Editor’s note: This Reader Forum article was written and submitted by Gene Salvadalena, Director of Leadership Development for The Charmm’d Foundation, which provides resources on leadership development for adults. It represents the writer’s opinions and not necessarily those of GazeboNews. We encourage you to respond to this, but please include your full name per the GazeboNews comments policy on Reader Forums.

By Gene Salvadalena, Director of Leadership Development for the The Charmm’d Foundation

I’ve been doing a lot of thinking lately about the recent developments at Penn State University, the terrible allegations of abuse to young boys, the serious questions around actions and maybe more importantly inactions amongst the university’s leadership, the effect on this institution’s brand now and in the future, and where I’d like to spend some time reflecting on, the decision making process of the leaders involved and implications for all leaders. I’m calling this the “Ethics of Leadership”.

The Penn State University Board of Trustees had to make some extremely difficult decisions, in a short period of time, and with not all facts out on the table. I listened intently to the press coverage of the Board explaining their decisions that immediately affected the top echelon of school leadership, with longer term implications for the school, the community, and beyond. This caused me to think about; how do leaders make tough leadership level decisions, how ethics are thought about in those situations, who they consider when making their choices, and how do they deal with the repercussions of their judgments.

I had always thought of this institution of higher learning as having a culture of strong ethics. I really don’t know what to think of that now, given what has been uncovered so far and I’m sure, unfortunately, what will come in the days ahead as the story continues to unravel. In my heart I have to believe that most of these men involved are good men, who know right from wrong. What has happened here? How will their actions and inactions affect everyone moving forward?

Here are some of the compelling leadership questions that I’ve been reflecting on given this terrible situation;

o Should true leaders only follow the letter of the law, or do they also need to follow the [...]

Editor’s note: This Reader Forum article was written and submitted by Jane Partridge, co-president of the Lake Forest-Lake Bluff League of Women Voters. It represents the writer’s opinions and not necessarily those of GazeboNews. We encourage you to respond to this, but please include your full name per the GazeboNews comments policy on Reader Forums.

By Jane Partridge, Co-President
League of Women Voters – Lake Forest/Lake Bluff Area

Contract negotiations between High School District 115 and the Lake Forest Education Association have become very public news in the past week. Teachers are picketing in front of the school, both sides have sent letters to school families, and articles have been appearing in the newspapers and blogs. In some circles tempers are high and discussion is reaching a fever pitch.

The League of Women Voters – Lake Forest/Lake Bluff Area welcomes a broad discussion about the high school teachers’ contract. One of the principles of the League of Women Voters is that democratic government depends upon the informed and active participation of its citizens. But active participation does not mean outshouting someone else. It doesn’t do any good when discussions degenerate into name-calling and facts are twisted. To help in reaching the best results, public discourse should remain civil. To that end:

Be objective. If a claim sounds too outrageous to be true, it probably isn’t true. A lot of assertions start with a grain of truth and then get blown up to astounding proportions. Make sure you know the whole story before passing a claim along. One way to do this is to go to the source. If you have heard that a particular person or group has done some egregious thing, ask them directly for their side of the story. They’ll probably thank you.

Look for unbiased sources of information when you evaluate the things you’re hearing. Even if both parties in a dispute believe they’re telling the absolute truth, they can’t help but put their own spin on it. If you can’t find a truly unbiased source, then at least look at the information being put out by both sides before drawing conclusions.

Avoid hostility. Don’t write anonymous letters which only serve to indulge their writers in a level of incivility they presumably wouldn’t stoop to in a face-to-face encounter. If you believe in something, and [...]

Editor’s note: This Reader Forum article was written and submitted by Abigail G. Fassnacht, a former Second Ward alderman in Lake Forest. It represents the writer’s opinions and not necessarily those of GazeboNews. We encourage you to respond to this, but please include your full name, per the GazeboNews Reader Forum comments policy.

November 6, 2011
To: GazeboNews
Re: Old Main: a cadaverous hulk dressed in protective cyclone fencing.

Let’s examine the history of Lake Forest, founded to create three educational institutions; Lake Forest College, Ferry Hall and Lake Forest Academy. Since then fine public schools have been broadly supported as the religious and parochial schools have thrived. Education is at the heart of our cultural history. Further we all recognize that without these healthy educational institutions the economic value of our real estate would soon wither.

The objective of preservation law is to maintain ongoing, lively references to our history. Architectural record has small merit without recognition of the uses and examination of ultimate reuses of our built environment.

The question before city council is not whether or not removing a building from the historic area would threaten the underlying ordinance. It will not. Judicious, considered application of the protective historic areas must meet the cultural goals of our community, in this case to strengthen an educational institution: Woodlands Academy.

Both elected and appointed officials serve us well when they weigh all facets of issues thoughtfully, bringing their own educations, life experiences, judgment and analysis to each issue put before them. Rigid universal application of old decisions to current problems becomes simply arbitrary. Ultimately this fails to strengthen our efforts to preserve our cultural history.

I have no connections with either Barat College or Woodlands Academy but am a neighbor to this blighted property.

I urge Mayor Cowhey and members of city council to vote to remove Old Main from the historic preservation district. This vote makes economic sense. This strengthens a fine educational institution. This enhances the neighborhood.

Thank you;

Abbie Fassnacht, Former Second Ward Alderman

Editor’s note: This Reader Forum article was written as a letter to the Lake County Board and was submitted to GazeboNews by its author, Mary Mathews of the Lake County League of Women Voters. It represents the writer’s opinion and not necessarily those of GazeboNews. We encourage you to comment and respond to this but please include your full name. Click here to read the GazeboNews comments and Reader Forum policies.

By Mary Mathews, League of Women Voters-Lake County

Lake County Board Members and Reapportionment Committee:

On a national, state, and local level, the League of Women Voters considers the redistricting process of paramount importance and one critical to democracy.

The League of Women Voters of Lake County was pleased with the Lake County Board’s outreach to it and two other organizations: NAACP and MALDEF. However, given the impact that the results of this process will have over the next 10 years, we are disappointed with the Board’s attempt to make their work transparent.

We encourage the Committee to engage in: more outreach, more communication with the public, and providing more opportunity for public input into the process.

There is very little redistricting information on the County’s web site. Considering its importance, the Committee’s redistricting work should be more visible and prominent on the web site and include regular status reports and notice of upcoming meetings. We also suggest newspapers and other media be made aware of your schedule, purpose, and locations of future meetings.

While the demographer and lawyer were introduced at your last meeting, we would like to see more information about them made available to the public. Who are they? Do they have any political connections? The demographer was the same one who drew the maps ten years ago, when the County was sued. What did he learn, what will he do differently? We would like to see more information about the people actively involved in the map drawing.

We were satisfied that the Committee voted to reduce the number of districts to 21. Since 1989 the League of Women Voters of Lake County has supported the idea of fewer districts. There was some implication that as two commissioners were retiring, the reduced number of districts could be easier to draw as their districts will be enclosed with others. This information is irrelevant to the approach the demographer should [...]

Editor’s note: The following was written by Janet Nelson of Lake Bluff and presented at the Lake Bluff District 65 School Board meeting on April 26. GazeboNews is running her presentation as in the Reader Forum with Ms. Nelson’s permission. The article represents the writer’s opinions and not necessarily those of GazeboNews. We encourage you to comment and respond to this article, but please include your full name. Click here to read the GazeboNews comments and Reader Forum policies.

By Janet Nelson of Lake Bluff

I am a great supporter of the Lake Bluff Schools and realize the vital importance of providing the best education possible, delivered by excellent teachers and with good financial practices.

One of the best parts of a democracy is this opportunity to present individual views to an elected body, such as this board, which represents the taxpayers. We defend that right of free speech, and also are able to respectfully disagree with opinions offered.

Last month several speakers came forward with concerns regarding Lake Bluff Elementary School. I may not have agreed with what I was hearing, but I listened both as a retired educator and a property tax payer. I was shocked into action when a Board member stated that it was necessary to address the class size concern immediately because the “Community has spoken”.

I’ve been part of this community for 49 years and thought of the other 80% of the residents – those who pay property taxes but don’t have children in school – you haven’t heard from us, although we were certainly courted when you needed to pass the building referendum!

My husband and I truly enjoy the advantages of living in Lake Bluff and therefore are willing to pay the high property taxes associated with that privilege. School District 65 has the 3rd highest tax rate of any entity in Shields Township and receives 42% of all the property tax dollars collected. The other 58% is divided between all of Lake Bluff’s other taxing bodies – the Village of Lake Bluff, the Public Library, the Park District, the High School, the mosquito abatement people, and all the others.

You, the elected Board members, are the ‘Trustees’ of the School District’s funds. We count on you to be fiscally responsible and [...]

Editor’s note: This Reader Forum article was submitted by the SpeakUp! Coalition of Lake Forest, Lake Bluff and Knollwood. It represent the Coalition’s opinions and not necessarily those of GazeboNews. We encourage you to comment on this, but please include your full name. Click here to read the GazeboNews comments and Reader Forum policies.

The Speak Up! Prevention Coalition of Lake Forest, Lake Bluff and Knollwood urges all residents to reach out to their fellow community members and elected officials to inform them why marijuana is a serious addictive substance and a public health threat.

“We are asking everyone to please contact their state legislators to ask them to vote NO on ANY vote to legalize marijuana for “medical use” or otherwise”, said Betty Frank-Bailey, Executive Director of the Speak Up! Prevention Coalition.

Marijuana is an addictive, illegal drug according to the federal Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA). Further, leading national and state professional organizations oppose “medical” marijuana legislation. Here are some key facts:

• The FDA, the agency responsible for approving medicine, has not found it to be safe or medically effective. Legalizing and decriminalizing marijuana leads to lower perceptions of harm and increased usage among youth.
• Marijuana use is already a prevalent local health issue among our youth.
• Youth in Lake Forest, Lake Bluff, and Knollwood are already at high risk of usage with 56% of seniors reporting that they think there is little or no risk of harming themselves if they smoke marijuana once or twice a week.
• In 2010, 52% of local high school seniors reported that they have tried marijuana and 35% reported using it in the past 30 days (2010 Illinois Youth Survey)
• The Federal Food and Drug Administration, American Medical Association, Illinois State Medical Society, American Cancer Society, American Academy of Pediatrics, National Multiple Sclerosis Society, and American Glaucoma Society all oppose the legalization of “medical” marijuana.

Please help us keep our youth healthy and drug free! Contact your Illinois State Legislators today:

State Senator Susan Garrett: ilsenate29@sbcglobal.net
State Senator Terry Link: senator@link30.org
State Representative Karen May: karen@repkarenmay.org
State Representative Carol Sente: repsente@gmail.com

To find state senators and representatives in other Illinois communities: http://www.elections.il.gov/districtlocator/districtofficialsearchbyaddress.aspx

For additional information visit www.SpeakUpLFLB.com or contact:
Betty Frank-Bailey, Executive Director
Speak Up! Prevention Coalition
400 E. Illinois Road, Lake Forest, IL 60045
(847)295-9075 office, (847)736-3626 cell, frankbaileylead@aol.com

Editor’s note: This Reader Forum article was written and submitted by Walt Nielsen of Lake Forest; it represents the writer’s opinions and not necessarily those of GazeboNews. We encourage you to comment and respond, but please include your full name. Click here to read the GazeboNews comments and Reader Forum policies.

By Walt Nielsen

April 14, 2011

Last night, the City of Lake Forest Plan Commission voted 5-1 to recommend to the City Council that the proposed amendments to Chapter 20A, Inclusionary Zoning, NOT be approved. This action is directly contrary to the petition of the Housing Trust Fund Board, which is aimed at setting up a robust subsidized single-family residence program which includes outsourcing the administration of the program to a City of Highland Park subsidiary.

What is notable about the Plan Commission’s solid rejection is that it was clearly predicated on both specifics within the amendments, such as hiking the amount of the payment in lieu option by a whopping 54% from $130,000 per unit to $200,000 per unit, but also upon recognition that the redistributionist fundamentals which the subsidized housing initiatives attempt to align simply don’t work in the current market conditions. Ramming down what is a multi-residential unit formula in which costs which produce zero value (paying in lieu or marking down prices) can be rationalized, i.e. spread, across the remaining units onto a single residential unit simply produces distorted transactions which ONLY the infusion of public funds in one form or another can ameliorate. Once again, there’s no free lunch in these deals, there is at best the allocation of costs on a widespread basis, but at the additional cost of carrying government bureaucracy with all its trappings for the long term.

It is no secret that Lake Forest has not been immune to the dramatic reductions in home market values which will likely continue to be “worked off” for years, if ever. For the leadership of the Housing Trust Board to assert even higher cost barriers upon development at the single family residence level stands as the height of arrogance and at a considerable depth of ignorance. If the residents of Lake Forest desire to assuage their feelings of guilt or charitable obligation by voluntarily supporting subsidized housing, there is a much better approach to doing so than [...]

Editor’s note: This Reader Forum was written and submitted by Rick Lesser of Lake Bluff; it represents the writer’s opinions and not necessarily those of GazeboNews. We encourage you to comment, but please include your full name. Click here to read the GazeboNews comments policies.

By Rick Lesser, Village of Lake Bluff Trustee

In 2005, the Harrison Conference Center was an active business with a beautiful piece of land. The Harrison played host to weddings, business meetings, guests and the Firemen’s Ball. Then Stonebridge applied for a planned residential development (PRD) saying that it would not add children to the schools, would not increase traffic on Green Bay Road and would sell at prices from $1.2 to $1.6 million, increasing house prices around the development.

Six years later, the land is horribly marred. Stonebridge trucked in dirt to build up the land above the natural grade. Mosquito infested stagnant pools now dot the land. The Harrison is a distant memory. No work has been done for years. The Manor House and the Gate House have sat without heat in the winter or a/c in the summer for many years. The property is in foreclosure. The developers are being personally sued by the Bank of America for over $35 million. The PRD was twice the size allowed by our zoning ordinance but the Village Board (4 to 3) gambled with the West Side of Lake Bluff and gave Stonebridge a variance. The PRD was designed and approved as an age-restricted development. Stonebridge has been an unmitigated disaster for the West Side of Lake Bluff.

I opposed the PRD at the time because (a) the age restriction was anti-family and would create a segregated, separate community; (b) the density was too great, 85 housing units on land zoned for 27 units; (c) traffic would be substantially increased; and (d) the envisioned prices were a fantasy.

Now the Village Board is being asked to remove the age restriction in exchange for nothing. We have no new traffic study and no idea what the impact will be on the other houses for [...]

Editor’s note: This Reader Forum article was written and submitted by Al Boese of Lake Bluff. Reader Forum articles represent the writer’s opinions and not necessarily those of GazeboNews. We encourage you to comment and respond to Reader Forum articles but please include your full name. Click here to read the GazeboNews comments and Reader Forum policies.

4/10/2011
By Al Boese of Lake Bluff

Perhaps you have seen the article that appeared in the April 7th edition of the Lake Forester with the headline, “Two assistant superintendents departing.” Of course, the headline reference was quoting Superintendent, Dr Harry Griffith and applied to Kyle Schumacher and Mike Cyrus, both carrying the title, assistant superintendent. Cyrus for human resources and Schumacher for education services for both Districts 115 & 67. The Superintendent went on to state the consequences of these departures, in light of these difficult economic conditions, the two vacated positions , will remain unfilled for at least a year, a reorganization of the staff would allow a redistribution of the duties to others, and savings would accrue, $125,000 to District 115 and $75,000 to District 67. So far, so good, that is until all the facts are illuminated.

Fact, the combined salaries of Schumacher and Cyrus are $355,300 and benefits add another 25% or so, totaling $443,750. If they are leaving and the positions will remained unfilled, what happened to the other $243,000 (Total payroll and benefit cost of $443,750-advertised savings of $200,000)? I detect some misdirection here. Is it possible that the redistributed functions bring with them, added compensation to those who have received the new assignments? It would not be surprising as the Districts already pay the Superintendent for two jobs, why not expand the practice to other staff members who are heroically accepting these new burdens? If there is another explanation for the missing $243,000, this would be a good time for disclosure!

As the Superintendent so correctly stated, these are difficult times for the economy, tax payers and the school districts. District 115 has suffered serious shortfalls of revenue to expenses and must take immediate steps to eliminate further deficits. So far, there is no evidence of concern or urgency, just business as usual.

There is a new Board and some campaigning from those running indicated the sense of serious trouble and the [...]

Editor’s note: This Reader Forum article was written and submitted by Walt Nielsen of Lake Forest. Reader Forum articles represent the writer’s opinions and not necessarily those of GazeboNews. We encourage comments but require full names on Reader Forum comments. Click here to read the GazeboNews comments and Reader Forum policies.

April 12, 2011

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN, AND IT SHOULD:

Earlier this morning the Housing Trust Fund Board voted to forward amendments to Chapter 20A of the Lake Forest Code, Inclusionary Housing, to the Plan Commission for its meeting tomorrow evening and in contemplation of its being presented to the City Council at its scheduled meeting next Monday, April 18th. These initiatives are designed to establish the structure within which Lake Forest can enter into and move ahead very quickly under a contract with a City of Highland Park corporate subsidiary to acquire scattered site single-family residences located within Lake Forest as public subsidized housing. Fearing delay of any kind which would enable a reasonable period of general public review and comment, this rush to seek a fait accompli testifies to the triumph of redistribution ideology over openly deliberative governance, a pattern which sadly exemplifies the leadership of the Housing Trust Board from its outset. It is clear that there are many broad issues and nuances alike buried in the voluminous legal documentation which has yet to be scrubbed under any semblance of rigorous due diligence. No opinion of the City Attorney which should ordinarily accompany the establishment of a public-quasi public venture has been published. Instead, this Board begins and ends with noble sentiments while giving lip service to aspects that would “seek” to insert what could well become unenforceable “controls” over administration of this program. As almost always, “the devil is in the details.”

Why the rush? Apparently this Board’s leadership is concerned about the imminent changes to the City Council which would appear to substitute people with more balanced perspectives on these issues. This is the same leadership which failed to keep minutes of its meetings for 18 months and then blamed the “oversight” on the loss of a City Staff member although the inconvenient fact is that that City Staff member did not actually leave his position until well after all these meetings were held. It is the [...]