[BCNnet] Tribune Editorial on Split Proposal

[Ingrid Richards]

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Randi Doeker - Chicago 
  To: fpfriends at yahoogroups.com ; bcnnet at ece.iit.edu 
  Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2008 7:19 AM
  Subject: [BCNnet] Tribune Editorial on Split Proposal


  Kudos to Benjamin, et al, for the Tribune editorial supporting the split.
  Randi Doeker
  Chicago
   
   
  chicagotribune.com
  Preserving treasured land
  April 2, 2008

  You've encountered the notion on this page and elsewhere: Other cities have renowned architecture, diverse economies, good universities, world-class cultural institutions and so on. Most do not, though, have such long histories of so aggressively protecting their most treasured public lands. 

  High on the list: the 68,000 acres owned by the Forest Preserve District of Cook County. That emerald necklace wouldn't exist if generations of conservationists-some of them public officials, many of them ordinary but devoted citizens-hadn't fought to protect it from influential people who had their own plans for the land.

  But the Forest Preserve District, a distinct unit of government that turns 95 this year, often has had to survive abuse and neglect from members of the Cook County Board. Those 17 commissioners by law oversee the district in addition to their (often equally abusive and neglectful) oversight of county government.

  Two respected civic groups, the Civic Federation and the Friends of the Forest Preserves, now propose the creation-at no additional cost-of a separate board with the sole responsibility of running the Forest Preserve District. Good idea.

  This is more than a snoozy exercise in promoting good government. The two groups' 20-page proposal chronicles a chilling litany of threats to the forest preserves-threats that trace to the County Board's conflicts of interests. It's unwise to have the same board members responsible for protecting the preserves from developers and promoting economic development in Cook County. Since its creation, the Forest Preserve District has had an intentionally narrow mission: to acquire, preserve and protect natural lands. 

  As former county Commissioner Carl Hansen famously (in conservation circles) argued during an attempted land grab of "just a little" district property in the 1990s: Preservation of our diminishing open lands can't be justified on grounds of economic benefit or most-visitors-per-square-foot. If the goal were to exploit the dollar potential of spaces our ancestors set aside permanently, then the district would have to sell every acre it owns.

  County Board members have, though, at times treated the district as both a land bank and a piggy bank. One example of each: In 1999 they explicitly violated the district's sacrosanct land policy to sell a 2.4-acre parcel to the Village of Rosemont for a convention center expansion. And in 2007, they concocted a dead-wrong revision of history to justify a $13 million rip-off. The same County Board members who supposedly protect the Forest Preserve District's interests essentially stole district money to balance the county budget. 

  The current proposal for changing governance-that is, for preserving the forest preserves-isn't the first. Financial scandals so plagued the district in 2002 that folding it into county government seemed to make sense.

  That idea foundered with the realization that then-County Board President John Stronger saw a merger as part of an elaborate plan to evade tax caps. One traditional and cynical scam: County Board members and presidents like to boast of not having raised Cook County property taxes in recent years. What they don't admit is that, instead, they've raised revenue by hiking Forest Preserve District property taxes. Once again, think Forest Preserve District-as-piggy-bank.

  Creating a separate board to oversee the district makes better sense: That would eliminate the County Board's conflicts of interests. The Civic Committee and Friends of the Forest Preserves suggest five unpaid commissioners elected countywide. We'd prefer choosing commissioners from five separate districts. The proposal notes that this wouldn't involve hiring any employees; the Forest Preserve District, as a distinct government, already has its own office staff.

  A separate board paying closer attention to the preserves might have avoided the County Board's mismanagement and also expanded the district's holdings. Creating that new board is a job for state legislators; their predecessors created the district in 1913. 

  The sooner they do so, the better for the forest preserves and the citizens who should be able to enjoy them in perpetuity.

   



------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  bcnnet mailing list
  bcnnet at ece.iit.edu
  http://www.ece.iit.edu/mailman/listinfo/bcnnet
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://screamer.ece.iit.edu/pipermail/bcnnet/attachments/20080403/2d6251e6/attachment.html