GazeboNews

News and stuff about Lake Forest and Lake Bluff

Insert6



Reader Forum: Old Main As Cadaver

November 6, 2011 By 2 Comments

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

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

Reader Forum: County Needs Transparency

May 12, 2011 By Leave a Comment

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 take.

During the meeting, Committee members often referred to districts by the name of the current commissioner. We would like to be assured that was only meant as a way to refer to a district, rather than using its district number. The demographer should not start the process with the current districts and move the lines according to the population changes. He should start by dividing the county into 21 equal-sized districts and then move the lines according to population, community of interest, and other criteria. This may result in some new districts without a current commissioner residing within the new lines. We must remember that the districts are to be drawn for the voter to choose representation and not to protect a commissioner’s job.

We suggest there be a number of meetings/hearings at different locations throughout Lake County, both during the day and evening so more people can be informed and involved. Residents, organizations, and public officials may want to view and comment on any proposed maps. As there was standing-room-only at the last meeting, a larger room is needed for Waukegan meetings.

Kane County has posted a draft map to the internet. Lake County should consider the same.

The League looks forward to working with the Committee and other interested parties in providing the best possible outcome for the residents of Lake County.

Sincerely,

Mary Mathews
League of Women Voters – Lake County

Filed Under: Archives, Reader Forum Tagged With: ,

Reader Forum: End ‘SAVE’ Contract

May 8, 2011 By 7 Comments

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 to make good financial decisions for the long term. In the past two years you have done an excellent job of reducing administrative expenditures, holding the line on other costs and thereby increasing the District’s reserve fund. Currently you are in negotiations with the Lake Bluff Teachers’ Council. In 1995, the Board and the Lake Bluff Teachers’ Council agreed to a contract that allowed the Board of Education to literally turn over about 60% of the Education fund to be placed in the Council Pool and allow that union group to determine the salary scale, the benefits package, and some bonuses for the teachers. With few changes, that 15-year-old contract has held until the present day. Your decision to “sunset” that contract a year before it was due to end and to enter into contract negotiations this year was an excellent choice.
In all, it appears that you have received good advice.

Currently, I’m told that the Education fund is $12.3 million. So we’re talking about 60%, or $7.4 million, that would be placed in the Council Pool if the contract stands unchanged. It is of particular interest that any dollars left over in that “pool” from year to year go into a Council fund and are not returned to the aggregate of Board of Education funds. Currently the amount in the Council Pool of ‘left over money’ is $3 million. This means that the Board has minimum, if any, control over how those funds may be used. $3 million dollars is a large sum of money, it is totaled into the Boards reserve fund reports — BUT there is a very gray area as to whether the Board can access those dollars. The Council interprets the contract as not allowing the Board to access those dollars.

This is just one of several conditions in that contract that work to the detriment of Board finances.

School finances are your prime responsibility; it isn’t as exciting or noteworthy as that great temptation to Board members — the micro-management of school operations. But we look to you to make wise decisions regarding the money to which you are entrusted.

During negotiations, the Teachers’ Council should be heavily involved in the determination of their salary scales, their benefits, and incentives to improve the delivery of education. Good teachers deserve to be well paid. However, they should never be handed monies that come through property taxes — those dollars are to be overseen by an elected board. I strongly urge you to discontinue the SAVE program.

The SAVE contract is unacceptable, improper, intolerable, and indefensible.

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

SpeakUp! Opposes ‘Medical’ Marijuana

May 2, 2011 By 11 Comments

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

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

Forum: Plan Commission On Right Track

April 17, 2011 By 2 Comments

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 to cram perversions of common sense down the throats of developers or neighborhoods alike. This message needs to be sent clearly and accepted fairly, i.e. without being mashed up amidst the usual mealy-mouthed liberal nostrums. The City Council should follow the lead of the Plan Commission and summarily reject the proposed amendments. It should also spend some serious time to deliberate the pros and cons of adopting a direct grant-in-aid approach rather than all the baggage (and baggage handlers) which the current subsidization of “bricks and sticks” brings with it. How about an advisory referendum with clearly stated alternatives of [A] the present regulatory construct, or [B] a grant structure? That would certainly seem to be preferable to outsourcing Lake Forest’s governance to a City of Highland Park (or anywhere else) subsidiary.

Will the Housing Trust Fund’s gambit to ram these seemingly innocuous amendments through before fair skepticism can be applied work? We should know this coming Monday evening when the City Council takes up this same petition. You should expect to see a full marshaling of the forces for redistribution initiatives and legal probity gathered. The preferable decision would be to recognize that serious questions regarding the implications of the single-family residence initiative have been raised and resoundingly endorsed by the Plan Commission such that enabling both a real opportunity for resident notice and input together with a substantive official review should proceed under a schedule which recognizes the importance of these issues, the same issues which now dramatically roil the City of Winnetka. We can do better and that choice is at hand.

Filed Under: Archives, Reader Forum Tagged With: ,

Reader Forum: Stonebridge Age Limit

April 14, 2011 By 10 Comments

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.

Lake Bluff Trustee Rick Lesser argues that the Stonebridge development should have an age restriction

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 sale in the Village. The land is covered with steep-sided ponds. These ditches allowed Stonebridge to cram 71 new cluster homes onto the Harrison’s beautiful meadow; they made the water detention ponds steep and deep. This was justified originally by the age restriction. The ponds were designed without thought for the safety of children.

The new developer, Sun-Cal, funded by the Roanoke Group, tells the Village Board that although the development will no longer be age restricted, it will still be “age targeted”. Sun-Cal estimates that roughly half of the buyers will be families. This just means that families with children will live in houses designed for seniors. Round pegs will be fit into square holes. They will always chafe.

The blindness which gripped some community leaders originally runs unabated. Originally, the plan was to get new residents who would contribute tax dollars but not children to the schools. The same people who extolled the age restriction in 2005 tell us now that the age restriction should be removed because they want children in the community. Now, in exchange for nothing, no reduction in density and no additional impact fees, the Village Board will eliminate the age restriction in the hope of saving this failure.

The Village would be far better off by allowing the Bank of America to complete the foreclosure process and sell to a new developer with a fresh, less dense, family-friendly plan. The property currently pays over $200,000 per year in real estate taxes but has no residents. The Village is holding $2.7 million from the developer’s defaulted Letter of Credit which could be used to maintain the property, demolish the 4 constructed models and have the ponds sprayed to try and abate the mosquitoes until a new developer with a fresh plan buys the property.

But that’s not going to happen. Instead the Village Board will try again to save Stonebridge. Like a mouse trying to lift a train, the Village Board has previously given Stonebridge free land, variance after variance, even a brass plaque to honor Stonebridge’s great preservation efforts (I’m not kidding — an actual brass plaque that you paid for!) yet still the project has failed.

The developer has said that this project will succeed with some fresh capital and energy. But Stonebridge did not fail for lack of capital or lack of energy. Stonebridge failed because it was premised on the idea that older people would pay outrageous sums to live in cluster homes with no children, no land, no basements, no golf course, no swimming pool, no tennis courts, no clubhouse and awful weather. Stonebridge failed because it was a bad idea and Sun-Cal’s effort will not succeed any more than the past efforts have.

I expect that Sun-Cal will spend the Roanoke Group’s money on salaries and then go the way of the first developers. They tell the Village that they will sell cluster homes at prices from $700,000 to $800,000, but larger homes with real land in the neighboring West Terrace are currently selling in the $300,000s. In the end, the cluster homes will meet the market and sell for less than existing homes on the West Side, undercutting the market.

When you find yourself in a hole, the first thing you should do is to stop digging. The Village should decline to remove the age restriction, let the foreclosure process finish and allow the Bank of America sell the land to a new developer with a better plan.

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

Timely Action Needed At District 115 Board

April 13, 2011 By 2 Comments

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 need to get the fiscal house in a semblance of order.

The Board could start by electing a new President. Sharon Golan has served 3 terms, six years in all; it is time for a change at the top. That election of a new President must be followed with a serious, comprehensive and coherent recovery plan. That plan to be followed with a solid implementation program that tackles the difficult staffing issues, beginning with a bloated, over compensated Administrative organization. These current departures would be a good place to start. I noticed the Superintendent was careful with his words, implying the positions would be vacant for a year or so. In view of a reorganization of the Administrative staff, why not insist the vacancy be permanent. Saving $440,000 is nearly 1/3 of the expenses needed to correct the projected $1.5 MM deficit for this fiscal year. Even if the savings are split between the districts, that remains, a serious amount of savings.

People, it is time for drastic and timely action. District 115 owing to the dangerously low reserve fund of 2.5% of the operating expense vs the state mandate of 20%, has been on the Illinois Board of Education “financial early warning” list for the last three years, a distinction shared by only 62 of the state’s 900 districts. That should be sufficiently embarrassing and cause for a loud and swift call to arms. So far the silence is deafening.

Al Boese, Lake Bluff

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

Affordable Housing In Lake Forest: Slow Down

April 12, 2011 By 10 Comments

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 same leadership which, contrary to objection at the time and the following written opinion of the City Attorney that a quorum was not present, held a meeting in early January attended by two members despite the City Council having officially previously expanded the Board to seven members. This is now the Board which features both membership by non-residents of Lake Forest compounded by their representation of entities which are well known potential beneficiaries of “Affordable Housing” and/or “Inclusionary Zoning” programs.

Meanwhile, as evidence of the ideological bent which focus these programs, the representative of the aforementioned City of Highland Park subsidiary lamented that two Lake Forest residences targeted for this program “have sold and there is evidence that the market for lower bracket housing seems to be improving.” Yes indeed, it is quite sad when capital markets work. Note very well also that since this program to acquire and renovate single-family detached residences incorporates a clear obligation for the owner/tenant to fully maintain the property that it becomes very unlikely that they can be shoe-horned into the rubric of being aimed for “Lake Forest’s deserving seniors.” As for other “qualifying” owner/tenants, particularly those with school age children, they will be eligible to attend Lake Forest schools but will effectively pay “adjusted” materially lower real property taxes. How convenient.

Presbyterian Homes has paid approximately $880,000 for the privilege of NOT building “affordable housing” units in its Lake Forest Place development. Those funds represent about 90% of those extracted to date for the Housing Trust Fund. Two major projects — Barat College (now owned by Harris Bank) and the Western-Laurel Avenue Knauz/municipal site (owned by the City of Lake Forest) – continue to languish under market conditions which do not auger well or soon for their development. Given their size and high residential configuration, both also clearly bear an excessive burden for being the source of significant funding under “Affordable Housing” proscriptions as constructing income control units or payments in lieu thereof both deter developers on pure financial impact and on the increased “grief” which public body compliance and administration impose. [Note that the price to be paid for NOT constructing subsidized units is $130,000 each, which this Board’s leadership perceives as insufficient — how’s that for piling on along with noting that payments in lieu are not of right but entirely at the discretion of the Board/City Council?] While you won’t see it disclosed, the Harris Bank and the City itself will invariably take the proverbial “hit” to their disposition pricing. There is no “free lunch.”

All the foregoing proceeds utilizing resources of the City which it should be marshaling to meet its real needs. For those who desire to help others with housing, find an established charitable organization which does this well and send them a check! I favor the wounded warrior programs, those people actually earned our support first rather than grovel for it later.

Walt Nielsen, Lake Forest

Filed Under: Archives, Reader Forum Tagged With: ,

Emmanuele: Lake Forest Community Won

April 7, 2011 By 2 Comments

Editor’s note: This Reader Forum article was written and submitted by Hannah Emmanuele of Lake Forest. Reader Forum articles represent the writer’s opinions and not necessarily those of GazeboNews.

Dear Friends and Supporters,

I am honored to have had the opportunity to run in this important election for the Lake Forest High School District 115 Board of Education. And I am overwhelmed by the support from so many community members for my candidacy. While I hoped for a different outcome, I will always treasure the many extraordinary conversations I have had with countless fellow community members concerning our schools and the education of our children. I also am humbled by the many people who genuinely desire a fresh voice and forward thinking perspective on our high school board, someone who is willing to partner with all our stakeholders– teachers, administrators, and parents and community members–to help drive the future of education for our children in Lake Forest, Lake Bluff and Knollwood.

I want to thank each of you who helped get our team to this point. While many are disappointed, we also have to be proud of this remarkable accomplishment. The very close results in this election–coming up short by a mere 167 votes–are a reflection of the current pulse in our community–a statement that people are looking for positive change. We went out and earned every vote the honest, old fashioned way–by asking people to think for themselves and ask questions, almost 1,200 of these people turned out to vote. This makes our success even more compelling. By raising awareness throughout our community about the significant issues and challenges the high school faces, we have forever changed the dialog concerning our schools. People are engaged and, most importantly, asking lots of questions and must continue to do so. This process ultimately will greatly benefit our children, our school and our entire community. I also want to extend special gratitude for all of you who stayed composed and true to the purpose and mission of our campaign, despite the incredible attempts by some to distract and derail our efforts. Collectively we showed great strength by keeping the conversation centered on what’s best for our children and our community.

Regardless of the final outcome, I am very proud and excited about the extraordinary positive impact our campaign has had throughout Lake Forest, Lake Bluff and Knollwood and I look forward with great interest and commitment to continuing to support our community and our schools.

Best Wishes and With Great Appreciation,
Hannah Emmanuele

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

Lake Forest Caucus: Stay Involved

April 6, 2011 By Leave a Comment

Editor’s note: This Reader Forum article was written and submitted by Mark Ventling, president of the Lake Forest Caucus. Reader Forum articles represent the writer’s opinions and not necessarily those of GazeboNews. Please note: GazeboNews is not publishing comments on candidate articles in the Reader Forum. This change in policy applies only to candidate articles–we encourage you to comment and respond to Reader Forum articles that focus on issues (but please include your full name). Click here to read the GazeboNews comments and Reader Forum policies.

By Mark Ventling

On behalf of the members of the Lake Forest Caucus, I want to thank those who voted in the recent election. We are grateful for your participation and also for your support of the Caucus candidates for Mayor, Alderman, and School Boards.

Whether or not you voted, I encourage you to participate in our local government. Attend meetings. Talk to your fellow citizens who are volunteering their time to serve. Consider offering to take a turn on a Board or Commission or on the Caucus itself. We are all in this together, and it is only by working together that we will keep Lake Forest a special place.

For more information on how you can volunteer, please visit www.lfcaucus.com.

Mark Ventling, President
Lake Forest Caucus

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

© 2012 GazeboNews. All Rights Reserved .