Resident Chuckles with "Adopt a Block" Program
o

---

Letter to the Editor

No one who calls Oak Park home should be tricked by the $4.8 million in federal funds that have been promised to begin the “Cap the Ike” project.  The real goal of the state and federal authorities is to have the local residents chasing a park that will expose citizens to the noxious fumes of the Ike, while they widen the roadway that runs through Oak Park.

What is needed is to “cap” the expansion of the Ike and promote mass transit in both directions.  Studies have proven that the more efficient and wider the roadway, the more traffic it will draw. The
real problem is the Blue Line of the CTA that ends in Forest Park, and not in Oak Brook or Aurora where the jobs and the shopping
are now located.

Federal funds for road construction and repair seem endless, increase our taxes, and provide no real relief. Meanwhile, the CTA continues to fight for its life each year by begging for funding, while the roads get wider and longer.

True congestion relief and better air quality for all, will come if we push mass transit for all who desire it, not a park on an expressway.

Tim Curtin
Coordinating Committee Member
Oak Park Greens

---

Letter to the Editor:

          This letter follows the Wednesday Journal's publication of massed negative letters (on 8/3/05)      
 
           A respectful period has now passed since the truly shape-shifting election results in the Oak Park Village Board of Trustees races were announced in these pages a few short months ago.
          In the interim we have been treated to the long-overdue pleasure of being served by a group of entirely new faces, intellects and temperaments at the Village Board table.  Congratulations and welcome aboard:  Greg Marsey, Martha Brock and Geoff Baker.  Welcome back, Bob Milstein, our venrated veteran.  And, congratulations Elizabeth Brady; your selection honors the diligent efforts and insights of this newly elected Village Board, led by freshly-elevated David Pope.

          When I  observe that Oak Park's voters resoundingly
cleared the boards by electing new faces, with both vibrant ideas
and deep roots as constructive local activists of many years engagement, my understatement is of the magnitude of an understatement that Michael Jordan played basketball.  Because Michael Jordan's freshly executed athleticism redefined basketball!  And, because our freshly engaged voters, with equal clarity,
redefined Oak park's future!

          The good humor, engaged judgement, reliable openness, respectful inclusiveness and characteristic hard work of the new Village Board is bracing, heartening, enjoyable and productive. 
We are challenged to think in new ways.  We are talking and
working together as we have not for far, far, far too many years. 
We are engaging respectfully, challenging long-held priorities as we explore, test, select, revise and reconsititue policies, procedures, priorities and ways of doing our community's business.

          Does this upset long-dominant traditionalist elements?  Of course it does, and the pinched pleas to pollute by invective and carping criticism is predictabe. Unfortunate, but predictable. 

          Why unfortunate?  Unfortunate because the paradigm of
local municipal inspiration, planning and execution has shifted. 
And, given that reality, I suggest that joining is infinitely preferable
to losers' grinding groans of curmudgeonly carping and complaining.  For a period of time practically beyond the memory of most of us today, it has been virtually impossible for energetic, independent citizens to engage with those governing, who often worked in
secrecy to shape (i.e. control) Oak Park.  Prominent in those years were code words, such as "traditional priorities" to justify/explain decisions and public expenditures calculated to further the aims of those controlling and exercising power.  Secrecy and knowing winks substituted for open discussion.  Questioners/challengers were
isolated and rejected, over and over and over again. Those risking entering the political arena independenty always risked, and experienced,  vituperative and very personal vilification; intensely negative criticism; carefully crafted  - and placed in print - to achieve the maximum effect upon readers/voters who might consider supporting or even joining efforts at opposition not sanctioned by
the local political elite. But, that has all changed.

          Now it is possible to participate, to question, to influence and to be influenced.  Come on down.  Come on in. An exciting era is launching; we are all part of this liftoff.  Negativity as a governing style has been rejected, resoundingly.  Openness as a governing style has been embraced, resoundingly. 

          And, if you know a negative vilifier, tell him/her so, bluntly and unambiguously.  Then, invite him/her in, for there is much we can do. Together!
                                      -   John Frederick Troelstrup   

---

PRESS RELEASE—April 14, 2005 

Mas Takiguchi announced today that he is not interested in seeking
to be included in any pool of candidates to complete the unexpired term of office created by David Pope’s election to the office of Village President.  He has announced this in advance of the
VMA’s meeting scheduled for Thursday evening with a personal correspondence to VMA President Gene Armstrong, as well as
VCA member Bob Milstein.  Mr. Pope also has been informed.

Takiguchi feels that it is in the best interests of the community
not to focus on his candidacy or loss in the recent election as an
issue in whether the new board decides to fill the vacancy or to
allow it to remain open until the next election on April 17, 2007. 

“The new trustees and Village President deserve the support of
the community.  The best thing I can do now is to simplify the discussion by removing myself as a potential candidate to fill the unexpired term.  The Board has my support in their efforts to improve services and build an effective budget.  I wish them
well.”

Takiguchi will refocus his efforts on the upcoming Pony baseball season and business interests.

Mas Takiguchi

---

April 11, 2005

Letter to the Editor:

There are many elements to a great concession speech such as; graciousness, congratulations to opponents, calls for unity, appeals
for common ground, language which heals, pride, bridges which
move us forward and thanks to all who worked hard on either
side to elect their candidates.

It is unfortunate the community did not experience more of what should be in a great concession speech from several losing
candidates after the April 5 elections.  But putting aside the past
for a moment, I continue to remain focused on our positive future.
I have been reaching out to the newly elected officials of the village board and it is a pleasure to report that each and every person who will be joining the board has reciprocated with kindness and graciousness as we seek common ground, work to mend any fences
and offer more than just hope for our work ahead - but a real commitment to seek ways to make Oak Park even better than I believe it is.

As we move beyond election rhetoric, a pledge can and should be made amongst us all to heal wounds with grace and candor. A
pledge can and should be made that we will focus on policy discussions, not personalities.

I pledge to remain focused on the challenges and opportunities
before us and have not lost faith in our board's ability to work together, no matter our party or association.

So to all who ran for public office I offer a paraphrased quote from
Senator John Kerry's presidential concession speech, "In an Oak
Park election, there are no losers. Because whether or not our individual candidates were successful, the next morning, we all
wake up Oak Parker's'."

As a proud Oak Parker, I urge everyone to bring your hands and hearts together again so we continue to make Oak Park the best
place it can possibly be. And to that end, an appeal for hope and optimism will continue to move us forward, but a real commitment
to teamwork and partnership will lead us forward.

I again applaud the victors, all who worked on any campaign and
the citizens of Oak Park, for allowing the democratic appeal to continue. And to those who were not successful in an election,
your voice, along with any citizen's voice, must continue to be
part of the Oak Park chorus of ideals, so that elected officials continue to make the most informed decisions possible.

Regards,

Ray Johnson
Trustee - Village of Oak Park

---

April 10, 2005

Dear Oak Parkers:

I am writing to thank you for your support and your willingness to elect me to a fourth term as your Village Clerk. The outpouring of votes, calls, and notes, both before and after the election, are so rewarding and are very much appreciated.

I promise that I and my staff will continue to give the best and fullest service possible to all residents, staff, businesses, and those who visit my office from outside the community.

Furthermore, I will continue to work with the President, Board of Trustees, the Manager, and all employees, for the good and welfare of all of Oak Park.

Thank you again for your trust and support; I will make every endeavor to continue to earn both.

Sincerely,

Sandra Sokol

---

April 2005

Since the beginning of this school year, we have both been involved in the Critical Issues Process at Oliver Wendell Holmes School. As this process, a collaboration between consultants with Intelivate, Inc. and the Holmes School Leadership Team, has moved forward, we have seen some remarkable examples of open and honest discussion about race, societal issues, and about how the teachers, administrators and parents sitting together at those meetings could better work toward achieving the very finest education for every Holmes School student.

So it was with some concern and surprise that we recently began to hear that there could possibly exist some fear of discussion of race in some of our schools, and even that racial issues might somehow be undermining some students’ education. We would like to share that our experience during the last six months has shown that honest,
open discussion is not only possible but is actively encouraged within District 97. As part of the Holmes SLT efforts, no fewer than seven lengthy discussions on race have taken place during that period. Four were during School Leadership Team (SLT) trainings and involved facilitated sharing of perspectives between all of the SLT participants. These talks were unique, enlightening, and most often exhilarating.

The three other meetings were publicized and were open to the public. The most recent, and most successful one, occurred on
March 3. Holmes Principal Laurel Muhammad hosted the first in a series of her “Community Conversations” on the topic of diversity and race. Childcare and food were available, and more than forty parents, teachers, administrators, and school board candidates attended. For more than two hours, Principal Muhammad moderated a discussion using questions that had been previously submitted by Holmes parents. Participants took the risk to communicate openly
and honestly. There were many emotional moments as different perspectives were shared. The level of mutual respect and the
genuine willingness of all of those present to listen to what each speaker had to say were remarkable. Many of the participants spoke at length of matters that were of grave significance to them, and the evening's spirit of conciliation and healing served to make everyone’s contributions measurably more meaningful.

There is therefore ample precedent for open discussions on topics of race and racism, without fear, without being silently hurt or even stilled by unspoken obstacles. We are encouraged that parents, teachers, administrators and staff continue to be committed to embracing discussion of issues that require us all to put our minds
and hearts together for the betterment of our schools and the academic success of our students. We feel strongly that what is happening at Holmes, if it is not happening elsewhere in the District, can easily occur utilizing the model we have created.

We believe in our schools and in our community and that both are fully capable of tackling these difficult but important issues. We hope that those who claim that such discussions are not possible would
take another look and join us – and others – that are meeting these challenges head-on. We have found that with a willingness to move beyond our differences and to seek common ground, we can overcome what some might feel are insurmountable obstacles. But that is what makes Oak Park what it is: we are people that have deliberately chosen to come together to make real a dream. After almost half a decade, we still pursue in Oak Park a vision of persons of disparate race, ethnicity and income living together peacefully, so that our children may benefit from our village’s unique humanity.
We must not forget these truths. We must not get sidetracked. We must continue to persevere, for when we look at our joyful children of diverse backgrounds playing together on the nearest school playground, we know that our dream of diversity can still be made real.

Michelle Harton and Bob Walsh
Oak Park Elementary School District 97
Board of Education Members

---

Dear Editor: I am writing today in full support of the candidacy of Vic Guarino for election to the Elementary School Board of District 97 here in Oak Park.

I have known Vic for more than thirty years, having grown near him in St. Giles Parish. His mother even claims that there was an occasion when I was looking after Vic and his sisters one evening, when I may have placed them in the basement of their home until they behaved more appropriately. I don’t remember this incident, but if it is true, it evidently had the desired effect, as Vic is now in every way a model citizen and father.

In all seriousness, I know Vic to be a person who has the career experience, the familiarity with critical school issues such as the achievement gap, financial management and student discipline, and the personal dedication to make a well-rounded and responsible Board member. He understands that recent Board moves to increase bilateral communication like the Town Hall meetings at many of the District’s schools were an important effort. He has emphasized the importance of reaching out to all parents to seek their involvement in their childrens’ learning, and in particular he co-founded a highly successful program at Irving School to foster such outreach to African American parents.

This effort and others are intended the narrow the achievement gap in District 97, and Vic has made the depth and breadth of his knowledge on this issue clear during the campaign. He has also called for a reconstituted Finance Task Force, so that the same kind of financial experts who looked closely at District 97’s financial status three years ago can update that analysis and help the Board and the Administration to chart an accurate and responsible economic course in the coming years. Vic has additionally stated that welcoming and supporting incoming Superintendent Dr. Connie Collins, particularly as she puts into place new systems by which she may increase the level of accountability within the District, will be a priority for him should he gain election to the Board.

For all of these reasons, and more too numerous to detail, I ask that you use one of your three votes to elect Vic Guarino to the Oak Park Elementary School District 97 School Board on April 5.

Sincerely, Bob Walsh

---

Why the Tuesday April 5th election is so important….

Your participation in the village elections on April 5 will chart a future course for our schools, parks, library and village with consequences far beyond the terms of those you want to elect.  What makes this election so important?  Why should you be motivated to vote?  Why should you participate?  Because you need the slate of Oak Park First candidates to win.  They are the people committed to building upon the already extraordinarily high level of satisfaction Oak Parkers have with their quality of life here.

I feel honored and privileged to be a current Trustee on the Village Board.  I’ve received so many expressions of the hopes and dreams residents have for the community.  Most Oak Parkers are clearly focused on ensuring a better tomorrow for ourselves and for those to come.  I know that serving Oak Park requires me to understand all sides of an issue, and to work effectively with people of differing opinions and philosophy of government.  I’ve worked with colleagues who were supported by the Village Manager Association and with those who were not – but the goals and objectives remain.

 

<>I’ve learned that hope and optimism with a focus on the future is what this election should be about. And that is why the 2005 election is critical. For if we were to listen only to some whom attend Village Board meetings or write letters to the editor, we might begin to believe that Oak Park is on the decline. We might begin to believe that our schools are not meeting high standards. We might even begin to believe Oak Park isn’t the community we thought it was.  But don’t you believe it.

  <>Consider these impressive features of our village that some critics don’t want you to know:
 

§  Sound Village finances and solid bond ratings.

§  Record breaking investment in the business and residential communities. Zip code 60302 has the fastest appreciation in home values in the Chicagoland area.

§  Strong inter-governmental cooperation between taxing bodies.

§  Recent expansion of joint purchasing and service delivery with neighboring communities.

§  Retention and expansion of key businesses.

§  Unparalleled quality standards in public safety and emergency services.

§  And much, much more.

 

But still, we hear and read about discord and divisiveness.  Consider the source of these accusations.  What’s the political agenda here?  Why foster discord rather than promote discourse?  What’s to gain by casting your vote for candidates who refuse to acknowledge good news? Yes, we can and should acknowledge our challenges, but we need to meet those challenges head on within a spirit and framework of teamwork and cooperation.

 

Here’s a classic example of the reality editing the opposition does: the scientifically valid 2004 Oak Park citizen’s survey tells us Oak Park is meeting and exceeding residents’ expectation.  When compared to other communities in the Chicagoland region, Oak Park was ranked #1 as a place to raise children, #2 with neighborhoods as a great place to live and #3 in overall quality of life. YET, some of our opponents derisively refer to it as “the happy talk survey.” They are displeased to learn people are
pleased.

The progress VMA endorsed majority boards have made is due in large measure to the fact that VMA candidates are not beholden to any special interest group. They are independent thinkers who
strive for the common good. The Oak Park First slate follows in this tradition.

A vote for the entire Oak Park First (OPF) slate – Diana Carpenter - President, Sandra Sokol - Clerk, Ray Barbosa, Dorothy Reid,
and Mas Takiguchi – Trustee Candidates is a vote for: continued support for appropriate, positive economic development opportunities for an expanded tax base, strong public safety and services, neighborhood police stations, exceptional fire and EMS services, and continued low crime rates.  The OPF slate commits
to working within a framework of respect and civility towards our citizens, elected officials, volunteers, and skilled Village staff.  The slate’s vision includes achieving even greater efficiency and effectiveness in the delivery of Village services, and physically reuniting our community with a Cap over the IKE.

If you elect the OPF candidates, you can be confident they will work with the entire board to set new and innovative goals.

Don’t make choices on Tuesday April 5^th based on what people tell you to be afraid of.  Choose the candidates who share your optimism and confidence in Oak Park’s future.  Choose the candidates who can lead in a way that provides a greater return for all of us.

<>I’m convinced the right choice is Carpenter, Sokol, Barbosa, Reid and Takiguchi, so join me in putting “Oak Park First” on April 5^th. Visit www.OakParkFirst.org to learn more. 

Ray Johnson Oak Park Village Trustee

---

March 12, 2005

I’ve never been a frequent letter writer to the papers, but this is a
note that I would be writing even if I weren’t a Village Trustee or a candidate for Village President. 

I want to encourage you to support the Park District referendum on April 5th.  The Park District has been underfunded for decades, with no levy increase since I was growing up here in Oak Park.  This has resulted in the deterioration of fields and rec centers, and has negatively impacted Park District programming. 

Park District properties and programs are shared resources that are specifically designed to serve the needs of literally every person in
this community.  They exist to serve children, teens, adults, and seniors alike.  Such offerings include active sports activities, like softball, tennis, and swimming.  But they also include community center programming like children’s summer camps, as well as social, cultural and fitness programming for people from age 1 to 100.

These offerings support informal recreation, providing places to walk, sit, gather, play, and just be.  At the same time they support the work of other very important organizations in our community that offer structured recreational opportunities, including Oak Park Youth Baseball/Softball, the Windmills, Strikers, AYSO, and others.

Will there be a financial impact to the average taxpayer from the proposed 25-cent levy increase?  Yes.  Will it be dramatic?  No. 
Can the impact be minimized through effective coordination between the Park District and the Village?  Absolutely.  Are their other places to find efficiencies that can help to offset the financial impact to taxpayers?  I believe that there are.  Will we do this?  I hope so.

Over the past decade or more, some significant mistakes have been made on all sides.  The issue today, however, should not be recriminations for past missteps, but rather how we can ensure that we have facilities and programming that meet our community’s current and future needs, while ensuring financial responsibility.  Passage of the Park District referendum is an important and overdue step along this path.  I hope that we can all take this step together.

David Pope

---

March 12, 2005

 Respectfully,      
   
    When Bush signs the legislation transferring
    class-action lawsuits to Federal Court,
    he will have taken another freedom from us.
    A truly free society can sue anybody, anytime:
    We're free.  That's the sign of a truly free
    society.  Now, we're no longer free, working people    
    can no longer ban together to fight these
    heartless, greedy corporations.
   
    Now our suits must be transferred to the
    business-friendly Federal Court.  This is
    another example of why working people must
    fight for populist appointments to the federal
    bench.
   
    Next Bush wants to protect doctors and the
    pharmaceutical industry from lawsuits.  He
    also wants to limit recovery in asbestos suits.
   
    Tax cuts for the rich, billions for the invasion
    of Iraq, universal health coverage for Israel and
    Iraq paid for by the American taxpayer. 
                                                          
    For middle-class working Americans Bush gives us
    cuts in social security, cuts in block grants to
    our neediest cities, cuts in education funding,
    and now he is considering raising taxes on
    workers to pay for the soft-handed, idle rich.
   
    These people are fascists in republican clothing.
    Pray for our country.
   
    Jim Kane'ala

---

March 12, 2005

To: Editor, The Oak Park Journal

            Like many Oak Parkers (I have lived here since 1988), I have generally supported the VMA.  However, based on my experience serving on the Plan Commission from 1995 to 2002 (and chairing it for the last two years and nine months of that term), and my subsequent experience as a member of the Save Our Retail Coalition (SORC), which fought for the inclusion of meaningful retail space in the development at Ridgeland and South, I have concluded, sadly, that the VMA is increasingly out of touch with citizens, increasingly ham-handed and insensitive to citizens’ concerns, and increasingly bereft of ideas.  Incidentally, I am not, and never have been, a member of the VCA, REDCOOP, HOCA, or the Green Party, the bogeymen whom the VMA attacks as part of the conspiracy to deprive the VMA of its ownership of village hall.

            This time, I am supporting the New Leadership Party (NLP) and its candidates: Bob Milstein for village president; Geoff Baker, Martha Brock, and Greg Marsey for village trustees; and Sharon Patchak-Layman for village clerk.  Each of them is an involved, proactive citizen.  Collectively, they have been involved in everything from elective office in the village, to village boards and commissions, neighborhood development groups, environmental issues, schools, and churches.  They have given generously of their time in the past, and have committed to do so in the future if they are elected.  Please visit the NLP website at www.NewLeadershipParty.org to learn
more about them, and of course attend the village forums where you can meet them and ask them questions.  They deserve your support.

            I can attest to the openness of the 10-week process last autumn that selected the NLP slate.  I was the facilitator for that process, with over 100 people from across the village participating.  Invitations were extended to all, and an enormous effort was made to make everyone in the village aware that they could participate.  Indeed, several VMA representatives even attended the first meeting in October.  They were not disinvited, but apparently chose not to return.  In December, 65 people, having stuck with the process, were entitled to vote, and did vote, to select the slate.  This was not the work of some small conspiracy, but of a wide tent.

            The NLP is based on a simple proposition.  After more than 50 years of one-party, VMA-dominated government, it is time to bring Oak Park new leadership that respects and will implement ideals that enjoy near-universal acceptance in our community.  Those ideals include open government, respect for and encouragement of citizen involvement, continued efforts at sustaining diversity and supporting open housing, the support of our schools, parks, and social services, the cherishing of our architectural heritage, support for local businesses as opposed to retail chains, and careful stewardship of our tax dollars, rather than giveaways to national developers.  (The NLP is not against development.  It is for better development, at less cost to the taxpayer.)  The NLP is open to new ideas from every quarter on how to implement these ideals.

            One thing that I learned on the Plan Commission is that citizens have important, useful, productive ideas.  I participated in numerous Plan Commission hearings on planned developments, for projects large and small, and one thing is certain: every single one of those projects was improved, usually significantly, because of citizen involvement in the hearing process.  It is naive to think that at the outset of the planned development process the developer comes in with his best shot.  (My day job is that of attorney.  My clients are businesses, so I do not dislike people who help improve our economic life.)  In this context, it takes the input of citizens to make the project better.  Good developers are able to help the process go more smoothly.

            The current village board, in approving the Whiteco project, praised it for being an improvement over the original proposal unveiled three years ago.  On that, everyone agrees.  What is generally overlooked, however, is that it didn’t get that way without tremendous effort on the part of citizens (for which I cannot take credit). 

            Whatever one thinks about the merits of Whiteco (in my view it received a far greater public subsidy than could be justified),
it is fairly clear to me that the village itself is responsible for the prolonged debate that the project generated.  The village was particularly clumsy in its role as co-applicant.  In that role, it treated those who sought to modify the project as enemies, rather than as citizens whose contributions to the discussion merited a serious hearing.  This was the work of a VMA-slated board of trustees.  
Bob Milstein, joined by outgoing trustee Galen Gockel, opposed the project for its exhorbitant public subsidies to the developer.

            The NLP is committed to open planning and citizen participation.  However, its platform goes far beyond those issues.  To learn more, please check the NLP website, drop by the campaign office, or attend the many forums, debates, and coffees at which its candidates will be appearing.  I have focused on citizen input in this letter because it is an area where I felt I could contribute to the discussion.

            A word on the race for village president.  To date, the VMA, bereft of ideas or of anything to say on behalf of its own candidates, has mounted ad hominem attacks on Bob Milstein, rather than addressing his record.  The truth is that Bob Milstein has been an able, indefatigable, and fearless trustee for the past two years, not to mention an involved, committed citizen for many years.  (For those who may not know, he was this newspaper’s Villager of the Year in 2003.)  His many contributions are beyond the scope of this letter.  He has worked with the majority of the board on most issues that have required action, including most of the economic development activities of the board.  But he has spoken out, in a way that no one else on the board has done, when what was needed was someone to ask hard questions or to vote against an unwise project.  He is both
a leader and a listener.  He is the best of the three candidates for president.

            There are no bad people running for village offices.  All are well-meaning, and the rest of us should be grateful that there are people like them willing to take on the thankless task of village government.  But still, we must choose those who will do the best job.  I believe that that will be Bob Milstein, Geoff Baker, Martha Brock, Greg Marsey, and Sharon Patchak-Layman, and I urge you
to vote for them on April 5.

            Michael Williams

          

---

February 4, 2005

Bob Milstein: A Character with Character

I've gotten to know Bob Milstein over the past few months, and I
want to tell you about the guy I know.     Bob takes a lot of hits
because he is a character: one of those people who has a personality that is neither bland nor complacent, and who speaks up when
he sees things that don't make sense.  He's also very funny, and if
he ever leaves public service he could start a second career as a comedian. 

But most important to the April 5 Village Board election, is that I've witnessed in Bob the dedication and caring that is so rare in our
public servants.  Bob will fight for what he believes in, and yet
Bob actually listens to concerned citizens and tries to understand
their point of view.  This is a concept so rarely seen  among the members of our current arrogant Village Board majority that it deserves to be  recognized.  Finally, Bob is someone who is
always on the right side: on the side of protecting Oak Park's
historic character and against cozy no-bid deals with developers;
on the side of affordable housing and against overpricing our community and killing the diversity we prize; on the side of supporting our small, home-grown businesses and against
wasteful tax subsidies to rich corporations and franchises.

Bob is concerned, as I am,  that Oak Park is on the verge of
losing its special character.  So I urge you to vote on April 5 for
Bob Milstein for President of the Village Board, and for the entire NLP slate: Geoff Baker, Martha Brock and Greg Marsey for Trustee,  and Sharon Patchhak-Layman for Clerk.

Carol Gulyas, Oak Park

---

February 4, 2005

Have you driven the streets lately? Have you hit a pothole? Have
we become the pothole capital of Illinois? Have you seen the downtown plan to demolish 22 “historic buildings”? Have you watched the majority of the Board give more than $10 million
dollars to one developer to build a high-rise apartment for the
affluent? Have you seen your tax bill? Have you watched
Channel 6 when the President cuts citizens off in mid sentence?

Have you seen the report that wants to knock down the Pancake House at Forest and Lake? Have you seen the report that wants
the Westgate Tudor building’s  to be bulldozed for a Street? Have you imagined the loss of Marion Street Mall to cars? Have you wondered who is really benefiting from the four year Whiteco
fiasco? 

When you elect the New Leadership Party candidates: Bob
Milstein (President), Martha Brock, Geoff Baker, Greg Marsey (Trustees) and Sharon Patchak Layman (Clerk), you will have accountable, transparent and open government that respects its citizens.

With the New Leadership Party you will have leaders that repair
the streets and that refuse to give money away. Under the NLP, citizens will get information from the Clerk quickly and within the required legal time frames. With the New Leadership Party
businesses will be treated fairly, openly and with respect. With
the NLP all business districts will get economic attention. With
the NLP our partner agency the Oak Park Development
Corporation, will be involved as a major player in the development
of all of Oak Park.

Vote April 5 for the New Leadership Party candidates:
Bob Milstein (President), Martha Brock, Geoff Baker,
Greg Marsey Trustees) and Sharon Patchak Layman (Clerk)

Karen Ard, Oak Park, IL 60302

---

New Leadership Party Slate Supports Park District Referendum

Over the next 10 years, Oak Park will be faced with exciting challenges.   Responding to these challenges will require a balance of creativity and pragmatism.  Whether the issue is balancing the imperative for economic growth with the importance of historic architecture; or balancing the necessity for openness in a citizen driven government with the need to make timely and difficult decisions in the interest of all citizens, your Village board has to think and act deliberately, but with respect.

As a voter, you will face one of these critical balancing decisions in the April 5th election.  The Park District is placing a referendum on the ballot that requests additional funding for the Parks of approximately $2.9 million.  The New Leadership Party (NLP) slate sees the Park’s request as a balancing decision between the funding challenges faced by the institutions that serve us, like schools, or in this case the parks, with the capacity of Oak Parkers to financially support those needs. 

After careful consideration, weighing the needs of the Park District against the capacity of citizens to support those needs, the NLP slate is in full support of the Board of Park Commissioners’ unanimous decision to authorize the referendum seeking voter approval to collect an additional $2.9 million annually commencing
in 2006.   As candidates, we want you to understand our thinking on this issue as it will give you a sense of how we will make decisions once elected.

The Park District needs these funds to execute a five-year capital plan that will renew Park facilities in every neighborhood.  In addition to these needs, the Park District would also like to, over time, eliminate the need to take funding support (approximately $1.6 million dollars per year) that comes from the Village of Oak Park.

As a slate, we do not take a decision that involves asking voters for more money lightly.  We considered a number of factors before arriving at this decision.

   1.
The Parks have not sought additional funds from voters in 35 years.  That’s a long time to go without an increase. We think that’s a reflection of excellent financial management and judgment.

   2.
As a percentage of total tax collected, the portion collected on behalf of Parks in Oak Park is 2%.  In Forest Park, they spend 7%.  River Forest spends 5%. 
Even Berwyn spends 3%.  We think kids in Oak Park deserve no less than their neighbors. 

   3.
A joint committee appointed by the Park District of Oak Park and the Village of Oak Park called the Park District Citizen Committee (PDCC) recommended the capital plan and its funding.  We think citizens who care are an excellent source
of good ideas. 

   4.
Over half of the funding requested in the referendum (approximately $1.6 million dollars) is meant to replace funding currently provided by the Village.  That means we can cut the impact in half by simply directing the Village staff to reduce
its levy by the same $1.6 million.  If elected, the NLP is committed to this reduction in conformance with the Park District plan.

Balancing the numeric concerns is extremely important.  But the NLP slate is also concerned about quality of life issues in Oak Park.  Quality schools, quality parks, diverse community, and growth opportunities for business are what make this Village a great place to live.  The five-year capital plan proposed by the Park
Board represents these values which are also embodied in the NLP platform.

These points taken together, in our view, strike the proper balance between need and the capacity to pay.  The Parks have managed their money well, and they are planning carefully for the future of our Village.  If the NLP is elected to a majority
of the board, we can reduce the impact of the increase substantially by making reductions in the Village budget and still get all of the benefits.  From improvements in infrastructure to the critical after school programs for children, the NLP slate wants to see the Park District funded to meet its goals.

We think you’ll agree with us and we ask that you vote for the NLP slate on April 5th

Robert Milstein, NLP candidate for Village President
Sharon Patchak-Layman, NLP candidate for Village Clerk
Geoff Baker, NLP candidate for Village Trustee
Martha Brock, NLP candidate for Village Trustee
Greg Marsey, NLP candidate for Village Trustee

Letters on the Proposed Smoking Ban in Oak Park,
February 3, 2005

---

Is it a game or an audition?
  I wrote the following almost a year ago, but didn’t send it, thinking I was over-reacting. At the end of this you’ll see I wasn’t.
 

      SPRING, 2004—This isn’t softball. It’s not even a game. It’s an audition. Oak Park Girls Junior Bronco and Bronco softball exists to groom pitchers for Huskies and Windmills—the elite Oak Park-based travel teams. Great for the Huskies and Windmills. Unbearable for most of the girls playing in the “house” leagues. The ball is seldom put in play. True, it’s difficult watching boys try to master baseball at this level, but not excruciating.

      Here’s what happens in the girls’ games; the pitcher, remember we’re talking 8 to 12-year olds, fires the ball as fast as she possibly can toward home. I used the word “toward” loosely. It’s more like “in the general direction of.” It’s a feat if the ball sails within 3 yards of the strike zone. So, the batter walks. And the next batter walks. And the next batter walks. And the next batter walks... Catch my drift? After seven walks (there’s a four run per inning limit which has unintended consequences, but that’s another letter) the teams switch sides. Why, I’m not sure. The only players that need to go out in the field are the pitcher and catcher. The position players aren’t going to see any action. Oh, I take that back. With all those walks, there’s a lot of stealing. Not much ‘caught stealing’ since 10-year old catchers aren’t normally equipped with 12 foot wing spans to nab the errant pitches.

      Sometimes you get a youngster who throws hard and does find the strike zone. Well, the batter is so unaccustomed to seeing this ‘missile’ actually zoom over the plate, winning the next American Idol is more likely than her bat actually making contact with the ball. She strikes out. And the next batter strikes out. And the next batter strikes out.

      Every once in a while a youngster is put in to pitch (maybe she hasn’t heard of Huskies or Windmills) who actually tries to throw the ball over the plate. What a concept! How does she accomplish this? By not trying to throw at the speed of light. The batter swings. It’s a sharp grounder up the middle. The shortstop’s eyes bulge. She’s confounded. “Why is the catcher throwing down to second, no one’s stealing? Wait! The ball is actually coming… OFF THE BAT!” She scoots to her left, stretches her glove hand out. The ball finds the pocket, but only for an instant. The shortstop scrambles to find a grip. Fires to first and gets the batter out by a half step. That’s baseball!

      This is not a slam at the Huskies or Windmills. It’s a plea to have those elite travel teams be what they are, and the “house” leagues be what they are—games—a fun way to pass the time. Get all the players into the game. They learn to run, hit, throw and catch, not just walk. And the parents actually watch!
 

Jump to January, 2005— The inevitable has happened. My daughter and one of her best friends, both 12, are not signing up for softball this year. It’s too boring. They’re playing spring soccer. You could take this as the rant from a Dad whose daughter wasn’t cut out for softball. My daughter and her friend have played baseball since before they could walk. They are good athletes. They’ll be on the soccer fields this spring, just as they play basketball now and floor hockey and flag football during those seasons. They get a chance to compete in those sports, rather than suffer through endless pitching auditions.

 
Sincerely,
Bill Grimes       Oak Park

---

December 3, 2004
West Suburban Hospital Complaint

I received a letter from my doctor’s office today stating that
they had made a decision to change their affiliation to provide care for managed care patients from West Suburban Health Providers to Rush Health Associates.  As a patient of the practice, this means that any lab tests, X-rays or hospitalizations I will need in the future will be provided out
of Rush University Medical Center and the Rush Oak Park Hospital network, not at West Suburban Medical Center (WSMC).  My physician is not the first doctor to separate from WSMC since Resurrection Health Care (RHC) took over the hospital earlier this year. As a taxpayer in Oak Park, this concerns me very much. The religious restrictions of RHC in addition to the high cost of malpractice insurance are fuelling the pressure for doctors to leave our area. 

RHC imposes their catholic beliefs upon employees and patients by means of hospital policies, insurance plan choices and services provided.  RHC limits fundamental services available to men and women and is having a dramatic effect
on the freedom of individuals to make their own health care decisions.  Patient safety is also being jeopardized.  Patients are being turned away from the Emergency Room at WSMC because the catholic faith does not agree with the individual’s personal decision or with the physician’s treatment method.  Personal medical choices without condemnation should be available at WSMC as a matter of rights.  Patients do not need a lecture on abortion when a tubal ligation is what the doctor ordered.  Patients should not be sent out of the ER while in pain and “shipped” in a cab to another hospital where the procedure can be performed.  At least then it is done without the guilt of the Resurrection experience.   

WSMC is experiencing a decline in the number of admissions and outpatient services.  As physicians begin to pull out and
go to other health care facilities that will provide the care their patients need, regardless of their faith, there will be even fewer services and doctors available at WSMC.   

Hospitals should not be in the “business” of making moral choices for people.   I see this as a red flag, something that
the diversified community of Oak Park should be defending.  This is not the type of treatment that our community members deserve.  It does not respect the diversity of our community. 

In the 20 years I have been coming to WSMC, I have never seen the morale as low as it is now.  I wish somebody would wake up and do something about the situation. A wrong decision was made when the Village of Oak Park condoned
the merger of WSMC and RHC without even as much as getting a Certificate of Need (CON Application) to review. 
Oak Park and the surrounding communities are just beginning to see the tip of the iceberg of the changes being made by RHC.  Please consider the prototype that is being given precedence for our community’s future direction.
 
Oak Park Resident

---

November 20, 2004

LETTER TO THE EDITOR

On this Thanksgiving, Trustees Galen Gockel and Bob Milstein deserve a sincere “thank you” from the citizens of Oak Park for their courageous vote last Monday against an $8.6 million dollar subsidy for a 14 story, 200 unit apartment building to be built at the southeast corner of Harlem and Ontario (the “Whiteco” project).  They are the only two trustees who took the time to look
behind the numbers provided by the Village staff and the developer to analyze whether this huge subsidy is warranted for the public interest.  They concluded that this amount exceeds any benefit that we may reasonably expect from this development,
and their arguments were persuasive.  Trustee Gockel was particularly credible having served as Oak Park’s township assessor for many years before becoming a trustee.

This was actually the second vote against this project by Trustees Gockel and Milstein.  Nearly two years ago, they exhibited the same courage when President Trapani called a surprise, Monday morning meeting -without public notice -  for the sole purpose of voting to revive the project which was voted down by the Plan Commission after 48 hours of public hearings.  Thank you,
Trustee Milstein, for notifying citizens of this meeting and insisting that they be allowed their 3 minute  comment period when President Trapani, surprised by public attendance, stated public comment was not appropriate.  It was a shameful moment in Oak Park’s history of “good government” and President Trapani should have resigned.  At this meeting,  Trustees Gockel and Milstein supported the vote of the Citizens Plan Commission and argued that the Village should issue a meaningful Request for Proposal in order to be able to compare the Whiteco project against the benefits of other potential developments.  The
majority of the Village trustees, however, have consistently refused to take this reasonable measure and exercise their
elected duty of fiscal responsibility.  Trustee Pope’s vote was particularly disappointing as he had voted against the poject a
few months earlier as a Plan Commission member, having
argued there against the poor economics of the deal. 

We should all ask why the Village has strapped itself to this one project for 4 years (including nearly a year of secret negotiations before the story was leaked to the press).   While Whiteco has waited in the wings - knowing a good deal when they smell one - our Village Board has exhibited no shame in dragging the public through this circus of endless meetings, so-called open-
planning sessions, etc., knowing fully well that they made up their minds 4 years ago without public involvement, and are now only interested in creating the appearance of public input.  They have even managed to portray these citizens as the unreasonable
ones though they have argued consistently for appropriate
development without excessive subsidies.

There are additional reasons why Whiteco should have been rejected on its economic merits.  The proposed $8.6 million
dollar subsidy (which will likely get higher) represents more than one year of tax revenues generated by the downtown TIF being handed over to a developer for a private project.  This is money
that should be spent on public improvements to benefit all of Lake St.  The TIF has now been in effect for 21 years and the recent Crandall Arambula study found our downtown to be only “FAIR” in appearance.  We should be outraged by this  - 21 years of spending TIF dollars and downtown is rated FAIR.  Why is
this so?  Because the past 3-8 years, the Village has been squandering  TIF dollars by buying up “historic” properties at inflated prices with the intent to sell them on the cheap to private developers who will tear them down . The Village recently paid $1.9 million for the 80 year old Hoppe condo building north of the Borders and will convey it to Whitco for yes, you guessed -NOTHING. 

Our current Village Manager restructured staff to eliminate the parallel positions of Economic Development Coordinator and Village Planner to create a Development Services dept. which trumps planning and acts like a real estate developer.  Real
estate development has taken the place of Economic Development.  I know of no other municipality that operates this way.  Forest Park did not upgrade its downtown Madison St. by focusing on real estate development.  It was successful because
it understood that when you have a good mix of retail , people
will come.  The quality of the stores are vital for success, not the
numbrer of nearby high rise apartment projects.  The Avenue-
Lake area is successful without highrise apartments. Shoppers will not be attracted to Lake St. because of a new apartment building; they will be attracted by a mix of quality stores.  And attracting good stores is a marketing effort, not a real estate
development effort that serves a few property owners at the expense of the majority. 

When I hear my fellow citizens talk so excitedly of a Trader Jo’s at this location, I am stunned.  Trader Jo’s which is a “destination” retail operation that draws from a wide region (we all drive to LaGrange, right?) is more appropriate for a less congested commercial area like Madison St. or Roosevelt Rd. 

You will most likely not decide to walk - through the most massive parking structure in town - to the Paper Source or Barbara’s after packing your frozen food purchases in the car.  No evidence has been furnished that a Trader Jo’s at  this location will enhance the retail mix in downtown.  New projects are supposed to support the existing businesses.

Most amazingly, the Village now wants to extend the DTOP another 12 years, making it nearly a 50 year TIF when it terminates in 2018.   The question that the Village did not ask the Planners to study was an important one:  If the TIF terminates at the end of 2006 as originally planned, how much additional revenue will be generated and what kinds of public improvements can be made with that money to beautify our downtown and attract quality retail.   Without this information, how will the trustees evaluate the merits of extending the TIF? 

If it is the current Board that makes the decision,  they will not worry much about the merits. 

In the next few weeks, the Village will hold the annual Joint TIF Review Board meeting.  They typically schedule this late in the year at a time inconvenient to the public (Thank you, Trustee Milstein, for requesting that it be rescheduled last year from Christmas Eve day)  so that not too many questions get
asked.  If you want your tax dollars used for projects that benefit the public interest,  come to this meeting and ask some tough questions about how our TIF dollars are currently being spent. 

Kathryn Jonas
Oak Park , 60302

---

November 21, 2004

Greetings, President Trapani,