Patlak deserves to return to Board of Review

I read with great interest your Oct. 2 article regarding the Cook County Board of Review candidates. I found it interesting that candidate Wendt apparently feels that being an attorney makes her a better candidate than Dan Patlak. Let's look at the facts.

Mr. Patlak has a business administration degree; Ms. Wendt does not. Mr. Patlak is a Certified Illinois Assessing Officer; Ms. Wendt is not. Mr. Patlak has been an assessor in Wheeling Township; Ms. Wendt has no such experience. Mr. Patlak has 15 years of experience on the Cook County Board of Review. Ms. Wendt has never served as such.

Mr. Patlak stated that, "99% of what the board of review does is financial analysis, it's not the interpretation of law." Anyone who has ever attended a board of review hearing would agree with this statement.

Ms. Wendt cites her attendance at law school and learning how to interpret case law as an important qualification, yet that only applies to 1% of what the board does.

Moreover, Ms. Wendt's misguided comments painfully suggest that she may not have ever attended a board of review hearing. Further, she does not appear to have done any homework to educate herself regarding the board's primary functions.

I have learned from personal experience as a CPA and CFO for many years, and having been in charge of the legal function for my employers for over 30 years, that many attorneys do not have competence in financial analysis.

Ms. Wendt further stated that, "The governor declared a state of disaster in March. The law states properties can be reassessed as of the date of this disaster. No one's talking about it. Why not?"

I have news for you, Ms. Wendt. The assessor's office assesses properties, not the board of review.

Dan Patlak is a competent and experienced commissioner and has received strong endorsements from all three major Chicago area newspapers. He deserves to be reelected.

Paul Wickland

Arlington Heights