Chicago Dispatchers

Wednesday, October 04, 2006

Residency requirement

We read other blog comments sections, also, and this topic caught our eyes over at SCC.

According to USA Today, a few city police departments around the country are challenging residency rules. Surely, if those challenges are successful, other departments within those cities will no longer be subject to residency requirements.

Sure, we knew about the residency rule when we got hired, but who knew that the cost of living would rise so quickly and dramatically in the city? The "you knew when you took the job" argument is cute, but really, just because something was a certain way when you started off with it doesn't mean it's eternally acceptable. Will there ever be a repeal of the state law that allowed Chicago (which is pretty much a "state" independent of Illinois) to set/keep a residency rule?

We doubt it. But we're wishing upon a star.

55 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I know that there is a law that states some municipalities have to have the police who work for the municipality have to live in the city limits of such city if there over 100,000 citizens living there[which might be stricken from illinois].But why should all other city workers have to do this also? Plus tell me why so many of us get punished if we are one day late paying a parking ticket , water bill or city sticker when everyone else gets away with it. I feel that if you work for the city you get punished for it!

04 October, 2006 12:00  
Blogger leomemorial said...

Off topic, but I have added a new dispatch folder on our po memorial site.

If I can help out in any way, or perhaps you can post some subjects that need to be discussed that would help such as staffing, tip's for civilians calling in that would help, etc.

I already posted an article about short staffing, which I went through and it made our lives HELL.

thanx

05 October, 2006 00:49  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The cost of living is one thing. Our taxes aren't the worse thing to deal with here in Chicago compared to the suburbs. But who would have thought the City of Chgo would allow their schools to get to such a state! Everyday rioting, poor grades, half wits gradutating. Blame the parents halfway but for 8 hrs a day those kids are with the system too.
Only choice you have is to send your child/children to a private school.

05 October, 2006 10:01  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't know what I will do if residency is ever lifted, but, I still get iritated that if I have to live in the City, why don't the CHGO Public School and the CHGO Transit Authority employees have to live here, too?

06 October, 2006 09:45  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

off topic; but who is the dispatcher on cty w 1 last tues night who told officers to "shut the fuck up during an emergency. officers asked her to turn her volume up or speak louder and she flipped out. I think she used to be on zone 13.

07 October, 2006 04:07  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

All City of Chicago Employees have to live in the city. Chicago Public Schools and Chicago Transit Authority are NOT City of Chicago Employees. Those are two seperate entities.

10 October, 2006 23:11  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Residency is on the books and has to be fought for via bad terrain uphill battle.

On the topic of Chicago Public Schools. If they were hired by a prior date. I forget the date either early 90's or maybe mid eighties, heck it may have been late 70's. Teachers/Principal's have the ability to move from the city. An old deal cut with their union and city. Many of the ones who were able to move are either retired or very near. Know a few teachers both retired and active and their required to reside in the city. No clue about Old CTA.

If we win residency it could possibly lead to negotiations of sorts on down the road. The city may not have to honor it across the board think about it, the city might settle prior. One thing is for sure the city will drag it out as long as they can. I feel it's such a long way off. Don't hold your breath nor trust it will apply to all, keep in mind the grandfathering clause. Perfect example the above teachers union deal.

This site appears to be fading in the sunset. Nothing personal but it's beginning to run like a tap for tree syrup and it's gettin cold trees are going dormant.

12 October, 2006 18:10  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

what's the story on tv about a CPD Sgt who supposedly raped a woman and is working dispatch and getting sgt pay?

16 October, 2006 00:28  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

1228
ARE YOU NUTS ??
No such beast. Stop believing everything you hear.

16 October, 2006 04:50  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

why would this person create a blog and then not maintain it? it's not like we can post our own articles.

16 October, 2006 09:46  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

yep and i'm sure you think the easter bunny is real too.

16 October, 2006 13:27  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
what's the story on tv about a CPD Sgt who supposedly raped a woman and is working dispatch and getting sgt pay?

12:28 AM


Anonymous said...
1228
ARE YOU NUTS ??
No such beast. Stop believing everything you hear.

4:50 AM


SORRY IT'S TRUE, he is stripped and has been for a while, yes he is still working and that's his right. The story was in the media a few times. Now whether or not it's true is not yet a fully proven fact. The media and their contact the alleged victims attorney made him look bad and that's to be expected but not an easy one for him. I wish him luck if he's innocent and can prove it. He's fighting against the allegations and he's a Sgt. Second poster there are all types of officer's on the job who are stripped some wrongfully accused and other's guilty via of the accuse.

I don't want to hear what the alleged victim said either, I have already read it but something does not seem to sit right with her or the incident but that's his battle and no one else's.

16 October, 2006 21:21  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

perhaps you mean that sgt is working at callback, not dispatching at the 911 center.

16 October, 2006 22:02  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Let me reiterate. There is no CPD sgt working as a dispatcher, with or without accusations of csa.
Now whoever the nosy person is that really needs to know someone elses business that badly, could you at least wait til the person is convicted, then go about gossip, because right now you are attempting to hang an innocent man.

17 October, 2006 12:46  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

WE ARE ALL INNOCENT TIL PROVEN GUILTY IN A COURT OF LAW.

17 October, 2006 12:47  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Look, there is no Sgt working at the 911 center as a dispatcher. Obviously you have some bad information.

17 October, 2006 13:57  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

He's at call back, where cars can also be dispatched, he's a Sgt. so that's not his job, wishing him the best. Innocent until proven guilty and I have know idea how his court case is moving along. CPD process is a slow process most of the time.

Until the blog master comes back up, this post looks like it's now a temporary open post.

17 October, 2006 14:05  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sorry, thats no not know.

17 October, 2006 14:07  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, just to add to the puzzle, here are a few facts, and I've been gone for more than 5 years.

1. He is the son of former exempt Pestka.

2. She was nice to the civilians in the 911 center who knew her, FWIW.

3. He is assigned to callback on Lexington, I think on midnights though I'm not sure.

4. He was indicted two years ago. For whatever its worth, the investigation was allegedly squashed until a videotape surfaced showing him following the victim out of his assigned district in his marked car, as per her allegation. The "victim's" lawyer had it that the investigation was squashed because of his relationship to a top and well-liked exempt. Once the lawyer went public and the videotape surfaced, the indictment came pretty quick.

5. Weirdly, Pestka's daughter used to work at the 911 center as a civilian (not in an emergency capacity). She was a nice kid. Not sure, but my guess would be that Pestka's daughter is Pestka's son's sister.

6. And no, the sergeant is not dispatching. There are about two sergeants in the entire CPD who would have a clue how to dispatch. Is Colleen still on the job as a sergeant? She would know how.

17 October, 2006 21:13  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You are wrong. Officers at call back cannot DISPATCH units. They can however, send horribly typed, misclassified events over to the real dispatchers at the 911 Center.

18 October, 2006 00:04  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No they don't "dispatch" jobs from call back, they make events and send them over to the zone if need be they same way you would make an event at the desk, or a calltaker rec'v a call would make an event.
ONCE AGAIN THERE IS NO SGT DISPATCHING!

18 October, 2006 11:44  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Last I heard Colleen is still a Sgt.
She was my trainer! Go Colleen!

18 October, 2006 11:47  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

News for all of you calling out the police. (terminology)

Problem Police language/terminology and civilian language. Use to be the same but now it's a cesspool of confusion. The police department is still run as Para Military department.

An Event number is even created on a hang up call, their a waste except to track that 911 dispatch, lol. When an officers enters the info. from the citizen via phone typing the info. into the system for 911 to send via radio a car. The term is DISPATCHED on the police side as well. They thereby create, LOL an event number.

The Police dept. does not care what you think, the officer's has set the requested dispatch, it's their terminology and they did their part. The responsibility now lies upon you to either get a car out or not via radio.

Call it a request, an event number LOL, call it anything you want if it makes you happy and puffs you up. After all the event numbers are just reference numbers to the officer's actions of dispatching. It's not a question of first came the chicken then came the egg.

Cease insulting the officer's over a police terminology bait your most unbecoming as a partner whose suppose to be there to support Police!

How do you know whether or not the SGT has never placed a car to be dispatched through the system via 911, you don't because your not tied to his working hours or counsel and it's irrelevant.

18 October, 2006 18:12  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

letstalkchitown911.blogspot.com
its a new blog that will be maintained!!!!!!!!!!!

18 October, 2006 18:24  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

6:12, the terminology may not matter to you, but that only shows that you are confused and confusing.

Dispatched is a term that refers to field units being given assignments. Merely creating a potential assignment is not dispatching.

The sergeant can create all the events he wants, it does not mean they will be dispatched. They may be filed upon completion with an RD number, duped, deleted or whatever else. In fact, the equivalent function to what you appear to be talking about in the OEMC is call-taking. You know, creating events for dispatch.

Whether an event gets dispatched is entirely subject to the actions of the dispatchers. In other words, if a dispatcher doesn't dispatch, than the job doesn't get dispatched. The sergeant or anyone else creating the event is not dispatching.

And no, its not a difference between police and civilian terminology. If you tried arguing your nonsense to anyone with half a brain in uniform, they'd put you down as a crazy and rabid dog.

Then Animal Control would dispatch someone to come and pick up your mangy hide. The sergeant doesn't dispatch animal control either. He can, however, create a request at 311 that will be used by an Animal Control dispatcher to dispatch a field unit.

Clear?

18 October, 2006 19:17  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And no, its not a difference between police and civilian terminology. If you tried arguing your nonsense to anyone with half a brain in uniform, they'd put you down as a crazy and rabid dog.

Then Animal Control would dispatch someone to come and pick up your mangy hide. The sergeant doesn't dispatch animal control either. He can, however, create a request at 311 that will be used by an Animal Control dispatcher to dispatch a field unit.

Clear?


You have a deflated EGO problem, and a small mind your all corn speak, clown.

Unfortunately the city had CPD adjust their terminology and military times because, entities like yourself are too dense to catch on. Are you on the AD desk, or are you, LOL a real dispatcher. Or maybe your a police hater or poser. Don't really care. Just take your meds and get back to work.

10-4

19 October, 2006 01:33  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The truth hurts?

19 October, 2006 05:19  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Lmao Great blog argument.
I dispatch, you don't, he did, he didn't, Animal control dispatchers. New one to me.
But as a dispatcher I have come to the conclusion that I am not going to dispatch any more jobs, but allow the my new coworkers to dispatch all of them. It has been repeatedly been told to me, that they are all smarter than me, brilliant naturals and the rest of us dogs shouldn't question their actions.
So welcome aboard, you can have my zone any day of the week, don't forget to write more paper about me to the bosses either, because I upset you questioning your officer safety skills.
I'm trying to bulk up my personnel file, since my 3 CPD accommodations and numerous letters from the field never seem to make it there. I'm sure yours all will of course, because as most of you already know, you're brilliant.

19 October, 2006 05:38  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

LMAO as well

I was happier when they use to leave my Honorable's in my mail box a long time ago, now they perform a stage circus act for presentation.

OEMC these days is stranger then CPD and that's saying a lot. Copper's swing by if their low on chuckles for the day. Bumping the work off to other's always works for us, lol.

19 October, 2006 08:13  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Then Animal Control would dispatch someone to come and pick up your mangy hide. The sergeant doesn't dispatch animal control either. He can, however, create a request at 311 that will be used by an Animal Control dispatcher to dispatch a field unit.



Tranquilizer gun screw the meds.

19 October, 2006 08:23  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

>>Unfortunately the city had CPD adjust their terminology and military times because, entities like yourself are too dense to catch on.<<

Yeah, because in the old days sergeants used to dispatch, right? Like in the days when the CPD fought the French and Indian wars or something? You my anonymous internet tough guy real-deal poleach (pohleeze!) are a riot. Like the retarded kid thumping his chest in gym chest kinda funny.

19 October, 2006 13:20  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Like the retarded kid thumping his chest in gym chest kinda funny.

1:20 PM

Your only further demonstrating your ignorance and now the factor you must have been a bully in school as a child as well. Please seek counseling to work through your personal issue's, it's not a bad thing. In the mean time I wish you well.

19 October, 2006 19:34  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Timmay!

20 October, 2006 05:14  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

514
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

21 October, 2006 04:10  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

letstalkchitown911.blogspot.com is up and running and you can comment anonymous

23 October, 2006 07:26  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No new postings in 3weeks........time to shut this down maybe? huh? huh?

24 October, 2006 19:32  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

THIS BLOG=ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

25 October, 2006 00:57  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

hey all, first time on this site, i'm a ppo in 021 and wanted to say thanks to the 3rd watch crew on zone 5, take care

26 October, 2006 21:59  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ


lets gossip!!

What's the word on MB!

27 October, 2006 10:48  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

perhaps the owner of this blog has left in fear of... well who knows. or maybe she got a promotion. or a demotion.

or most likely, she's been out of work because she finally got that gastric bypass surgery she's been dreaming about, only to discover that she can no longer down 6 bags of cheetos in a sitting at her console. (btw my console HAS been cleaner lately, hm.)

:( a sad day it is indeed.

27 October, 2006 10:59  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

for all you blog addicts:

http://www.secondcitydick.blogspot.com/

27 October, 2006 19:36  
Blogger secondcitydick said...

Hello CPD Dispatch, I am starting a blog for CPD Detectives. Would you please link me www.secondcitydick.blogspot.com

27 October, 2006 20:24  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I just figured out who created this blog.
Hint #1) Whoever created it is asleep at the wheel.
Hint #2) He/she may have forgot his/her log on ID or password and may not be able to log into the blog to maintain it.
Hint #3) 12:57 & 10:48
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.
No it's not Dave C. on CW1 the words are all spelled correctly and in english.
Must be Eric W.

31 October, 2006 17:31  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Every city employee can piss and moan all they want about the residency rule. Being a CPD on the N/W side, compare what we pay in property taxes to those out in burbs. I'll stay put here. I couldn't arrord to move and pay double or triple in taxes. Chicago has the infrasucture, the burbs not as good as ours. That's only one reason why taxes are to the sky out there. And need I remind you that the projects that are being closed, where do you think a lot of these shitheads are going?

07 November, 2006 15:06  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Can anyone tell me if Gina (Kurelic?) is still a dispatcher. I used to hear her on zone 10 on 3rd/1st watch (power shift I believe) but I don't hear her anymore. Anybody out there know?

16 November, 2006 18:18  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

yes she is back on midnights and works zone 9 now

16 November, 2006 19:47  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Do you know if she's here tonight?

16 November, 2006 22:04  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

hellllloooo stalker??

17 November, 2006 04:55  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey A LOT of uglier women have been stalked, it's about time that a good looking woman gets stalked.

17 November, 2006 17:17  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jeezus Christ, can ya keep the last names off of the internet? #$*&U$#*& does that info not need to be available to the public.

18 November, 2006 18:30  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

All our names are readily available to the public thru the city's website , fyi.

19 November, 2006 17:05  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Not that readily !

20 November, 2006 11:54  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's too bad this blog didn't work out. It had a lot of good publicity, and was received well by established blogs. Would be nice if whomever started it would pass the baton to someone else so that it can continue.

20 November, 2006 17:33  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yeah, and I can find a lot of names in a phone book too. It would mean something if I knew who I was looking for. But tying someone's name with the position that they work now and that they worked before? Singling out a particular individual by name for any reason, even well intentioned, on a public forum?

Seriously, that just ain't right. If you don't understand why then you may not understand how easy it is to misuse information these days.

20 November, 2006 20:27  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Move to Englewood...it's cheap there !

24 November, 2006 20:14  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Chicago Dispatchers Blogarama - The Blog Directory
Law & Legal Blogs -  Blog Catalog Blog Directory