring who would embarass Crystal Lake more as you seem to be.

Logically, however, one would think that it would be it's own citizens actions that would reflect on it, and not those of the "outsiders."

Just a thought.
 

esgwerg

By the way, don't worry about me protesting. I really do not want to be any closer to the Singapore team than I have to be!

It's interesting, you keep going back to challaging facts, but even you present facts that show in November (the letter) that Crystal Lake was the only real viable site for the rowing. That alone shows CLRC knew it needed the money to be ready for the GG.

But you continue to evade my points:

1) Unwanted intrusion by outside organization with little economic gain by residents.
2) Loss of use of lake resources by locals during prime time July weekend.

and:

But please explain how you are more worried about me embarrassing you on the streets of Crystal Lake than the gays and lesbians in those pictures?

You suggest my rights be abridged so you can clear the streets for what?

You have taken time to insult my intelligence, suggest my rights to matriculate Crystal Lake streets be restricted during the GG to aviod embarrasing you and shown a clear preference to being embarassedby the Signapore GG team instead.

Have I got all that right or am I still "You've taken Cal's bait, hook, line, and sinker;"?
 

monelson,

Let me just say that I apologize for the "hook, line, and sinker" comment. It was uncalled for given your fairness to discuss the issues. I did not, however, EVER suggest that you not take to the streets. Only that you do so respectfully.

To your two point, though:

1) That's a matter of perspective. You may not want it, but some do.

2) Is an arbitrary reason given that fact there are a number of events that occur on the lake.
 

oh, and let me just say, after rereading your post. You're just making things up..

"You have taken time to insult my intelligence, suggest my rights to matriculate Crystal Lake streets be restricted during the GG to aviod embarrasing you and shown a clear preference to being embarassedby the Signapore GG team instead."

huh?!? what?!?!

What are you reading? Seriously. If you're going to take offense, fine. But at least take the time to know what's being said.

"You have taken time to insult my intelligence"

Where?

"suggest my rights to matriculate Crystal Lake streets be restricted during the GG to aviod embarrasing you"

Um, where?

"shown a clear preference to being embarassedby the Signapore GG team instead"

And coming from lefft field...huh?
-----------------------------
Let's look at my comment that is getting your undies in a bunch:

"As far as the core issue, I really don't care at ths point. Our boards voted it through. So we can either be dignified, gracious hosts or the wingnuts can come out of the woodwork and embarass the community. Likely, it'll be a mixture of both. I wish that we could ask the extreme people on either side of this to just stay home that day, but that's obviously not going to happen."

I clarified for you:
"My wingnut comment goes for both sides of the equation. Only you yourself know where you stand on the spectrum. If you want to protest, that is your right to do so, providing it is done in a respectful manner."

You comment:
"By the way, don't worry about me protesting. I really do not want to be any closer to the Singapore team than I have to be!"

Okay, so where am I telling you to stay off the streets? Where?
 

It’s interesting and frustrating at the same time to read blogs when thread get long and they seem to go in circles. You can see where one person misunderstands the other and then goes off on a tangent and then the other person does it too.

Blogging, email, and on-line chatting make things easy and quick, but that doesn’t always help us communicate as human beings. Even if the conversation gets heated, I TRY to give the other person the benefit of the doubt. I think that maybe one of us misunderstood a previous post or maybe one of us didn’t flesh out our thoughts to be fully understood.
______________

That said, there is another point I’m interested in commenting on...

monelson,

You keep referring to the Singapore team picture from the previous GG as being an embarrassment. Do you understand that these people are having fun in a festive environment dressing up, like many other people (gay or straight) do when celebrating? That particular group dressed all in red and used red face paint. Why is that embarrassing when your having fun and celebrating? And where did you get that they were the Singapore team? That’s not listed anywhere on that page.

I understand if you don’t like the costumes (on that site or others) or don’t think they are socially acceptable to wear in public. Some of the costumes sometimes push the mores of society. And that is understandable especially coming from a group that has been shunned from this particular society for a very long time. There is a rebel in all of us if we are pushed.

But, you do understand that this goes on all over the world, every day, gay or straight?
 

esgwerg -

Ok, let's actually go over what you said. In a post dated 8:58 AM
you said "You've taken Cal's bait, hook, line, and sinker". That insults my intelligence as not being able to think for my self.

Then you told me "So we can either be dignified, gracious hosts or the wingnuts can come out of the woodwork and embarass the community. Likely, it'll be a mixture of both. I wish that we could ask the extreme people on either side of this to just stay home that day,"

I am an extreme person on this and so in this comment you called me a wingnut and suggested I stay home (suggesting my movement be restricted).

As for my commenst about the Singapore team to the Sydney GG, take a look at the pictures of the GG participants. They are the flambouant anything goes to make our point crowd. Again, take a look at the pictures. You have constantly taken issue with many of us and our opposition to the GG coming to Crystal Lake. When I combine your statement that you want me (the "extreme people") to stay home so as to not embarass the community (ie you), but you are all in favor of opening our resources and facilities to the GG, who's behavior as evidenced by the pictures is clearly embarassing,I conclude that you have "shown a clear preference to being embarassed by the Signapore GG team instead."

Hey it's no more a strench than CLRC suggesting the 2016 Olympic can come to Crystal lake!

Okay, my comments were inflamatory and made because I was upset with your comments.

Now how about my original concerns - which you have answered.
In reviewing your response, this event will close the entire lake (except for some beach access) for a whole weekend in July. Name me a single event that closes down the bulk of the lake to users for a whole weekend in June, July and August? My reasoning is not arbitrary and this event has a high opportunity cost to it.


I agree that the unwanted intrusion by outsiders is perspective, but help me with the economic impact. GG is housed inside the city in three locations and intendes to house it participants, officials, etc there. Rowing events outside of some popular spots (the Themes in london, or the james river in Bostson) have low attendance so ther will be little revenue there. Yet the participant and equipment traffic will clog the small inadequate streets.
I could be wrong. Please make a case for the benefit to Crystal lake residents given the opportunity cost of losing lake access for a weekend in prime summer.
 

monelson,
To my knowledge he rowing event is only scheduled for the Sunday of that weekend. Not the Saturday.

And, Where did you read that the picture you keep referring to is the Singapore team?
 

Dear Monelson -
Please don't waste your time and get yourself worked up...eswerg is not worth it. I answered all of his questions respectfully, AND noted that "some will think no big deal" on this. I don't expect everyone to accept my claim, and have said that. He is entitled to his opinion, yet wants to sit and argue till the cows come home....no thanks, I have other things to do.

I was also willing to put MY NAME to my statements/claims, certainly more than Eswerg is willing to do.

Eswerg's statement about "other events" is a joke to those of us who know better. There are no other events, in the middle of summer, where the MAJORITY of participants/spectators are from out of town. "Parking won't be a problem" (from their own proposal) because they are arriving in busses from out-of-town.

I agree with you on the pictures monelson...and most decent people would. Have a good one...
 

Mike

Try the fourth row, fourth pic on this page - it has captions. They were named least dressed at the opening cerimonies! (really, I am not making this up)

http://www.outsports.com/ggames02/ggamesPics.cfm?date=3&gallery=2

I do not doubt that it will be on Sunday the 16th, but the GG web site has this set of info on it (http://www.gaygameschicago.org/sports/sports.php?mgroup=Rowing)

"Mark your calendar now for July 16 as the Gay Games rowing regatta will come to Crystal Lake!

Location:
Crystal Lake
Days of Event:
Monday 17 July - Thursday 20 July
Schedule of Games:
Daily 9am until 7pm
Divisions Offered:
1 x, (Skiff); Men's, Women's & Mixed; Open, Masters & Adaptive ; 2 x (Double Sculls); 2 – (Coxless pairs); 4 x (Quad) ; 4 – (Coxless 4); 4 + (Coxed 4); 8 + (Coxed 8)"

So is it just Sunday or is it also "Monday 17 July - Thursday 20 July "? Either way, the main issue is that it consumes the lake on a prime weekend day and possibly longer.
 

esgwerg,
I see what group you are looking at now, but it was not the picture you pointed us to before. They may have been voted least dressed, but they are in bathing suits, not that scandalous. But that is my opinion, obviously not yours.

I have written to the GG folk and asked about the websites schedule and what is the final plans. I'll let you know what they say.
 

Mike,

Are you sure those are swim suits? they certainly are not modern competitive swim suits. I agree it's not that scandalous. But I think you would agree that they were wearing them for some other reason than to go swimming.

The question is, would you want to see them walking down a Crystal Lake street like that or some of the other outfits in some of those pictures. Would you want the childeren who live around Crystal Lake to see the behaviors and outfits expressed in the other frames on the many pages of that site?

We do disagree. But the point I was making to esgwerg was that he is more concerned about me acting out my constitutional rights of free speech and how that might embarass him, yet he is unconcerned with the behaviors exibited in the frames og the pictures on the Outsports site.

Let me make one final point. I guess what makes me concerned is the nature of the GG. It's not just about sport. If it was, the rowers would be at one of these events held the weeks of the GG:
Saturday, July 15, 2006
Kennebec River Flat Water Drag Race
Saturday, July 15, 2006
Philadelphia Youth Regatta
Wednesday, July 19, 2006
USRowing National Championships
Saturday, July 22, 2006
Michigan Club Invitational Regatta
Sunday, July 23, 2006
Howard M. Smith Diamond State Masters Regatta
Grand Regatta, Grand Rapids, MI: July 9, 2005
Chicago Sprints, Chicago, IL: July 16-17, 2005
USRowing National Championships, Indianapolis, IN: July 20-24, 2005

So it clearly is not all about sports, that can be participated in without a GG. So enlighten me as to why the GG exists ?

and would somebody who supports this take a shot at this question please:

Give me the benefits to Crystal Lake residentsthat outwiegh the opportunity cost of losing lake access for a a Sunday in prime summer.

Any takers? I am not even asking you to justify the cost of police, fire, ambulance, lost beach revenue. Just tell me what's in it for the average Crystal Lake smuck who won't be able to use the lake on a possibly hot July Sunday.
 

Okay, again I do not understadn. How can a group host and event like the rowing for the GG, when it is participating in another event as a team that same Day. From the CLRC web site the following schedule info:

Chicago, IL July 16
Chicago Sprints, Masters and Juniors.

oh well.. if they aren't using the lake that weekend, it make sense they find someone else to use it. God knows we got nobody round here that wants too...
 

monelson,

Well, I'll try to cover all of your comments...

As for the outfits in the pictures, it looks like the page you are looking at (and most people are focusing on) is from the opening/closing ceremonies or at parties. If you look at pics from the sporting events they look VERY 'normal'. They do actually take their individual sports seriously. For the most part I wouldn't worry too much about outrageous outfits walking the streets of CL. And if by chance you do see one, remember it's meant to be in the spirit of fun.
===========

I've re-read your posts and esgwerg's and in my opinion you two got off sync with each other. I don't think he ever intended to imply you give up your right to free speech. He even clarified that in a following post on here addressed to you. These misunderstandings do happen on these blogs.
===========
The subject of loosing lake access is different for different residents of CL. I can't speak to that. Only to say change the rules/by-laws of the park board for future proposals.
===========

The CLRC may only be listing the event on it's calendar, not participating in it. I don't know. I would give them the benefit of the doubt. You think they would sponsor such an event and then go off and participate in another.
===========

Why do the GG exist?

You are correct that the GG is not just about sports. Sports is the activity that will be going on. But, the idea of the GG is also about socializing and also about coming out of hiding and saying they are part of all communities of the world. Once you get to the issue of making yourself visible as a gay/lesbian this becomes a VERY broad subject because it deals with discrimination (jobs/housing), rights, being a hidden minority, violence/murder, socializing with others who share similar beliefs.

The subject also gets emotional/heated because religion and also what makes this group (gays, lesbians. etc...) different involves the idea of sex. And, most Americans are uptight talking about anything related to sex. But ones sexuality goes far beyond who you have sex with, it involves who you want to share your life with... and that touches on all aspects of our lives and culture.

You may or may not understand (or more distinctly, empathize) some of this unless you have been discriminated against, denied rights, threatened or beaten up because you were different. Living in CL I can see MANY people are very much the same on the outside. I wouldn't say people celebrate their differences in CL. They pretty much stay quiet to themselves, and I can see the appeal of that. There are many gay/lesbian folk living in CL who like it there because of that as well.

It is true that in some ways the GG doesn't have as much necessity as it once did when it started. But, as was evident in some of the things said at the park board meetings, it is still needed to bring awareness to these issues and provide a sporting and social outlet for people from all over the world.

I hope this helps answer some of your questions.
 

Mike -

Thanks for the response. You have some cogent positions and are obviously a person of articulation and thoughtfulness. In reflecting on your comments I did notice how many issues I raised that you attempted to minimize and tell me "I wouldn't worry too much" or suggest I misinterpreted what is in black and white (and don't be confused, he did not "clarified that in a following post ". What he did do was try to suggest he was talking about the extreme views - and as I said I am the extreme view. Remember anytime anyone of us loses a civil right, we all lose. (I do not for an example agree with burning the flag, but I will defend someone who does it as free speech protected even though it is very personally difficult to).

Let's make sure we understand something. I do understand. It's not whether I empathize or not, because I understand. I choose to disagree about Gay as a lifestyle based on specific reflection on the issues.

I would be happy to discuss whether "Gay" is some of the things you assert or not, but that's not been the issue here. Let's find another place to have that discussion. I agree with you that that discussion goes along several topics (religion (not my issue though), sex, behavioral phsyc, nature vs. environment, etc.). It's not that I mind having a dialogue about it, but this thread has been more about recreational space usage and a classic conflict between local usage rights and external usage rights.

What is a problem to me that is relevant here, and you touched on it, is a about certain provocative dress and behavior in very public settings that you have dismissed here as "remember it's meant to be in the spirit of fun." I disagree. I see it as an attempt to be intentionally provocative, gain media attention and elicit an emotional response from straight people in an attempt to engage a dialogue leading to acceptance of the more normal gay lifestyle (by that I mean that I doubt I could tell is someone is gay or not in everyday life. I have known some people who have identified themselves as gay to me, but otherwise I would not have known it.). This movement towards outwardly colorful and provocative behavior at public events has gained the movement national media attention at Gay Pride events and I do not think it is just "meant to be in the spirit of fun” (I do understand that it has a significant element of fun in it for the participants). And yes, I do expect to see it throughout the Chicago area during the GG.

But the real issue here is your statement "It is true that in some ways the GG doesn't have as much necessity as it once did when it started. But, as was evident in some of the things said at the park board meetings, it is still needed to bring awareness to these issues and provide a sporting and social outlet for people from all over the world."

The awareness is there. What is now at issue is whether we as a nation choose to accept gay "lifestyle". It no longer requires being confronted in the provocative, in your face, we are a discriminated minority approach the gay movement takes. Access to Crystal Lake is not an issue of Gays being discriminated against. It is as I have said over and over -

1) Unwanted intrusion by outside organization with little economic gain by residents.
2) Loss of use of lake resources by locals during prime time July weekend.

Your third to last paragraph is very telling. It is a part of the real issue here. I do not know if gays are as accepted in Crystal Lake as some would like, but the community seems to be tolerant of non-abhorrent behavior. These are not the bright lights of the city here, but a community of people who work to live and try to live good lives. They value their recreational spaces and the opportunity to use them. It is not their fault that Chicago has aspirations to hold events such as the GG and have not built the facilities to house the sports involved. Yet in a combination of slight of hand, political aspirations and innuendo of threat of lawsuit, their elected officials have approved this intrusion into their peaceful, sleepy berg. I disagree and think it should be changed. I don’t care if who it was that wants to use the lake for rowing.

By the way, sometime we got to talk about how constantly describing a group, as a discriminated minority is a debilitating thing.
 

Hello Monelson -
Well put. There are many issues/reasons why people are upset with the GG event. I agree, and have said this already, that losing lake rights to accomodate an out-of-town organization is simply not right. I too, am one of those that would rather defend a lawsuit than to roll over and cave in...however...I don't think the majority of CL/LW taxpayers would share my view. Note I say majority - and I think the majority's wishes should always be considered and respected, even if I'm not in it.

In those infamous August 25th GLRF Regatta Advisory Group minutes (www.glrf.info/REGATTAS) note the last paragraph on page 4: "To host a regatta, CLRC has to see the financial benefit for them, and to demonstrate the benefit for the local community."

So...has he demonstrated the community benefit? No. To the contrary, the focus is all on benefitting the GG group. And "financial gain"? Aren't they listed as non-profit?

Additionally, on the same document, page 6, second paragraph, it states: "Regattas are profitable events because a local rowing club or organization hosts them...the water facility is free.