Turf Field Referendum Soundly Defeated At Polls
Pars, Sprague Jr. fall short in bids to serve on school boards.
Photos
Western Springs voters Tuesday gave a resounding "no" to the Park District's referendum to issue $1 million in bonds to pay for the construction of a synthetic turf field in Spring Rock Park.
With all precincts reporting, the nays carried the day by a nearly 2-to-1 ratio, with 909 "no" votes to 487 in favor.
Green signs appeared around the Village on Tuesday, including outside many polling locations, urging residents to vote against the referendum, with the slogan "wrong place, wrong plan" and protesting against raised taxes and enviromental effect. No signs appeared in favor of the proposal.
The result means that the Village will lose a $500,000 grant from the Township of Lyons obtained to build the field. The field will not be built.
Outsider candidate Pars falls short
Village voters chose all three caucus candidates for the District 101 School Board over independent Eli Pars.
With all precincts reporting, Pars garnered 436 votes, 16.9 percent of all votes cast, an impressive showing for a non-caucus candidate but not enough to dethrone any of the three caucus candidates: Kathleen Wennerstrum (868 votes, 33.6 percent), Eleanor Wackerman (672 votes, 26.0 percent) and Todd McLawhorn (611 votes, 23.6 percent).
Tight LTHS race ousts Sprague Jr.
In a closely-contested race for the Lyons Township High School Board, John T. Polacek (4,350 votes, 23.0 percent) defeated Arthur W. Sprague, Jr. (3,677 votes, 19.5 percent).
Heather H. Alderman (5,421 votes, 28.7 percent) and Philip Palmer (5,459 votes, 28.9 percent) were safely elected.
Palmer, an non-incumbent, will replace four-term veteran Sprague Jr. on the Board. Alderman and Polacek are incumbents.
Uncontested races
Sheila R. Hansen, Edward Joseph Tymick and Patrick Thomas Word were elected as three new Village trustees in an uncontested race.
Brigette Denning and Gloria S. French were elected library trustees; they were also uncontested.
Dominic Arquilla, Jennifer Dunleavy and Michael E. Stibich were elected as four-year commissioners for the Park Board. Walter Knake was elected to a two-year terms. Again, there was no contest.
Finally, Reta Strecker, Any Jo Wittenberg and Robert Hiatt ran uncontested and won spots on the District 106 (southern Western Springs and La Grange Highlands) Board.
All totals are unofficial until certified by Cook County.
C Throckmorton
7:51 am on Wednesday, April 6, 2011
Why do we have to "lose" the grant? What about, as others have suggested, some ice skating rinks and/or a band shell?
Darren McRoy
10:37 am on Wednesday, April 6, 2011
Because, unfortunately, the terms of the grant specifically tied it to a turf field. That just appears to be the way the grant application process works... you have to apply for something in particular.
Joseph R. Martan
1:30 pm on Wednesday, April 6, 2011
Clearly, the "powers that be" wanted that turf field. Too bad they failed to realise that the MAJORITY of taxpaying residents saw it for what it was - a "goodie" for a small privileged minority who wanted bragging rights with other communities. Memo to our Park Board: spend a little money for dirt and properly maintain the old field instead of pushing projects favored by yuppie elitists and aging jocks.
Matt Hays
4:18 pm on Wednesday, April 6, 2011
Great to see that we can count on so much support for a park district referendum focusing on maintaining/improving the parks. Especially in light of the fact that the last one was defeated a couple of years ago. Perhaps it is time for another?
Joseph R. Martan
11:48 am on Friday, April 8, 2011
Matt: Employing the cheesy tactic of repetitive referendums to wear down opponents of tax increases isn't going to work in these times. Whether a prior referendum was defeated is irrelevant. The controlling issue here was whether an artificial turf field - and the necessary property tax increase to support it - was an improvement which would benefit the MAJORITY of this village's residents (and taxpayers). Those who voted on Tuesday concluded - by a 2 to 1 margin - that it wasn't. If you are willing to pay for something which only a handful of aging jocks and the children of yuppie "we want everything for our children" parents will use, then I suggest supporting the idea of user fees by those who would actually use it. Last, if the conditions on this field are so bad, then it smacks of a lack of adequate and timely maintenance. Instead of millions for a prestige project, how about building up the field with soem loads of dirt, new sod and a drain tile if necessary. That's a lot less costly.
When I learned the game of football part of the core teaching was that you played the game irrespective of conditions. A muddy field - that was part of the learning experience - to learn to perform when optimum conditions aren't handed to you. It was a good learning experience - and a good life's lesson. Reading some of the supporter comments on this issue, that life's lesson aspect seems to have been forgotten. A little mud isn't going to hurt anyone.
C Throckmorton
1:48 pm on Wednesday, April 6, 2011
Perhaps next time we should have a referendum on what to get BEFORE we apply for a grant. @ Darren: Too late to re-apply?
Darren McRoy
2:28 pm on Wednesday, April 6, 2011
The Park Board meets at 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday, April 12 in Village Hall. They always welcome visitor comment. I would highly suggest bringing that idea to their attention; the Township might be willing to consider reissuing a portion of the grant for a separate project. On the other hand, they may have a higher-priority project in a separate town.
Paulette Delcourt
7:15 pm on Wednesday, April 6, 2011
We can't have "mob rule" in town, that's why we elect our officials! But I have to agree with Claudia, not agreeing on the project before a grant is written seems like a waste of energy. Grant writing is arduous, and I'm curious to know if a professional grant writer was paid for this. @Darren, do you know who authored the original grant? I can see Spring Rock from my house, and over the last few years it would make a better habitat for carp than kids.
Greg Lumsden
8:54 pm on Thursday, April 7, 2011
Just a few points. 1)There were public meetings held before the Park District applied for the grant (3 or 4 I believe) and the MAJORITY that attended were in favor of requesting the grant for the field. 2) The Park District applied for the Grant for the FULL amount required to build a turf field, but it was at the discretion of the Township to distribute the money. All of the grants that they awarded were for less than any of the projects needed and they stipulated that the money could ONLY be used for the project presented after the grants were awarded. They still sit on a significant amount of grant money which they have not yet awarded...............maybe somebody should ask the Township why they didn't grant enough money for anyone to complete their proposed projects and why they are sitting on the rest of the grant money. A skating rink is a lovely idea.......it also requires total replacement on a yearly basis and volunteers to run it. A band shell would also be quite nice. Who would pay for the bands to play in it after it is built?? The Park District has money in the bank (as the signs say). However, that money has to last until the year 2026 or something like that. The Park District has not had a tax increase in Western Springs in nearly 50 years. They really do an amazintg job on a very tight budget. Finally, the fields are properly maintained thanks to the donations of Football and Little League to offset the costs that the Park District cannot cover.
C Throckmorton
10:04 pm on Thursday, April 7, 2011
Although there were public meetings, the majority of people I know were still completely unaware of the initiative. From what I have learned about the Gilbert Park rink, they average $1500 ea. You can buy a lot of rinks with $1M, but it wouldn't take a lot of community donations to make them happen either.
Good question - why wouldn't the Township completely fund projects...?
Paulette Delcourt
9:50 pm on Thursday, April 7, 2011
The money was not made available to us to complete the project, that is ultimately what drove the outcome of the vote. Taxpayers have no stomach for any kind of increase while their friends and neighbors are losing their businesses and homes. Thanks for the clarification on the original grant proposal.
Carol
10:00 pm on Thursday, April 7, 2011
I'm still not clear where the "grant money" was coming from.... the "$500,000 grant from the Township of Lyons". Is this money from Lyons Township taxpayers? Or do they have a money tree?
Darren McRoy
10:50 pm on Thursday, April 7, 2011
Carol, 3% of your property tax bill goes to the Township; I imagine that is their funding source. I suspect, although I don't know, that a portion of businesses' taxes also go into it... so I imagine all that McCook industry and Countryside retail pays a part?
Paulette Delcourt
10:03 pm on Thursday, April 7, 2011
What would be perfect would be if the money was returned to the taxpayers. Most money trees are a bit bare these days.
Paulette Delcourt
10:07 pm on Thursday, April 7, 2011
Claudia, I agree that people really didn't know about it.
C Throckmorton
5:29 am on Friday, April 8, 2011
I think that using our tax money for a community project is KIND of a way of returning it to taxpayers. It's just ineffective to only partially fund a project...
Paulette Delcourt
8:24 am on Friday, April 8, 2011
Yes and the benefit is limited to a few people.
Carol
11:59 am on Friday, April 8, 2011
Where exactly in SpringRock Park was this proposed synthetic turf field supposed to be? Was it at the west end of the park? It is my understanding that there is asphalt in that area which had been used as the place to keep road construction equipment when the TriState was being built. If that is true, putting synthetic turf on top would do nothing to help the drainage. Taking off the soil above the asphalt, removing the asphalt, replacing the soil, and reseeding would take care of the drainage with no need for "synthetic turf".
Paulette Delcourt
12:38 pm on Friday, April 8, 2011
I wonder if that's true (about the ashphalt). If so, that's another concern.