GazeboNews

News and stuff about Lake Forest and Lake Bluff

Insert6



Viewing Forest Park Master Plan From Rehab Perspective

May 17, 2012 By Leave a Comment

Editor’s note: At the Historic Preservation Commission meeting on Wednesday, May 16, Gail Hodges spoke in favor of the Forest Park Master Plan, and outlined how she has changed her position on stone amenities. GazeboNews asked Ms. Hodges to share the text of her presentation in the Reader Forum. Reader Forum articles represent 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 Gail T. Hodges

The Forest Park Master Plan follows the standards for “Rehabilitation,” the treatment recommended for Forest Park by the Historic Preservation Advisory.

• “Rehabilitation” is defined as “the act or process of making possible a compatible use for a property through repair, alterations, and additions while preserving those portions or features which convey its historical or cultural values.”
• Rehabilitation is often selected in response to a contemporary use or need. It may involve preservation of existing fabric along with new additions and alternations.
• Rehabilitation differs from “Restoration,” which involves restoring a landscape to a particular period of significance.
• Rehabilitation differs from “Preservation,” which involves ongoing maintenance and repair of the original and is not intended to accommodate new additions.
• Rehabilitation differs from “Reconstruction,” which involves replicating a non-surviving landscape to its appearance at a specific time and in its historic location.

“Rehabilitation” is consistent with the process used at Forest Park Beach and at Market Square. It is recommended because Forest Park is an historic property in need of structural repair as well as alterations and additions to accommodate contemporary use and address maintenance-costs.

Brief 36 of the National Park Service defines parameters for the four possible treatments of historic properties: “False historicism in every treatment should be avoided. This applies to individual features as well as the entire landscape. Examples of inappropriate work include the introduction of historic-looking benches that are actually new design, a fanciful gazebo placed in what was once an open meadow, executing an unrealized historic design, or designing a historic-looking landscape for a relocated historic structure within “restoration.”

The history of Forest Park documents it as a natural resource reserved for passive enjoyment from 1856 to the present day.
The landscape and gardening philosophies and plans of Almerin Hotchkiss and O. C. Simonds shaped Forest Park by conserving and enhancing the natural resources of its unique site between ravines on the bluffs of Lake Michigan.

Over the past 150+ years, Forest Park has changed from a landscape typical of 19th century Lake Michigan tableland to that landscape being cut through and cleared for timber and a road, planted or altered by an 1896-appointed Park Board authorized to “solicit funds, labor, and plants,” maintained and planted by City staff to meet City needs and requests from members of the community. Much of that history is undocumented. The remnant native landscape, the road, and the altered view sheds may be defined as its “features of historical or cultural value.”

The Hotchkiss Plan
The undeveloped native landscape of open woodlands, hardwood forest, and under-story species on the bluffs of Lake Michigan was designated as a place to conserve land for a park in the 1857 town plan by Almerin Hotchkiss. Hotchkiss planned Lake Forest as “a city in a park.” He used Lake Michigan, lake-front bluffs, ravines, and native woodland to define the layout of Lake Forest. The innovative plan set aside ten acres of tableland stretching between two ravines 3,200 feet parallel to the bluff and Lake Michigan as “Forest Park.” This created Lake Forest’s first conserved open space and the first North Shore public park north of Evanston.

The Simonds Plat
In 1896, the Lake Forest City Council commissioned O. C. Simonds to develop a plan for Forest Park. Simonds advocated that the best landscape design is inspired by nature, informed by local land-forms, and constructed using indigenous plant materials.

Simonds’ plat included:
• A 25-foot-wide Ring Road, from which the public could enjoy dramatic views of Lake Michigan while strolling or driving along the lakefront bluff. The Road included a turn-around on the bluff at its south end, a 600-foot shrub island dividing the Road into two lanes north of Spring Lane, and a triangular island of native-growth at the Spring Lane intersection.
• Elements of the Plat affirmed Simonds’ design and conservation philosophy:
o Placement of plant material to ensure visual engagement with a body of water, Lake Michigan.
o Retention of the significant native hardwood forest and ravines north and south.
o Open and limited views for visual engagement with the landscape.
o Minimal use of smaller plantings so that visual engagement is always drawn back to the dominant natural features.
o A west-to-east central walking path through the park, as well as a path down the bluff to the beach, both believed to follow existing footpaths.

The 1911 Survey
A May 13, 1911, “Plat of Re-Survey…” documents how Forest Park was actually built. This survey reveals that:
• The Ring Road was built 18.75 feet wide in the location specified by Simonds’ plat, and was paved with macadam.
• The south portion of the Ring Road along the bluff conformed to Simonds’ plat, ending in a turnaround on the south bluff and including a triangular island at the Spring Lane intersection. However, the shrub island shown dividing the Ring Road north of Spring Lane on the plat is eliminated, and the soft curve north is sharpened.
• No street lights existed in the Park. (The 1930 Street Lighting Report confirms recommendation for 15 lights to be installed in the Park.)
• Maple, cherry, and apple trees existed in the park woodlands, as documented by the surveyor’s notebook.
o There has been found no other documented inventory of specific plant material in specific locations within the Park until recent surveys undertaken by The City of Lake Forest. (Early 1900’s journals describe plants seen in the area, but are not specific as to location or relation to Simonds’ plat.)
o The following aerial photographs from the report of the Historic Preservation Advisory Committee contrast the condition of the Park in 1939 and 2007 with Simonds’ plat. As can be seen, considerable plant material shown on the Simonds’ plat was not in evidence in 1939 and there were significantly more views to the Lake than in the plat. By 2007, many of the 1939 views had been filled in by plantings in the intervening years.

Forest Park Today
Lake Michigan views are diminished by interruptions of recent plantings. The Ring Road, bluff, and plantings have deteriorated. Nevertheless, one is still drawn into the Park by the lake view.

The Master Plan’s Compatibility with Rehabilitation Standards
Forest Park today demonstrates deteriorated landscape, road, drainage, and infrastructure. The Master Plan considers these elements within the context of the Hotchkiss Plan, the Simonds plat, the design philosophies of both landscape architects/gardeners, and the 1939 aerial photographic evidence.
• The remnant native landscape, the road, and the remaining views are slated for restoration in the Master Plan, under rehabilitation standards, to include:
o Restoration of indigenous plant material that also will be low maintenance. Plant colonies are defined and reflect the layering patterns typical of Simonds’ plans.
o Restoration and rehabilitation of the road to repair deteriorated surface and solve drainage problems and bluff erosion.
o Restoration to open up obstructed views with reference to both the Simonds plat and the 1939 aerial photograph of existing conditions 30 years after the plat was drawn.
• The Park must meet contemporary and future needs to better accommodate pubic use, municipal budget constraints, pedestrian safety, accessibility, and ongoing maintenance. These are reasons why the Master Plan proposes, consistent with rehabilitations standards:
o Expansion of pedestrian walking paths beyond those suggested by Simonds.
o Accessible parking provisions on the road and in the parking lot and low-level path lighting.
o Seating, picnic, trash, bicycle, and other amenities designed to avoid “false historicism” through the use of stone and wood that relate to materials used at the beach level and historically throughout the community. These materials are low key to blend into the natural landscape, weather as natural resources, and achieve low maintenance costs for the City.
Specifically:
• The Ring Road follows the general outline of Simonds’ plat, with modifications to accommodate the required pedestrian path and draw the road back as appropriate to minimize impact on the bluff.
• Ring Road Parking allows for pull-over areas that can be adjusted to permanent accessible parking if determined needed by use.
• South Parking Lot and Redistribution of Parking Priorities During the Few Days of Peak Use will minimize Ring Road parking during peak use.
• Pedestrian Paths and Belvedere Landing provide the opportunity to separate pedestrians from traffic and centralize drop-off in an area treated with native stone to minimize wear and tear on the bluff edge.
• Amenities Designed Harmoniously for Natural Integration with the Site, and Scaled to the Acreage and Linear Dimension of the Site, to include:
• Benches, tables, bike racks, trash/recycling containers, drinking fountains designed to use stone and weatherized wood to blend with the landscape and minimize annual maintenance costs.
• Lighting designed to be consistent with the historic overhead lighting and minimize light spill into the neighborhood.

Filed Under: Archives, Features, News, Reader Forum Tagged With: , ,

Reader Forum: Forest Park Is Similar To Market Square

May 15, 2012 By Leave a Comment

Editor’s note: This Reader Forum article was written and submitted by Prue Beidler of 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 comments policy on Reader Forums.

By Prue Beidler of Lake Forest

Fifteen years ago when I was asked to join Crissy Cherry as co-president of Market Square 2000 I agreed with enthusiasm. This seemed a fitting opportunity to express my appreciation to the community in which my husband Frank and I had raised our three children. Crissy and I undertook the leadership of the Market Square 2000 board after the City Council accepted Lake Forest Garden Club’s gift of a rehabilitation plan requested by the City and crafted by nationally acclaimed landscape architect Rodney Robinson.

In the last few years as the Forest Park Project has unfolded I have thought often of that challenging and exciting Market Square 2000 work. The parallels are striking. Both plans were requested by the City for the rehabilitation of iconic and beloved spaces. Both were designed by distinguished and experienced landscape architects. In the case of Forest Park the landscape architect is Stephen Stimson. Both plans were funded by Lake Forest Garden Club and then the projects themselves were “spun off” to become independent 501(c)(3) organizations. Both projects included numerous opportunities for community comment and with both projects the original plans were modified after this input. In both cases, volunteers and City staff worked tirelessly as partners.

Each public-private partnership has its own story line, however, and there are certainly some differences between the two projects. Crissy and I brought experience as volunteers to our leadership and certainly passion for the project itself. But we really had to create, with our board, the model to actually get the work done. The Market Square 2000 public private partnership serves, I believe, as a strong model for the Forest Park Project as it moves forward. It is also enormously important to the current project that Ralph Gesualdo, a former chairman of the Lake Forest Parks and Recreation Board, already knew Forest Park well before he assumed the leadership of the Forest Park Project board and he understood fully the complex issues that go into designing and maintaining all of our City’s parks. This same expertise is reflected in the extraordinary skill sets brought to the Forest Park Project board by its volunteer members.

Another distinct element to the story line for Forest Park is the length of the process to date. I always support including as many views as possible in discussing a space which belongs to all Lake Forest residents. But I also believe that it is time for City commission and Council members to accept the reality that some people will not be supportive of the project no matter how many changes are made or how long public discourse continues. I know the people who feel this way love Lake Forest as much as I do. They may not believe, as I do, that spaces used by humans inevitably need modifications over time. Perhaps they worry that their own cherished experiences in the current park will not be replicated in the rehabilitated space. Yet I believe that we are all assured of continued cherished experiences long into the future because both the City and Forest Park Project board are clearly focused on maintaining Forest Park as a passive park with improved walking spaces and view lines to the lake.

The process has had great integrity, as did the process for rehabilitating Market Square. It is now time to move forward. The work has honored the visions and plans of those associated with Forest Park in earlier times as well as the current needs of the community and likely needs of our residents in the future. I urge the support and encouragement of residents and I urge the endorsement of the plan by both the Historic Preservation Commission and the City Council at their upcoming meetings.

Filed Under: Archives, Features, News, Reader Forum Tagged With: , ,

Reader Forum: Forest Park Plan Hijacked

May 6, 2012 By 20 Comments

Editor’s note: This Reader Forum article was written and submitted by Bart Woloson of 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 comments policy on Reader Forums.

By Bart Woloson of Lake Forest

Having attended Thursday night’s 4+ hour hearing on Forest Park (the first I have attended on this subject), I came away with the feeling that some members of the Historic Preservation Commission have hijacked the approval of the Forest Park Plan through repetitive delays over a two-year period in the name of Historic Preservation. The history of Forest Park is somewhat fuzzy, and what little is left of the original plan is being carefully preserved in the revitalization plan. Furthermore, I was on the committee that drafted the Historic Preservation Ordinance and can assure you that there was no intent to use the ordinance to delay improvement of parks. I believe that the City Council should demand immediate conclusion of deliberations by the Historic Preservation Commission and pass it on to the Council – up or down, and let the Council decide.

Here is the statement I planned on making at Thursday night’s meeting:

I am here to voice strong support for the Forest Park revitalization
plan as presented tonight. It is an excellent plan, long overdue, and
sorely needed to correct what has become an embarrassing front face for the City of Lake Forest.

Thank you ladies and gentlemen for giving your time and wisdom to your respective Board and Commission. I have spent a bit of time where you all sit tonight. Thank you also to Bob Kiely for his thoughtful moderation of this hearing and for his always strong leadership in directing our planning and development staff professionals. It is hard for me to believe that Bob Kiely was already in this position for several years when I retired from City government in 1995. I spent 20 years from 1975 to 1995, first as Chair of the ZBA, then jointly as a plan commissioner and finally as an Alderman for the last 4 years.

In that time I came to know the importance of public/ private
partnerships to the development and the attractiveness of Lake Forest. The obvious projects were the Lake Forest Beach and Harbor development and the revitalization of Market Square. We also dealt with numerous Open Lands projects, both train stations, Elawa Farms, the Middle Fork Savannah, and even the Gorton Community Center and the adjacent Library and Historical Society facility —all done with public/private partnerships.

Forest Park too has long been a public/private partnership receiving
some 42 donations of trees and benches in recent years. The private
donations needed to implement this revitalization plan for Forest Park
will be substantial, and they will be attained based on the subtle
grandness of the plan presented, and the generosity of our citizenry.
Beware of lesser plans on the advice of Daniel Burnham.

I would like for a moment to consider the real estate consequences of
preserving and enhancing Forest Park. The value of real estate in
Lake Forest depends largely on the perception that Lake Forest is the
most desirable residential community on the North Shore. The old adage that location is everything really does not work here. We are the furthest North Shore suburb from Chicago requiring the longest commute into the City. This detriment must be compensated by keeping Lake Forest the most beautiful suburb with the finest public amenities.

Forest Park has the longest bluff’s edge frontage (open to the public)
on Lake Michigan of any of the North Shore suburbs. Preservation and “revitalization” of this asset presents a great opportunity to enhance the perception of Lake Forest as the most desirable residential suburb.

In contrast, the current (and now prolonged) state of Forest Park is
tired and “seedy”; a detriment to the desired image of Lake Forest.
Broken and rutted pavement in the Ring Road with muddy shoulders leads to a largely non-existent view of Lake Michigan, the bluff overgrown with brush and non-indigenous “weed” trees. We need prompt action on this plan and not redesign by the amateurs on the various boards and commissions. Gail Hodges had it right when she said “Let’s not invent history to preserve.” Hopefully the City Council will see the wisdom in this suggestion.

I am personally impressed with the quality of work done by the Forest
Park Board and the Landscape Architect retained- and they have done this as a public service and not for personal gain. I also recognize the continued support by the Lake Forest Garden Club, which has a long and successful history in implementing public/private partnerships for the enhancement of our Lake Forest environment.

I encourage your careful consideration of this plan, and timely action
to move the approval process forward. We may some day be proud to take eager visitors for a stroll on the promenade at Forest Park. Let that day be sooner rather than later.

Filed Under: Archives, Reader Forum Tagged With: , ,

Reader Forum: Choose Simonds Over Stimson

March 28, 2012 By 2 Comments

Editor’s note: This Reader Forum is by Neva GaNun of Lake Forest. It was first presented to the Lake Forest Historic Preservation Commission at its meeting about the Forest Park Master Plan on March 21, 2012. The Forum article 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 Neva GaNun of Lake Forest

First a few comments on tonight’s remarks:

  • Three high use peak days at Forest Park are peak days for boaters and for users of the Forest Park tableland. Therefore, using either for parking on those days negates the usage of the other.
  • The opening of three rooms/spaces is a formal conceit – not one O.C. Simonds would use.
  • Donor plaques – limited life span … WHY will residents continue to make memorial donations if they know their loved ones will die twice? Once in real life and again in the Park? We meander through our memories.
  • As for a memorial wall of plaques – this is NOT a columbarium nor is it the Vietnam Memorial. One of the charms of Forest Park is that memorial trees and their plaques are specific to the memory of individuals, and are placed at their particular tree or shrub or place of experience.
  • There should not be a “big box” store attitude toward memorials.

Now for my prepared remarks:

O. C. Simonds was a very sophisticated, but humble man. He was NOT a “rustic”. He was not “rusticated”.

Neither are most Lake Forest residents.

I want to share with you excerpts from the University of Michigan School of Natural Resources and Environment publications regarding the works of O. C. Simonds.

“At Graceland Cemetary, Simonds used thickets of natural shrubs and trees, with gently sculpted landforms, and water…to make Graceland a quiet, restful image of Midwestern landscape.” Robert Grese

“Simonds became so well known for his naturalistic design that Chicago’s wealthiest families demanded his services to design naturalistic grounds for their estates.” — Gelbloom

O. C. Simonds and Jens Jensen are often clumped together, as both are considered “Prarie Style” Landscape Architects, although Simonds preferred to be called a Landscape Artist.

But let me be clear: O. C. Simonds IS NOT Jens Jensen. Jensen’s work was about rocks and grasses. Simonds’ work was about water, trees, shrubs and views.

Simonds DID NOT limb up trees. Jensen did. And (Forest Park landscape architect Stephen) Stimson wants to.

Mr. Stimson’s Plan will destroy a rare example of O. C. Simonds’ landscape artistry, Forest Park, in one of the most rare ecosystems in the world – our bluffs on Lake Michigan, which have NO rocky outcroppings.

Stimson wants to place layered limestone on our bluff and tableland – a signature of Jens Jensen. WHY?

Simonds’ jewel, Forest Park, has many facets. Changing one facet of Simonds’ design alters the entire jewel.

Yes, our Forest Park needs to be cleaned up and polished. It does NOT need to be reset.

Stimson’s Plan, as presented, is the framework for destruction of a plan which has worked for 116 years. Why is this even being considered?

CUI BONO? Who benefits by it? Certainly not the residents of Lake Forest, not now, not in the future.

History will judge the City of Lake Forest poorly if this plan is accepted, thereby destroying Simonds’ plan.

Thank you.

Filed Under: Archives, Reader Forum Tagged With: ,

Forum: It’s Discrimination Against Women and It’s Wrong

March 26, 2012 By 2 Comments

Editor’s note: This Reader Forum article was written 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 of the League of Women Voters – Lake Forest/Lake Bluff Area

The League of Women Voters was born more than 90 years ago from the long fight to get women the right to vote. Since 1992, when League members studied health care policy, we have worked to ensure access to quality health care for all. The League also has a strong commitment and belief that public policy in a diverse society must affirm the right of individuals to make their own reproductive choices.

That’s why the League is so deeply concerned about recent proposals that would allow employers and health plans to block contraceptive services and discriminate against women.

By a narrow margin, the U.S. Senate recently defeated an amendment that would limit access to contraception for women if any employer or insurance plan has an undefined “religious or moral objection” to it. This open-ended invitation to cut back on preventative health care services would turn back the clock for women and for American society.

We understand that not everyone agrees with the League on this subject. But we strongly believe that public institutions, including schools and hospitals that receive substantial federal assistance, should not limit the health care choices available to their employees. Institutions that serve the public at large should not impose their own views but should respect the conscientious decisions of each individual.

The League of Women Voters believes that all persons, regardless of gender, should be eligible for preventive health services. Allowing employers to exclude contraceptive services is discrimination based on sex, and it’s wrong.

Filed Under: Archives, Reader Forum Tagged With:

The Picture Perfect Lawn: How Safe Is It?

March 19, 2012 By Leave a Comment

Editor’s note: This Reader Forum article was written and submitted by Jill Danly of Lake Bluff. 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 Jill Danly of Lake Bluff

For many, the picture perfect front lawn scene includes children and pets romping and playing on lush grass. But at what cost?

Many homeowners use chemical pesticides and herbicides to control weeds and keep their lawns looking nice. But environmental awareness campaigns are sprouting up everywhere. They are focusing on the danger of lawn-care chemicals that can cause cancer, asthma and Parkinson’s disease, among other harmful implications.

I’ve lived in Lake Bluff on and off for 30 years and have been involved in “green” business practices for just as long. I’m starting a new community campaign called Pure Green and I encourage you to join!

Jill posts a Pure Green lawn sign in her front yard and encourages others to do the same!

Pure Green is a choice each homeowner can make to eliminate the chemical spraying and pledge to go the natural lawn-care way. It’s rather simple. You can begin by choosing non-toxic fertilizers, you can ask your landscape provider to begin to implement healthier options.

Mowing higher and watering less will eliminate weeds — and with that simple change the transition to building a strong turf will begin. There are several links at the end of this article that provide many ideas and resources to begin caring for your lawn the natural way.

It would be great to get our local municipalities behind the Pure Green push, but first we need to start at the grass roots level by encouraging all local property owners in Lake Bluff and Lake Forest to implement a Pure Green approach to lawn care.

I’ve been seeing green on many levels for years–as a teacher of green Architecture at Illinois Institute of Technology; a representative of Eco-Friendly products at Green Home Chicago, and as a member of Safer Pest Control, which educates the consumer on Green, healthy choices for our environment.

I’ve been hearing about local dogs dying prematurely due to canine cancer, more children being diagnosed with asthma. It makes me wonder: Do we need to use so many pesticides?

Communities around us such as Evanston and Highland Park have banned spraying on playing fields. The state of New York, Canada and many more are opting to do away with any pesticides .

Can Lake Bluff and Lake Forest begin to go Pure Green?

Where do you begin? By simply educating yourself. Opportunities to learn more:

www.safelawns.org

Logiclawncare.com

Www.spcpweb.org

Join the Facebook page titled Pure Green.

Ask your landscape provider to switch to organic products, which contrary to popular belief can often be less expensive than conventional chemicals.

Go to the lawn care seminar March 30th at Chicago Botanic Gardens (click here to read more)

On a very basic level: Mow higher, water less and embrace a dandelion or two. It’s a sign of a healthy lawn.

Filed Under: Archives, Reader Forum Tagged With:

Reader Forum: New Hospital Needs Review

March 12, 2012 By 1 Comment

Editor’s note: This Reader Forum was written and submitted by Mary Mathews of 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 comments policy on Reader Forums.

By Mary Mathews of Lake Forest

Our community hospital is not just being revitalized with new x-rays and wallpaper, but instead a large regional medical center is being proposed. This may be what Lake Forest needs and wants. But the Special Use Permit Application just became available for residents to read on Friday, March 9 and the Plan Commission will discuss it on Wednesday, March 14, 6:30 p.m. at City Hall.

Residents need to have a chance to review the application, ask questions, and get answers. This is a major land use change within the City and will have significant impacts not only on transportation and stormwater, but also on other quality of life issues. Careful consideration and resident input is needed before this application is approved. Changes may be needed.

The documents are not available online but copies can be obtained in the Lake Forest Municipal Building on Field Drive in Conway Park.

Filed Under: Archives, Reader Forum Tagged With: ,

Reader Forum: Safer Report Raises Questions

February 29, 2012 By 2 Comments

Editor’s note: This Reader Forum article was written and submitted by Michael Beacham of 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 comments policy on Reader Forums.

Has Harry Griffith Been Caught In A Lie?

By Michael Beacham

As if the handling of the John Steinert Matter in 2009 wasn’t bad enough, it now appears that in November of 2011, when Steinert’s actions became known to the public, that Superintendent Harry Griffith lied to the public to cover up his and the board’s ineptitude back in 2009. And it appears by the silence of the three remaining board members from that era that they are complicit in this lie. What’s at issue is what did they know about the nature of Steinert’s behavior and when they knew it.

Dr. Griffith was quoted in a November 19, 2011 Chicago Tribune article as follows:

“Griffith told parents that, although he was aware of Steinert’s conviction, he learned of the graphic nature of the cellphone messages only this week, after viewing a completed police report for the first time. ’My disappointment in this is deep; John was not forthcoming,’ said Griffith, adding that Steinert described
his behavior as ‘flirtatious” at the time.’”

And when he was under fire by angry parents, on two occasions in November 2011 I personally heard Dr. Griffith say to parents and concerned community members “If we had known then the lewd or sexual nature of the harassment then we would have handled this differently.”

But the Safer report says something entirely different about what the Superintendent and the board knew back in January 2009.

According to the Safer Report:

“On January 27, 2009, then Assistant Superintendent Michael Cyrus, interviewed Steinert. He was guided by questions prepared by Phillip Gerner, outside council who specializes in labor law. Steinert admitted that he sent the intern text messages that requested dates and sexual acts. Steinert told Cyrus he sent a message asking if the intern wanted Steinert to perform a specific sexual act.”

And it goes on to say that on January 28th Griffith “informed the board that Steinert was to be arrested the next day. He described that Steinert had sent text messages that were ‘very aggressive,’ ‘very assertive,’ and ‘very explicit.’”

Clearly Dr. Griffith and the board did know the lewd nature of Steinert’s behavior almost immediately. And yet they decided not to terminate or even temporarily suspend him pending the resolution of his criminal case. Then a month later they decided to extend Steinert’s employment contract, leading to a subsequent expansion of his responsibilities and ultimately a huge salary increase.

In November 2011, when parents and the community at large learned about how Dr. Griffith and the board handled the Steinert matter two years earlier they were furious. To defend their incomprehensible actions they appear to resorted to lying to cover their tracks, saying that they didn’t have enough information to fully understand the nature of what Steinert had done.

In my opinion, Dr. Griffith and the complicit board members need to be called out on this lie. Once again they have embarrassed this community and denigrated the leadership positions to which they have been entrusted. They have again brought shame to this community and they need to be held accountable for their bad judgment in 2009 and for breaking our trust in 2011. Nothing short of their resignations is appropriate.

Michael Beacham

Filed Under: Archives, Reader Forum Tagged With:

Reader Forum: The Ethics Of Leadership

November 16, 2011 By 3 Comments

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 letter of what is right?

o Should those in leadership positions think about the implications of their actions only for themselves, or should they think about this more broadly with all who could be affected?

o As leaders how well have we sorted through and recognized the severity of a situation and its implications both now and in the future?

o What does doing everything possible mean when you are in a leadership position?

o What happens when you face other leaders who aren’t acting ethically or who are making decisions that aren’t looking at the total picture?

o What should acting in the spirit of good ethical conduct mean to a leader?

o What are the moral implications of your actions or inactions?

One of the most telling revelations that I’ve heard in all of this when I think of “The Ethics of Leadership” came from Joe Paterno when he said; “with the benefit of hindsight I wish that I had done more.” As leaders we don’t have the luxury of hindsight. We can however think through to the best of our ability how we would respond to questions like what I’ve posed, in guiding us to make the best decisions possible.

Filed Under: Archives, Reader Forum Tagged With:

Reader Forum: Think Before Commenting

November 8, 2011 By 4 Comments

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 you’re sure your belief is well-founded, then you shouldn’t be afraid to put your name to it.

Respect participants. The parties involved are not usually monsters. In this case, we have the Board members and the teachers. Board members are usually members of the community who have stepped up to do a necessary job, at no pay, for at least somewhat altruistic reasons. Teachers are usually interested in doing what’s best for their students as well as their own pocketbook and would rather teach than picket. All parties involved in a public dispute should be treated and referred to respectfully.

The League of Women Voters hopes that people will use situations like this to learn more about the issues, and exercise their rights and responsibilities as responsible citizens and community members.

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

Filed Under: Archives, Reader Forum Tagged With: , ,
« Older Posts

© 2012 GazeboNews. All Rights Reserved .