Author: Serkadis

Chicago is a leader in trading exchanges, hamburgers and … bank branches in supermarkets.

That’s right, the Second City leads the nation in bank branches in supermarkets and other retail establishments, with 353 as of Jan. 15, according to a new study.

Moreover, in-store networks in the Chicago area are holding up better than those in many other U.S. cities, as the alternative banking segment undergoes its first shakeout in years.

Nationally, the number of in-store branches has fallen to 6,747, down from 6,885 as of June and 6,832 in June 2008, according to SNL Financial, a Charlottesville, Va.-based cruncher of financial industry data.

“We’ve seen a decrease of 138 U.S. in-store branches, and if this trend continues, we’ll see the first year-over-year decrease since 2002,” said SNL analyst Adrian Goffinet.

Grocery store saturation, and consolidation in some instances, might be playing a part in the slip in in-store branches, said David Kerstein, president of Austin, Texas-based Peak Performance Consulting Group, which advises the banking industry.

“There just aren’t that many more places to expand that are good prospects that banks haven’t already taken,” he said.

But the Chicago market is dropping at lesser rate, SNL found. Chicago’s 353 in-store branches are down only two from June and up from 351 in-store branches in June 2008.

Kerstein has several theories on why Chicago is a relative hotbed of in-store banking.

First, the banking industry in the Chicago metro area is more fragmented, with 293 lenders vying for business in every nook and cranny. That compares with 174 banking institutions in metro Los Angeles and 244 in metro New York, according to figures from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. Thirty-seven banks in the Chicago area have at least one in-store branch.

Second, Chicago is a major market for Wayzata, Minn.-based TCF Financial, which accounts for about 45 percent of the area’s in-store branches.

U.S. Bancorp of Minneapolis ranks first nationally in the number of in-store branches and fourth in the Chicago area, with 16 as of June, up one from June 2008. Most of its Chicago-area in-store branches are in Meijer and Dominick‘s.

Nationally, it has about 730 in-store branches and typically adds 40 to 50 a year.

“We’ll do the same in 2010,” said Chuck Stroup, U.S. Bank’s executive vice president of in-store banking.

It plans to add four in-store branches in the Chicago area this year.

U.S. Bancorp also plans to add one additional “on-site” branch in a corporate or university campus, hospital or racetrack in the Chicago area. It has a branch on the campus of Northwestern University.

“We have about 60 locations nationally on university and workplace campuses, and expect to do 10 to 15 more each year,” Stroup said.

U.S. Bank manages in-store and on-site branches separately from traditional stand-alone branches.

“Our mantra is it’s 50 percent the same as traditional branch banking and 50 percent different,” Stroup said.

“The difference is you’re inside a grocery store or a university campus or a workplace campus that allows you to be proactive in a way that a traditional branch wouldn’t. So we employ different marketing tactics, offer different promotions, pricingwise, from what traditional branches do, because we have access to host partners’ traffic.”

For Conan O’Brien, the writing was both on the wall and in Jay Leno’s freshly signed NBC contract renewal as host of “The Tonight Show” in the spring of 2004. He saw it coming. All of it.

“Jay may decide he wants to do the show until 2025,” O’Brien told The New York Times at the time. “Jay could say: My brain will be in a jar and we’ll wheel it out and I’ll do the monologue.”

Leno will be only 75 in 2025, and it’s actually not unreasonable to think he still might be hosting “Tonight,” assuming there’s an NBC on which to host it.

As of this writing, representatives for the flailing network and O’Brien — who later in ‘04 secured a guarantee he would get Leno’s “Tonight” job in ‘09 — were working on his exit settlement after seven months in the post so the network can reinstate Leno on the program he vacated in May.

NBC’s position, as articulated by NBC Universal Sports boss Dick Ebersol, whose credits include bumping Jane Pauley off “Today” in favor of Deborah Norville, is that O’Brien’s ratings forced the network’s hand.

“What this is really all about is an astounding failure by Conan,” Ebersol told the Times. In giving “Tonight” to O’Brien, he said. “We bet on the wrong guy.”

Since NBC effectively bet on both by keeping Leno on reserve, who knows? We should know sometime before 2025.

In the meantime, both Leno and O’Brien are jockeying to play the victim of NBC’s managerial incompetence, as well as of each other — O’Brien as prey to Leno’s failure to mount a successful prime-time effort and unbridled ambition to hold onto “Tonight” as long as possible; Leno of O’Brien’s inability to maintain the No. 1 standing with which he left “Tonight,” imperiling the network’s No. 2 moneymaker after the “Today” show.

Never mind the orderly succession promised on the 50th anniversary of “Tonight” in October ‘04 when everyone was gracious and polite and saying they didn’t want a repeat of the ugliness that accompanied Leno replacing Johnny Carson in 1992 and David Letterman’s defection to CBS the next year. Leno pointed out on the air that no one but Carson had hosted the program in their 60s, “and I think it’s safe to say I’m no Johnny Carson.”

Leno’s 60th birthday will be in April.

Ironically, the reason Leno said he remained in the NBC fold with a prime-time venture he correctly predicted would “either be a big success or crash and burn” rather than jump to ABC and compete head-to-head against O’Brien was concern over how that would be perceived.

“In the public’s mind, you look bitter,” Leno told me in August, just before the launch of the failed series that would enable NBC to keep him around as insurance. “You look like, ‘Oh, Jay Leno didn’t like getting kicked off the “Tonight Show.” ‘ … Bitterness doesn’t get you anywhere in show business. I always tell people the reason show business pays a lot of money is that when you get screwed, you’ve got something left over.”

For that reason, many may shrug indifferently at this whole debacle because on its face it seems to be just a story of rich middle-age white guys caught in a corporate struggle over who gets squeezed out and is sent packing with millions of dollars and who stays … with millions of dollars.

It’s not Haiti. It’s not health care. It’s not even something Sen. Harry Reid said in private several years ago.

But, really, who doesn’t love a good, expensive corporate bungle?

Plus, “The Tonight Show,” a late-night TV institution of more than 55 years, stands much like the old Marshall Field’s flagship store on State Street. Even if you never were near it or its sister stores, it’s a historic landmark. You might feel you have a stake in what it’s called and you might feel compelled to protest if it were to be overhauled, razed or otherwise threatened.

Then there’s the intimacy of bedtime TV.

“We’re in bed with these guys. It’s their job to give us hope,” said Chicago writer Bill Zehme, a veteran chronicler of late-night TV who helped write Leno’s autobiography and is working on a biography of Carson, whose 1962-92 “Tonight” run remains the gold standard. “We got through the day where we’ve learned more horrible things happened, and it’s almost evangelical. These guys make light of it so it doesn’t seem so bad. … All those years, Carson was the mint on our pillow before bedtime.”

Lately, however, the late-night mints have been salted with references to the Leno-O’Brien situation. Letterman suggested a version of “Law & Order” called “Leno Victims Unit” and ran a fake ad that said Leno stands for the values that built this country, “like killing Indians because you want their land.” Fellow CBS host Craig Ferguson blamed the Leno-O’Brien mess on “atrocious management by a once great American network.”

ABC’s Jimmy Kimmel lampooned Leno for one whole edition of “Jimmy Kimmel Live,” earning an invitation to NBC’s “The Jay Leno Show,” where he continued his attack and pleaded: “Listen, Jay, Conan and I have children. … You’ve got $800 million. For God’s sakes, leave our shows alone.”

O’Brien the other night said it was his dream to host “The Tonight Show,” which should serve as inspiration to kids that they can do anything they want, unless Leno wants it too. Leno noted Thursday that O’Brien’s ratings have gone up since the NBC fiasco blew up, “So you’re welcome.”

It is hard to imagine O’Brien didn’t suspect Leno’s return was a possibility, especially after NBC re-signed the longtime “Tonight” host in late 2008. And Leno, who always had close relations with affiliates, had to know his prospects in prime time would rest not on the cost-efficiency touted at the network level but the impact of his diminished ratings on stations’ profitable late local newscasts.

Back in early 2004, O’Brien turned loose his agents in his bid for “Tonight,” comparing them to Rottweilers. “Their job is to attack,” O’Brien said in the Times. “My job is to say: Dear me.”

And looking ahead to the inevitable clash over finite late-night network TV real estate, O’Brien said, “Let’s just hope it gets ugly, and then we’ll all have fun.”

Yes, kids, dreams do come true.

[email protected]

Chicago Blackhawks owner Rocky Wirtz walks down the stairs into the Ketel One club at the United Center Thursday night with his family — wife, Marilyn, daughter, Hillary. He is dressed in a gray suit and a tie. His stepdaughter, Elizabeth, says she’s never seen him wear jeans.

He orders a chicken Caesar salad and a glass of red wine. Diners nearby turn and stare, and a few snap photos with their cell phones. Ald. Brendan Reilly stops by, and one brave man steps up to the table, apologizes for the interruption and says, “Rocky, thank you. Thank you. Thank you.”

“That’s so nice,” his daughter, Hillary, says after the man leaves. “People are so nice.”

Rocky Wirtz, 57, having turned the Blackhawks into a winning franchise almost overnight, is quite possibly the most popular businessman in Chicago. But it hasn’t always been that way. He says he hasn’t forgotten the local headline that topped a story about his divorce from his first wife: “For Better or For Wirtz.”

Time: One minute into the game; Brian Campbell scores.

Wirtz sits in a folding chair, behind the last row of 100-level seats in a corner of the arena with a great view of the net. Wirtz waves to Bobby Hull, who is watching from a box, and some Jersey Boys singers, who are sitting below to his right. His son, Danny, who is vice president of the $1.5 billion Wirtz Beverage Group, joins the group along with Elizabeth and Carol “Mickey” Norton, a Bulls and White Sox partner.

He points out that Norton has seven “rings,” six from the Bulls championship, one from the White Sox. She is wearing two of them tonight.

“I just want one,” he tells her. “I’m very envious of your seven.”

Norton later tells him in the private Sonja Henie room that he’s setting the bar too low. “One at a time, Rocky,” she says. “Get them one at a time.”

Time: Second period, Dustin Byfuglien scores.

Wirtz misses it. He’s walking to visit Hull and Tony Esposito. Wirtz, a former high school football player, has handsomely cut brown hair, a long nose and a million-dollar smile. His humor is wickedly dry. (At times during his father’s regime, he quips, “Even the guy who ran the mailroom said ‘no, thank you’ ” to tickets.)

Hull recaps Byfuglien’s goal, saying Campbell’s early score “wasn’t going to be enough.” The fact that the two are talking is remarkable. Wirtz said the most important decision he has made was to woo the franchise’s famous alumni back into the fold. Of them all, Hull, 71, bitter over years of disputes about money, took the longest to persuade.

“We really have to not hold grudges,” he says.

Time: Period three

Wirtz rides the crowded elevator to the 300 level. On the way, a ticket holder, who doesn’t recognize him, warns everyone that he’s just eaten a ton of beans. Such is the risk of mingling with the mortals.

Wirtz passes the Jagermeister stand and the new bars he had installed but barely has time to point them out before he is mobbed. Men reach out to shake his hand; again, more thank-yous; and he begins to attract a small crowd asking for autographs. A few start chanting, “Rocky. Rocky.”

Wirtz pulls out his personalized Sharpie. His lifelong friend, John Miller, CEO of North American Corp., had “Rocky Wirtz” stenciled on it as a practical joke.

“He has a bad sense of humor,” Wirtz says.

One woman asks Wirtz to sign a hat for her nephew. After he turns to the next autograph seeker, she whispers to me, “Who is that?”

Game time: Duncan Keith scores in the third.

Wirtz watches from the owner’s box, which he has handed over to team president John McDonough. Wirtz stands behind the bar and adds two bottled waters to the ice bucket. The game is on Comcast SportsNet on a flat-screen TV behind him, which is again remarkable. Among his first moves after inheriting the team from his father was to get the Blackhawks’ home games on television.

“Hey, that’s Lori Healey,” I say as the camera pans the crowd and catches Mayor Richard Daley’s former chief of staff. The camera cuts to a woman wearing a black sweater, “And that’s my secretary!” Wirtz says. The camera cuts again. “Hey, Rocky, that’s you,” I say, and after, a few-second delay, I realize, “And me.”

Time: A minute or so left in the game; victory in hand.

Wirtz is back in his folding chair. I point out that a few reporters have derided him as not being “a hockey man.” He admits to spending most of his time on his beverage business. “I only work this during the games,” he says. But, he argues, he has been attending hockey games since birth. And he knew that he was going to take over the franchise when he was in the sixth grade.

“We had a succession agreement in place,” he says rather nonchalantly, as if such a thing were normal for a teenager. He seems to have been plotting strategy ever since, warning his family’s longtime PR man, Guy Chipparoni, “Get ready. You’re going to be busy.”

The buzzer sounds. He says that he loves to watch fans jumping and dancing. One turns around to shake his hand and congratulate him on the win. Then, he asks, “Mr. Wirtz, can you buy the Bears?”

Until Thursday, the closest Melissa Harris ever came to Bobby Hull was filling in his name in a crossword puzzle. She can be reached at [email protected] or 312-222-4582.

Follow her on Twitter @ChiConfidential.

Three presidents from opposing parties stood united outside the White House this morning to signal the launch of an aggressive private fundraising drive for the earthquake-stricken nation of Haiti.

“These two leaders send an unmistakable message to the people of Haiti and the world,” Obama said of the former presidents flanking him in the Rose Garden. “In a moment of need, the United States stands united.”

Obama, in turning to his Republican predecessor, George W. Bush, and Democratic predecessor, Bill Clinton, has borrowed a page from the Bush playbook in the aftermath of a South Asian tsunami that claimed a massive toll in 2004: Bush tapped Clinton and the president’s father, former President George H.W. Bush, to spearhead fundraising.

“This is a model that works,” Obama said.

Bush spoke bluntly of the challenge posed by an earthquake that has claimed tens of thousands of lives and left the Haitian capital in ruins – and he spoke even more bluntly about what Americans can do.

“Our hearts are broken when we see the scenes of little children struggling without a mom or dad, or the bodies on the ground or the physical damage of the earthquake,” Bush said. “The most effective way for Americans to help the people of Haiti is to contribute money…

“I know a lot of Americans want to send blankets and water,” Bush said, with a knowing nod, looking at the cameras: “Just send your cash.”

Clinton, who also already is serving as the special United Nations envoy to Haiti, said of the earthquake’s survivors: “Right now, all we need to do is get food and medicine and water and a secure place for them to be.” But in the long-term, he said, the rebuilding of Haiti will require a sustained effort to capitalize on what could be an opportunity.

“I believe that, before this earthquake, Haiti had the best chance in its history to escape their history,” Clinton said. “I still believe it… But it’s going to take a lot of help and a long time.”

Obama, making his fourth public address on the Haitian crisis in four days, also suggested that the intense media attention focused on the island nation now soon will shift to other areas. It will be the job of Bush and Clinton, he said, to keep American generosity focused.

(Photo approaching Rose Garden by Mark Wilson / Getty Images.)

“In times of great challenge in our country and around the world, Americans have always come together,” Obama said today, standing with Bush and Clinton in an overcast Rose Garden.

“At this moment, we are moving forward with one of the largest relief efforts in history,” Obama said, and his predecessors will ensure that the U.S. government’s own commitment of $100 million and rising will be matched by contributions from “beyond the government.”

The White House has created a Web-site for the fundraising effort that the two presidents will lead: clintonbushhaitifund.org.

Obama, citing “destruction and suffering that defies comprehension, said “we also know that our longer term effort will not be measured in days and weeks. It will be measured in months and even years.”

“Here at home, Presidents Bush and Clinton will help Americans do their part,” the president said. “This time of suffering can and must be a time of caring and compassion.”

When he had spoken this week with each of his predecessors, Obama said today, “They each asked the same simple question: ‘How can I help.” In the days ahead, he said, they will be enlisting the help of many more Americans.

Following a half-hour private meeting in the Oval Office this morning, Bush stood to Obama’s left during a brief appearance outside. Clinton stood to Obama’s right.

The two former presidents each spoke of their personal involvement with Haiti – Bush citing his wife’s journey there to oversee U.S.-sponsored efforts at AIDS prevention, Clinton complimenting the Bush administration for its work on disease prevention.

“The Haitian people have got a tough journey,” Bush said, suggesting that catastrophes “bring out the best of the human spirit… President Clinton and I are going to work to help tap that spirit.”

Clinton, in 1975, celebrated his wedding in Haiti, traveling there for a delayed honeymoon with a wife who is now Secretary of State Hillary Clinton – making her own first journey to the earthquake-stricken nation today.

“I have no words for what I feel,” Clinton said today. “I was in those hotels that collapsed. I had meals with people who are dead. The cathedral church that Hillary and I sat in 35 years ago…. is rubble. It is still one of the most remarkable places that I have been.”

The Primrose Candy Co. on Chicago’s Near Northwest Side every day churns out millions of individually-wrapped candies, from root beer barrels to “Starlight” mints. Sugar is its lifeblood.

But keeping that sugar flowing is an increasingly expensive proposition for Primrose and the entire candy industry: Sugar prices are hovering at 29-year highs. Low U.S. sugar stocks and soaring global sugar prices appear to be the culprit, and consumers are feeling the effect as candy makers pass along their rising ingredient costs.

Many candy-makers instituted price increases of about 10 percent last year, said Sal Ferrara II, president of Forest Park-based Ferrara Pan Candy Co., maker of such venerable brands as Lemonhead and Red Hots. (Ferrara Pan raised prices late last year, though the executive declined to say how much.)

Meanwhile, data from market researcher Nielsen Co. show that the price of non-chocolate candy jumped almost 9 percent during the 13 weeks ended Nov. 28 compared with the same time last year. Chocolate candy has experienced a similar price jump. Makers have been hit by high sugar costs and soaring cocoa prices.

What this means is that consumers can expect to pay higher prices for packaged candies or the same prices for less candy. “You are going to see price increases as well as weight reductions,” Ferrara said, referring to shrinking candy packaging without shrinking the price.

Over the past several months, consumers have generally benefited from falling or stable prices of such commodities as corn, soybeans and wheat. But the price of sugar has been anything but sweet.

The world price of raw sugar during the third quarter of 2009 was 42 percent higher than a year earlier and almost double that of two years earlier, according to data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Bad weather has hurt harvests in Brazil and India, two of the world’s biggest sugar producers. Plus, Brazil has been increasingly devoting sugar resources to ethanol production, putting upward pressure on sugar prices.

In this country, sugar prices are primarily determined by domestic factors because the U.S. imposes tariffs on most imported sugar. Still, the global run-up has a negative effect on U.S. prices, said Tom Earley, a sweeteners analyst at food consultant Promar International.

The world price serves as a “floor” for the U.S. price, Earley said. “The higher global prices, the higher the floor.”

In the U.S., sugar production has “been on the low side” in recent years, which has helped push up prices, Earley said. Sugar beet producers had a disappointing fall due to bad weather. During the past couple of years — particularly in 2008 — attractive prices for other crops, namely corn, have led farmers to reduce sugar beet cultivation.

The upshot: U.S. sugar stocks, relative to sugar demand, are this year less than half of what they were a year ago, according to a recent report by Promar. “We have sort of a structural deficit,” Earley said. With that deficit, U.S. raw sugar prices in recent months hit a 29-year high, and the price in November was 61 percent higher than a year earlier, according to USDA data.

Mark Puch, Primrose Candy’s president, has felt the pain. And it only hurts more that U.S. sugar prices are normally considerably higher than world sugar prices, due to U.S. import restrictions. The candy industry claims the cost gap with foreign sugar has driven candy production out of the United States.

To counter fierce competition from foreign candy-makers, Primrose over the past 15 years has branched out into making sugar-free candy and dietary supplements. Together, such products now constitute about 55 percent of Primrose’s sales. Most of the rest comes from what the family-owned firm has been making for 81 years: sugar-based candy.

Primrose’s “hard candy kitchen” had the aromatic scents of citrus and mint last week when a reporter visited. Hard candy’s two main ingredients, sugar and corn syrup, were being mixed, cooked and then plied — on this day at least — with peppermint oil and orange flavoring.

Normally, Primrose and other makers of hard candy might use 55 percent to 60 percent sugar, with the balance of its sweet stew coming from high-fructose corn syrup. But with the climbing cost of sugar, that ratio is closer to 50-50 these days, Puch said.

Corn syrup is no bargain, either, compared with what it was a few years ago, Puch said. While Primrose is paying about 15 cents a pound now, down from almost 20 cents a year ago, corn syrup was just about 9 cents per pound four years ago.

Soaring corn syrup prices, along with rising sugar and energy costs, in 2008 prompted Primrose to hike prices about 5 percent starting Jan. 1, 2009, Puch said. On Jan. 1 of this year, the company raised prices another 3 percent due to escalating sugar costs.

It’s the nature of the business: “I pass along a lot of the cost,” Puch said.

Always dreamed of being in the movies? Here’s one way to make it a reality: consider getting your house on the big screen instead.

That’s exactly what Evanston homeowner Cyndee Keiser did, when her sprawling Sheridan Road home was recently chosen to be the location for the film “Baby on Board,” starring Heather Graham and Jerry O’Connell.

Keiser’s home joins a prestigious list of Chicago-area homes with Hollywood pedigrees, including 671 Lincoln Ave. in Winnetka (“Home Alone”); 1258 Linden in Highland Park (“Risky Business”); and Green Bay Road and Woodland in Lake Forest (“Ordinary People”).

But for Keiser, it wasn’t just about the prestige, the ego boost of seeing her home lit up on the silver screen, or even the fun of rubbing elbows daily with movie stars like O’Connell, Graham and Lara Flynn Boyle. Those were simply the perks of the job — one that she was well compensated for. “I’ve made as much as $12,000 in income from my shoots,” says Keiser, whose home has been used as a location for television shows (a pilot called ” Wrigleyville“), independent films (“Stash”), catalogs (American Girl) and newspaper ads ( Kohl’s, Ace Hardware and Flor tiles). “I’ve done so many that I’ve kind of lost track,” admits Keiser.

According to Chicago location manager Valerie Bulinski, who’s worked on such films as “Ferris Bueller’s Day Off,” “The Fugitive,” and “Midnight Run,” a film shoot is often enough money to cover a homeowner’s annual real estate taxes. “They usually negotiate a lump sum with the homeowner, but generally, the fee is based on how many people are in your house, how many rooms they’re using, and how long they’re in your house,” Bulinski says. “The more of any of those categories, the more money you’ll make.”

At a time when many Chicagoans are looking for ways to earn extra income, renting out one’s home for films, commercials or still photography has never been more attractive, especially when you consider that the federal government allows homeowners to earn up to $15,000 a year renting out their homes without being taxed on the income. For unemployed or underemployed Chicagoans, finding location work for their homes is often less effort than finding work for themselves.

“It’s easy money,” says Deerfield homeowner Pam Katz, who was approached by a location scout shortly after building her Prairie-style home six years ago. “Within a couple of months after meeting with the location scout, Crate & Barrel booked us for a five-day shoot, and six months later they came back to shoot their fall catalog,” says Katz, whose home has also been featured in Purina, Barilla Pasta, Masland Carpet, SC Johnson and Pampered Chef ads. “We’ve had as many as nine or 10 shoots in a year,” she says. “When you consider the going rate is $1,000 a day, that’s a lot of money.”

Of course, not every home is “model material.” According to Katz, one reason she gets so much work is because her spacious home can accommodate large film crews and equipment. “Visually, what we’re usually looking for is space and the amount of light in that space,” Bulinski says. “It also helps to have different looks in the same home, because sometimes they do multiple shots in a home. They might want to present different characters and make it look like it’s a totally different home.”

Location scouts may also be looking for certain features that are unique to the project. “If it’s a movie, they’re usually looking to express the character who lives there,” Bulinski says. “Catalogs also have specific looks. There’s usually some key thing they’re looking for, whether it’s a swimming pool or a certain type of kitchen.”

When Chicago location scout Kate Levinson walks into a home, she usually knows immediately which client it might appeal to. “Big interior stores like Crate & Barrel like empty houses that they can fill with their furniture,” she says. “American Girl likes lots of kids bedrooms and fun nooks and crannies. Once, when I worked with Huggies, they wanted to be able to see the toilet from the living room.”

Logistics like parking, elevator access and condominium or village rules governing filming can also affect a location decision. “You could have the most beautiful penthouse apartment with a perfect view of the city skyline, but if there’s no freight elevator or way to move the equipment up and down the top floor, then a dream location may turn into a nightmare and they may not use it,” says Rich Moskel, director of the Chicago Film Office. Moskel’s had his share of nightmare locations: In the late 1990s, Moskel coordinated the simultaneous shutdown of the Blue line between Belmont and Montrose and the closure of the express lanes on the Kennedy for five nights in a row in order to film a chase scene in the Bruce Willis film “Mercury Rising.”

Luckily, residential shoots aren’t nearly as complicated, but homeowners shouldn’t underestimate the chaos that can arise from having 20 or more people in their home. Not everyone can handle it. “If someone’s a control freak, it’s probably not going to work,” Bulinski says. “They have to be able to accept the fact that for a certain amount of time, their house is not going to look like it did. But at the end of the day, when everything is back in order, you don’t even know they were there.”

Occasionally, repairs are needed to restore the home back to its original condition. While homeowners are provided with an insurance policy that’s usually larger than the value of their home, they should be prepared for possible nicks, dings, and accidents. “We had a shoot recently where the toilet broke,” Levinson says. “It probably needed to be replaced anyway, but it broke while it was being rented out, so it was paid for.”

In general, the more people in a home, the greater the chances of damage occurring. Photo shoots usually involve 10-20 people, television commercials 25-75, and movies 75-300 (although not all at the same time). “With movies, and even with commercials, your neighbors are going to be impacted,” Bulinski says. “There’s just no way around it.”

For Katz, the benefits have outweighed the negatives. “I’ve met so many interesting people — art directors, stylists — I didn’t even know those jobs existed before this,” she says. “I’ve also gotten some great ideas for my own decorating. After the Crate & Barrel shoot, I ended up buying the pillows they used on my couch, because they worked so well.”

Catered food is another perk. Since the crews generally spend 8-12 hours in a home, they usually bring in breakfast and lunch. “They never do not say ‘please help yourself to this,’ Keiser says. “Ninety percent of the time, they leave whatever is left, so you can dine for days.” Katz has even thrown parties with the leftover food. “One year, Crate & Barrel made two turkeys in my oven, plus sweet potatoes, yams, all the side dishes. That night, I invited friends over and we had a huge Thanksgiving meal in April.”

Keiser, who moonlights as a movie extra, even managed to negotiate a small part for herself in “Baby on Board.” The scene was set at an Evanston restaurant and Keiser was seated at a table next to the leads. “In the movie, all you see is a quick shot of the back of my head,” she says. “It was very disappointing.”

Her house, on the other hand, got wonderful exposure. “I love showcasing my house,” Keiser says. “It’s so nice to let people enjoy all the work we’ve done to it — and it’s also nice to let our house pay us back.”

An industrial chemical developed to help separate heavy metals from polluted soil and mining drainage is being sold as a dietary supplement by a luminary in the world of alternative autism treatments.

Called OSR#1, the supplement is described on its Web site as an antioxidant not meant to treat any disease. But the site lists pharmacies and doctors who sell it to parents of children with autism, and the compound has been promoted to parents on popular autism Web sites.

“I sprinkle the powder into Bella’s morning juice and onto Mia and Gianna’s gluten free waffle breakfast sandwich,” wrote Kim Stagliano, managing editor of Age of Autism and mother of three girls on the autism spectrum, in an enthusiastic post last spring.

“We’ve seen some nice ‘Wows!’ from OSR.”

A search of medical journals unearthed no papers published about OSR#1, though the compound’s industrial uses have been explored in publications such as the Journal of Hazardous Materials.

Boyd Haley, president of the Lexington, Ky.-based company that produces the compound, acknowledged its industrial origins but calls his product “a food” that is “totally without toxicity.” He said he has been taking the supplement for nearly three years.

“Look, I put myself on the line,” he said. “I have taken 250 milligrams per day, on the average.”

Federal law requires manufacturers to explain why a new dietary ingredient reasonably can be expected to be safe. The Food and Drug Administration told the Tribune that Haley had not submitted sufficient information.

In an interview, Haley said that the compound had been tested on rats and that a food safety study was conducted on 10 people. Asked to provide documentation of the studies, he stopped communicating with the Tribune.

Experts expressed dismay upon hearing children were consuming a chemical not evaluated in formal clinical trials for safety, as would be required for a drug prescribed by doctors.

Ellen Silbergeld, an expert in environmental health and a researcher funded by the National Institutes of Health studying mercury and autism at Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, said she found the sale of the chemical as a supplement for children “appalling.”

“I would worry a lot about giving anything to a small child that hasn’t been scrutinized for both safety and efficacy by the FDA,” said antioxidant expert Dr. L. Jackson Roberts, a pharmacologist at Vanderbilt University School of Medicine.

OSR#1 supplements are one of many risky, unproven therapies given to children with autism by doctors who say they can successfully treat the disorder, which has no cure and very few proven treatment options. Last year, Tribune reporters examined alternative treatments for autism and uncovered a trail of junk science and false hopes.

Haley, a retired professor at the University of Kentucky who once was chairman of the chemistry department, has spoken at autism conferences promoting alternative therapies.

His fiery presentations connect autism and the mercury that was once a part of childhood vaccines, a supposed link that numerous scientific studies have failed to prove.

“We need to get mad,” he told an audience of hundreds at a national autism conference in Chicago last year.

One of the most prominent autism groups, Generation Rescue, once named him to its Hall of Fame, citing his “clear, thoughtful, feisty testimony and writings” about mercury.

On the Age of Autism blog, parents have hailed him as a hero for his new supplement, which Haley said “easily 1,000 people” have taken. “Boyd Haley should be ‘Man of the Year,’” wrote one reader.

Stagliano, the Web site’s managing editor, declined to comment.

The company that makes the supplement, CTI Science, describes it as an antioxidant.

But pharmacologist Dr. Arthur Grollman, director of the Laboratory for Chemical Biology at State University of New York at Stony Brook, said it is obvious from the product’s chemical structure that it is also a “powerful chelator,” a compound that binds to heavy metals such as mercury.

The FDA has approved several chelators as drugs to treat heavy metal poisoning. Some doctors also use the drugs — which carry significant risks — to treat children with autism based on the scientifically unfounded idea that their disorder is linked to toxic metals.

But the chemical being sold as OSR#1 is part of a family of chelators originally developed for industrial purposes, according to a U.S. patent issued in 2003 and assigned to the University of Kentucky Research Foundation.

A university spokesman said Haley’s company has licensing rights to that patent, which discusses ways to use the compound to remove heavy metals from soil and acid mine drainage.

Fraudulent Web sites, other scams can divert money from needed destination

Gut-wrenching pictures and news accounts of the disaster in Haiti have prompted Americans to donate millions of dollars to the relief effort.

But for every legitimate charity soliciting your money, other groups are looking to cash in on the tragedy, experts say.

“There seem to be more and more every time there is a disaster,” said Steve Bernas, president of the Better Business Bureau in Chicago.

“Americans are very generous, and these scam artists come out of the woodwork.”

Bernas told the Problem Solver that after the tsunami in 2004, thousands of Web sites popped up asking for money. Some were legitimate. Many were not.

Within days of Tuesday’s earthquake, more than 400 Web sites surfaced with “Haiti” in the Web address, Bernas said.

“You just have to be careful,” he said. “You have to determine if it’s a real charity.”

Experts offer the following tips for evaluating charities and making donations:

–Check out the agency’s rating at Web sites like bbb.org/us/haiti or the American Institute of Philanthropy’s charitywatch.org. Both Internet sites offer analysis of organizations involved in Haitian relief efforts.

–Look for charities with an established track record of helping in the region, suggests Chicago-based American Institute of Philanthropy. You can also find a list of 65 agencies that are already on the ground in Haiti at InterAction.org.

–Be wary of high-pressure tactics to contribute over the phone. Bernas said some scam artists will goad you into contributing on the spot.

“That’s a tip-off to rip-off,” he said. Instead, get the charity’s name and do some research before making a donation.

–Exert caution when giving online: through social networking sites, via text messages or in response to an e-mail.

“It’s easy for someone to pretend they’re a victim and for an impostor to get money,” said Daniel Borochoff, president of the philanthropy institute. “Even if they are a real victim, they could get an unfair amount of money.”

–Be wary of agencies that claim to use 100 percent of its donations in the relief effort. Such claims are likely fraudulent because all organizations have overhead costs, Bernas said. On the flip side, avoid agencies that spend too much on administrative costs. The philanthropy institute says a charity should spend at least 75 percent of its budget on program services. You can research an agency’s financial information at guidestar.org.

–Donate money, if possible, instead of goods or clothing. Cash allows charities to buy the most-needed food, medicine and materials, while reducing shipping costs, Bernas and Borochoff said.

–Resist the impulse to go to Haiti and volunteer.

“It’s a very understandable human response to want to get on a plane and go down there and do something,” said Sam Worthington, president and CEO of InterAction, a coalition of U.S.-based international nongovernmental organizations.

“Unfortunately, the more people who show up in Haiti without professional international aid experience, the harder it will be to help.”

–Take a deep breath. While the pictures can be moving, you do not have to donate immediately.

“There are going to be a lot of long-term needs,” Borochoff said. “There’s going to be a lot more suffering if people just think of the emergency needs and then we just walk away from Haiti.”

The Tribune asked some movers and shakers to give their impressions of Michelle Obama’s first year as the nation’s first lady. Here are excerpts:

Letitia Baldrige, social secretary for first lady Jacqueline Kennedy:

“I think she’s done a terrific job. Coming in as the first this and the first that, she’s had any number of mountains to climb, and she’s climbed every one.

“There have been some fashion errors. Some of the skirts that she mixes with printed tops have been less than exciting, in my opinion. But if that’s all we can say negatively, she’s doing terribly well.”

Is she the “new Jackie”?: “That’s too facile a comparison. They’re two totally different women in totally different times. Jackie tried to make the White House beautiful and fix it up and this first lady has other agendas: the education of children, healthy eating, obesity — and all of those things weren’t even on Jackie’s mind at all.”

Michelle Obama’s biceps: “I think they’re wonderful and that she shows them off to her advantage. We all should be so lucky. Any time I pass a mirror and look at my arms, I flinch.”

Mary Matalin, conservative commentator and publisher:

“I think she just exudes what people are looking for in this era: She is a woman who knows what’s in her heart and she’s really comfortable with who she is and she’s cognizant of her position and her responsibility and her obligations, but she’s going to take care of her kids and take care of herself.

“She’s compelling in ways I find more appealing than her husband, and I’m not talking about politics or ideology.”

Penny Pritzker , Chicago business executive, member of President Barack Obama’s Economic Advisory Recovery Board:

“She’s authentic, accessible and is as comfortable greeting the queen of England as she is serving food to the homeless. And she’s an inspiration. She embodies the American dream: a girl from the South Side of Chicago who through hard work and education becomes a lawyer, a hospital vice president and first lady.”

Nancy Beck Young , history professor, University of Houston:

“There’s a paradox because she’s breaking so many barriers while she’s advocating a pretty traditional agenda. Her moderation is part of the larger Obama strategy to keep a centrist coalition together.

“If she was talking about unwed mothers, if she was talking about premarital sex, if she was talking about drug use — and not in the Nancy Reagan ‘Just-say-no’ kind of way — she would come off as off-putting for too many Americans, I fear.

“It’s a calculated political choice, and it’s a smart choice, to take on safe, antiseptic causes.”

Lewis Gould, editor of “American First Ladies: Their Lives and Their Legacy”:

“As a political surrogate, she’s very important. The wife of the president is the only person around the president who doesn’t have another agenda, from (chief of staff) Rahm Emanuel down.

“She may want something, but her first interest is in the president, and as a sustaining force, and emotional buttress, the first lady is crucial. The role of first lady is usually more complex and interesting than what the public appearance is. She has a certain star quality that neither Laura Bush nor Barbara Bush had. Hillary Clinton had a star quality, the kind that was polarizing.”

Avril Graham, executive fashion and beauty editor, Harper’s Bazaar:

“She keeps her wardrobe fresh, young and unimposing in many ways. For many first ladies, it was the requisite boxy, buttoned-up suit of old. She marches to a different beat. She mixes American, French, Italian designers and high and low price points in her wardrobe choices. She understands dressing down as well as dressing up.