Zero stars. Never park here. The parking process is designed for entrapment. And then they won't…read moreactually provide a means for you to pay your ticket (electronic tickets mysteriously aren't available in their system online (even though they're electronic) so you have to mail in your payment). Then, after mailing in your payment you will be repeatedly told that your payment was lost in the mail, during which time the amount owed will continue to escalate. And because someone thinks it's 1972, you can't pay electronically. During which time you will waste hours and hours talking to different unhelpful people who transfer you to lines that cut you off or to hold music from which no one ever picks up. All just trying to pay a parking ticket. Incompetence and entrapment at its worst. A lovely place otherwise but not worth the ineptitude and bureaucratic hell that comes with a visit.

The Winnetka park district offers amazing facilities like the ac Nielsen tennis center and…read morecountless number of parks in the Winnetka town. They have parks that are pretty clean and very great looking and that once you get to something from the Winnetka park district you will be like wow! I know parking can be a pain in the ass, but everything else in this park district is amazing!

When we decided to get married, we knew we wanted a City Hall ceremony, for multiple reasons. The…read morewhole time, we planned to get married downtown, but when they stopped taking appointments for awhile, I panicked and called Skokie to see if they still were. This was right before the Delta surge, so I don't know what, if anything, has changed, but at the time, we were allowed 4 people to go in with us. I later on found out downtown resumed taking appointments and made one there, but we kept circling back to Skokie, because again, multiple reasons. Downtown only allowed 2 people to go in, there's no easy parking and we wanted to take some photos at spots up north, so we'd be driving in all sorts of circles in such a short period of time. After much debate, we figured Skokie would be easier to navigate for my mom, easier to hit up our photo locations and allowed us to have 2 extra people, which ended up being really nice and much needed on the actual day. This was a rough day. My mom unexpectedly passed a couple weeks prior and I stopped caring about our wedding plans completely. My friends came through and helped get me out of my sadness long enough to have a wonderful day, and the judge? Well, he was great. We actually ended up having 5 people with us (unintentionally) and he didn't mind. He allowed (only) us to take our masks off and then claimed it was his anniversary day, too. He probably tells that to everyone, or maybe it really was, but he really put a smile on everyone's face. If I remember correctly, we were the 2nd to last to get married, but he didn't rush us. He made sure the photographer got all of her photos, and our friends, too! We had 3 separate cars of people driving here. The first 2 cars were friends we sent ahead to "check-in" for us and let them know we were on our way, since we had to make a quick pit stop after the first photo location. Security was quick to come out and remind us about masks, which we then panicked about when we realized my stepdad didn't have his and my friends who were inside had all the extras. In all that chaos, everything worked out. During covid, at least, they have you check-in, pay the fee (I think it was $10) and then have you wait a little bit before they get started. Each couple, and their party, goes in one at a time and I think they had something like 6 spots per day, which is why it was important to call and make that appointment. I recently remarked to my husband that it would have been nice to have some pictures outside of City Hall, but we had no regrets about choosing this location and there was a spot right out front where we were able to take some really nice photos.

This place bites. I needed to get some documents from the vital records office and when we got…read morethere, the security guard said that office was closed (I guess that's why there were people pouring out of the building a few minutes after 4 pm). He also told me that apparently the vital records office runs on an appointment only basis. Yet when I made my appointment for the following day, they let folks in who didn't have an appointment. Weird. I don't really love this new development, especially since you don't know about it unless you show up or I guess look at their website beforehand. This is a relatively new system, because when I went to pick up some record a couple years ago from this same office at this courthouse and was able to walk in and do it within fifteen minutes. And when you get there they make you sit directly next to one another--four of us were sitting elbow to below when there were at least a dozen and a half chairs there. If you want to walk in, go downtown for assistance.

Supremes trash the Appellate Court. courtesy of Zorn from the Trib. The alacrity and clarity of…read morethis decision really do renew my faith in this court's willingness to do the right thing. ".. the meaty analysis section in plain text form, is below: ANALYSIS Before proceeding to the merits, we wish to emphasize that, until just a few days ago, the governing law on this question had been settled in this State for going on 150 years. In Smith v. People ex rel. Frisbie, 44 Ill. 16 (1867), this court was faced with a question remarkably similar to that which is before us today. Smith, a longtime resident of Illinois, had been appointed a circuit judge by the governor of Illinois, and a quo warranto action was brought to remove Smith from that office on the grounds that he had not been an Illinois resident "for at least five years next preceding *** his appointment," as the Illinois Constitution then required In support of their action, the objectors pointed to the fact that Smith had moved with his family to Tennessee for eight months during the relevant five-year residency period. In concluding that Smith's eight-month sojourn to Tennessee did not result in an abandonment of his established Illinois residency, this court explained that, once established, "residence is lost *** by a union of intention and acts" and that "the intention in many cases will be inferred from the surrounding circumstances." Smith, 44 Ill. at 24. This court then examined the "surrounding circumstances" and found that (1) Smith frequently declared that his move to Tennessee was only an experiment; (2) just two months after arriving in Tennessee, Smith expressed a desire to return to Illinois as soon as became feasible; (3) Smith at no time expressed an unqualified intention to remain in Tennessee; (4) Smith declined to vote in a Tennessee election because "he desired to do no act by which he would lose his citizenship in [Illinois]"; (5) he refused to sell his Illinois law books prior to his move, saying that "he would probably return, and would then need them in his [Illinois] law practice"; and (6) he "only rented his [Illinois] residence when he left." Smith, 44 Ill. at 23-24. This evidence, the court concluded, was insufficient to "establish a presumption of loss of residence." Smith, 44 Ill. at 24-25. Since Smith was decided, the principles established in it have been consistently and faithfully applied in the candidacy context by the appellate court of this State. See, e.g., People ex rel. Madigan v. Baumgartner, 355 Ill. App. 3d 842, 847 (2005) (" '[W]here a person leaves his residence and goes to another place, even if it be another [s]tate, with an intention to return to his former abode, or with only a conditional intention of acquiring a new residence, he does not lose his former residence so long as his intention remains conditional.' " (quoting Pope v. Board of Election Commissioners, 370 Ill. 196, 201 (1938)); Walsh v. County Officer Electoral Board, 267 Ill. App. 3d 972, 976 (1994) (whether candidate abandoned old residence in favor of new residence presents a question of intent, which is measured both by the "surrounding circumstances" and the candidate's declarations thereof); Dillavou v. County Officers Electoral Board, 260 Ill. App. 3d 127, 132 (1994) (whether candidate abandoned established residence is a question of intent, and " 'an absence for months or even -10- years, if all the while intended as a mere temporary absence for some temporary purpose, to be followed by a resumption of the former residence, will not be an abandonment' ") (quoting Kreitz v. Behrensmeyer, 125 Ill. 141, 195 (1888)). Moreover, the principles established in Smith and uniformly followed since were the very principles relied upon by the hearing officer, the Board, and the circuit court below. Thus, from April 1867 through January 24 of this year, the principles governing the question before us were settled. Things changed, however, when the appellate court below issued its decision and announced that it was no longer bound by any of the law cited above, including this court's decision in Smith, but was instead free to craft its own original standard for determining a candidate's residency. See No. 1-11-0033, slip op. at 6-8 (dismissing the foregoing authority in its entirety). Read more: http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_columnists_ezorn/2011/01/did-see-this-coming-emanuel-to-stay-on-the-ballot.html

Lazy people who don't know their job, call in to speak to a manager, "they're also lazy". It's…read moredepressing these people have jobs?

If you are looking to get married in Chicago City Hall, here are few things you should know about…read morethat process. First, you need a marriage licenes at the City Clerk's Office. Go to Daley Center for that. It is somewhere in the basement. You need to do that 24 hours before the big day and it is valid for 60 days. Then you go to 118 N. Clark St. The place you looking for is in the basement also. It is kind of hard to find it, cause it is in a padway. Wonder why....... No appoitments accepted. You need to get in a line. There is few rooms where the ceremony will be perform. The ceremony takes usually few more minutes and it is host by city judge. Some of them are really really nice and cool :_) Some of them just doing there job I guess :_(

I don't know why I'm always disappointed by government employees and services. I should know better…read morethan to expect anything besides a terrible experience. It's just frustrating that almost anytime you deal with a governmental employee, they seem gruff at best. And even those working in one of the more joyous units of county government! I called with some questions when the woman called me back, she was muttering under her breath--I don't think she expected me to pick up because I had call screening on. But she apologized for like 30 seconds at the beginning of the call saying it was a bad day, she was annoyed, but not at me--a very professional start. She did provide good directions--119 W Randolph, take the escalator downstairs. And yes, you'll enter on the Randolph side; don't use the Clark or LaSalle entrance or you'll probably get a bit turned around. But what was especially annoying is that they close for like 2.5 hours during the day. That isn't really made clear anywhere except for the sign right outside the office door, and in the two phone calls I had with them before stopping in they didn't mention being closed from 11:30 to 2. So plan accordingly. There's a $10 fee, cash only (also incredibly weird as far as I'm concerned, from both the safety perspective and that it's the year 2026). If you forget your fee, there's an ATM upstairs. On the plus side, this location performs ceremonies all week without appointments, unlike the suburban courthouses. Saturday they do require appointments, but it's nice that do any on Saturdays.

Hunger Knows No Reason Even though I have lived 5 minutes…read morefrom this place for the last 23 yrs, I just discovered this place while looking for places to volunteer. This also made me realize how unaware we could be of the needs and people of our surroundings and neighbors. Started in 1971 as a volunteer program this not for profit organization serves the needy in Des Plaines community in providing much needed assistance in food and clothing. This community based operation relies on donations of foods, clothing and funds from all capable and generous hearts. Their RED BARREL program is visible in many places including grocery stores in Des Plaines. Please be kind and share your abundance with some one who is much in need. For more info www.selfhelppantry.com 847-375-1443

Informative. Very nice not like the IRS every one was nice beginning to end gave us places to call…read moreand people to follow up with

think this is a scam if you get a call from this number. wrong website listed and caller is shady…read more Right website is https://tax.illinois.gov/

They help people... Donate clothes, money or your time to them. This is a great Chicago…read moreorganization that aids it's community and citizens. They have been helping the Humboldt Park community for years and will continue to with future donors.

Super friendly little charity. If you have a collection hotel toiletries, this is the place to…read moretake them, or the pile of free toothbrushes your dentist gives you. Clothes and school supplies are also a plus. Super sweet folks, they will probably ask to take your photo with your donations so they can post it on their Facebook page.

Not being a Chicago native, I never really knew what to think of Aldermen. In the past all stories…read moreI had heard about aldermen involved bribes. Recently though, we have been experiencing a terrible rat problem on our block, yard and sadly basement... made worse by excessive trash in the alley behind our house. We've tried everything including the possibility of adopting and introducing feral cats! My tenant took it upon herself though to call our Alderman's office to leave a message. Imagine her surprise when Scott actually answered the call and spent half an hour talking to her. As soon as the call was over, he sent his head of streets and sanitation to the block. He removed a non-compliant trashcan and has also put a plan in to add trash cans. The rats are apparently at bay, but regardless, Scott absolutely gets my vote and it didn't cost a cent!

Stu P., I believe you are misinformed. How exactly is the Alderman "money-grubbing" concerning this…read morecase? Name the developer that you believe he was in cahoots with on this property. How does an Alderman "use police" to evict people? Where are your facts?