Even before this year’s first school bell sounded, opponents and proponents of referenda to build and operate a new school in District 34 are debating. The opposition, which will call itself Citizens Associated for Responsible Education or CARE, issued a white paper detailing their objections.

The document charges District 34 is "inefficient and not fiscally responsible," and predicts that "tax revenue will increase with growth in the property tax base, even without approval of a referendum." The group also suggests that District 34's enrollment and related cost projections are "exaggerated and at odds with the 1999 District 225 study" of student population trends in Northfield Township.

The white paper is filled with statistics that support CARE’s claim that "We don’t need another school," but District 34 Superintendent Dot Weber disputes CARE’s data. "Schools and classrooms in District 34 today are different than they were even five years ago. Children with special needs and programs that serve them use space that formerly went for general classes. Many of the facts in the white paper are, therefore, outdated."

Weber sites her own statistics in support of a new middle school and argues that the district has been fiscally responsible. "We spend $1,500-$2,000 less per child when compared to the four other elementary districts that send their students to High School District 225," she says.

Editor’s note: During the course of the campaign for the fall referenda, it may be difficult for voters to decide which numbers to believe, but in the end numbers may not matter. Opponents will, no doubt, touch a nerve when they say, "CARE wants to keep the promise that redevelopment of the Naval Air Station will not cost homeowners additional taxes." What’s more, a majority of voters have no children in District 34 schools – a situation that may have doomed District 31's repeated efforts to raise money for a new school at the polls.

A new publication is making the rounds in Glenview. It’s called Glenview Straight Talk, and it purports to tell "the truth" about politics and public affairs in the village. Sadly, the two-page mailing is filled with misinformed opinion, boosterism and faulty analysis.

Take the item about Glenview’s Prairie Preservation Project. Straight Talk asks if Trustee Rachel Cook is a member of the group and suggests she stop voting on matters related to the prairie. In fact, Cook resigned from the GPPP before running for village board, but she – like Trustee Kent Fuller – remains concerned about the prairie’s future.

Does Straight Talk think lawmakers who have worked to prevent domestic violence should be barred from voting for protection of women and children? Should public education advocates be prevented from voting for school appropriations?

Straight Talk also fusses about a lawsuit filed by the Prairie Preservation Project to secure full legal protection for the property. "Upon investigation, it has been discovered that they have legal counsel pro bono," says the newsletter, "while the village taxpayers will have to pay to defend this lawsuit."

The Prairie Project is, in fact, getting legal representation at no charge from the head of the environmental division at Jenner & Block, one of Chicago’s largest and most respected firms. Law firms don’t take cases on which they will make no money unless they feel a serious injustice is being done.

On the other hand, Glenview shouldn’t have to pay a dime in legal fees. There would be no lawsuit if members of our village board would obey the law – consulting with Illinois’ Department of Natural Resources about the prairie. Instead, the trustees behave like developers, insisting they can’t afford to extend additional environmental protection.

The lack of critical thinking and the lack of news aside, Glenview Straight Talk is a disappointment because its authors, who describe themselves as "Citizens for Truth in Glenview," never say who they are. That kind of secrecy leaves us to wonder what this publication is really about and whether we can believe anything its authors say.

While Glenview Watch has definite views on the issues facing this community, we attempt to provide fair coverage and perspective for readers. Editorial opinions are clearly identified as are the editors, and we gladly print letters from anyone who disagrees.

If you saw our story, "Howard’s Ark," you recall the frustration of one man hoping to tear down a small home on a large lot and build two others. After more than an hour of discussion with the Plan Commission, he still had no clue of what formal procedures were necessary to achieve his goals and was told to come back in two weeks.

Did our coverage put some pressure on village planners? This week, the man was back for speedy approval of his request for subdivision.

Unfortunately, another citizen has taken his place in that civic purgatory known as the Glenview Planning Department. James Menighan has been trying to build an addition at 1011 Glenview Road for months. Each time he sends in new plans, village engineers say he isn’t including enough storm water detention.

"I’m perfectly willing to do a storm water retention as you require," said the frustrated homeowner, "but we can’t seem to get a handle on what they want. . .They’re not telling us, ‘Here’s what we want. Do it.’ We just keep coming to them, and they keep rejecting. Something is wrong here."

What followed was a lecture for the cable audience from Chairman Doron who considered it "my job to tell everybody who’s watching, so you understand why we have the subdivision code."

"Flooding is a problem, especially in east Glenview," he began. "When the village was built out in the post war era, many of the houses and lots built were substandard relative to controlling storm water. When the subdivision ordinance was passed years ago, its entire purpose was to try and bring those properties up to standards."

Menighan, whose old farm house was built long before the war, wondered why he should be made to pay for poor village planning in the past.

"Since it is your property, then you have the rights and obligations that go with it," said Commissioner Howard Silver. "What we’re saying is you’re welcome to put this addition on, but in order to do it, you have to meet these conditions."

But what conditions must he meet? During nearly an hour of discussion, Chairman Doron tried repeatedly to clarify what the village engineer seemed to be saying, only to be told that even he had it wrong.

At one point, Menighan said his engineer had designed a storm water detention system that would capture half of the water from the site and retain up to 58 percent of the runoff in a rainstorm.

"Well that’s what the ordinance requires," said an exasperated Commissioner Jack Bevington. "What’s the problem?"

"You’re asking the wrong person," said Menighan.

Doron demanded clarification on the ordinance. Did it require 50 percent detention based on square footage of the property, cubic feet of water or cubic feet of water per second running into our sewers? He begged for the planning department to provide numbers.

The Planning Department came back talking about restricter pipes, grading and pumps.

Finally, Doron drew the only possible conclusion: "It appears there is confusion," he said and offered to push for a speedy, behind-the-scenes resolution of Menighan’s problem.

Editor’s note: Either the ordinance governing storm water detention is too complex or too vague for the experts let alone homeowners. To avoid future cases of this kind, to spare the Plan Commission and the public untold frustration, the village board might want to ask for a revision of the law. That, of course, will have to wait until the commission fixes another poorly written ordinance – the one governing teardowns.

Plan Commission Chairman Tim Doron says a new teardown ordinance should be ready for public scrutiny in two weeks. In exploring ways to prevent construction of over-sized homes and additions, Doron found himself searching for a word coined by Dick Feit, a founder of CAP – Citizens Action for Proportionality. "This all kind of relates to what the CAPs people were talking about as far as – help me with the adjective," he said.

"Proportionality," said someone on the panel.

"Proportionality," said Doron. "Actually, that’s an adverb."

Editor’s Note: As he calculates the new ordinance, we hope Doron’s math is better than his grammar.

When he served as Glenview’s assistant village manager, Matt Carlson upset some residents who thought he was too gung ho about development. Carlson, you may recall, referred to the earliest phase of Glen construction as a "basectomy," and told Mark Ganchiff, then President of the Glenview Prairie Preservation Project, to buzz off because, "We’re going to develop this land whether you like it or not."

As public opposition grew, as traffic got worse and cracks appeared in fiscal plans for The Glen, Carlson announced he was leaving to become manager of Delafield, Wisconsin – a city of about 6,000 people. He reportedly wanted a "better quality of life" for his family.

Alas, it seems controversy has followed Carlson to his new job. He had persuaded the city council there to pay a third of his housing costs since he contended real estate in Delafield was very expensive, but when the public heard about the deal, they were outraged, and Carlson was forced to back down.

Now, Matt is dogged by a new dilemma. He’s pushing Delafield to install a $24 million water system, paid for in part by hook-up fees of $1,200-$1,700 and quarterly charges of about $150. In addition, each homeowner would have to pay the cost of physically linking his or her property to the line.

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports that hundreds of people descended on Delafield City Hall demanding a referendum on the matter and spent two hours testifying against Carlson’s plan. Residents are also taking a closer look at local government – heading over to city hall to ask for various documents.

Having learned his craft at the heels of Glenview’s Village Manager Paul McCarthy, Carlson has reportedly caused considerable frustration by insisting folks fill out forms before getting any information. The McCarthy administration has long required Glenview residents to fill out a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to get documents or data of any kind.

When village officials first unveiled plans for redevelopment of the Naval Air Station, they said 20 percent of the money from land sales would be set aside for capital improvements in other parts of the village. The money could, theoretically, be used to build a new school, to fix roads at Glen Oak Acres or to acquire open space.

Instead, Village President Nancy Firfer reports the money will be used to help pay off debts at the Glen. Our trustees haven’t talked much about cost overruns, but this diversion of dollars suggests the problem of growing Glen debt is very serious.

Trader Joe’s: Construction is finally underway on the northeast corner of Waukegan and Lake – future home to Trader Joe’s, but Glenview will not be the first North Shore community to have that popular specialty food and wine outlet. As predicted in the Watch, Northbrook’s store is likely to claim the honor. It’s expected to open in the Waukegan Road shopping center southeast of Deerbrook Mall where former Glenview deli Max & Benny’s is now located.

A hazard at Glenview and Harms: Soon after the tragic death of a young Glenview boy at a downtown construction site, one of our readers expressed concern about a large nitrogen tank that had been sitting unattended for weeks near Harms Woods. We called Glenview’s Director of Public Works, Bill Porter, who tracked down the owner and insisted the tank be removed. Ameritech had, apparently, been using the nitrogen to dry some of its underground cables. Porter said the nitrogen was not inherently dangerous but agreed the tank might have caused injury had it fallen on a child.

New Canaan Church expansion: Members of the New Canaan church are still hoping to build a large social and recreational center near their building on Greenwood north of Lake, but the matter – which is now before the Zoning Board of Appeals – has been continued. Normally, a developer would need to prove that no harm would come to the neighborhood as a result of this special use in a residential area, but a state law championed by State Senator Kathy Parker could provide carte blanche for church planners.

Gay Meier, Chief Financial Officer for District 34 Schools, says: "We were so surprised by your article [about new documentation required to prove residency]! We (the residency office, the central administrative office, and the superintendent's office) have not received ONE phone call from the Old Orchard County Clerk's office. I just spoke to the high school and the same is true there. If the County Clerk's office called somebody, it wasn't the school district offices!"

"Our residency office attempted to constantly monitor our process throughout the summer. We specifically questioned parents who had just returned from the Old Orchard facility about lines. Not once did anyone come back saying they had to wait. In fact, many of them had positive

comments about the process. At least two that we know of ended up getting a rebate for one reason or another. (Needless to say, they were thrilled). Several others commented that it was nice to finally straighten out the names on their tax bills once and for all."

"That's not to deny that there were some who were unhappy about being sent there, but almost to a person they were back in less than a half hour, and many said it wasn't as bad as they were anticipating."

"It's still too soon to have a final tally, but we can say with complete certainty that we had several families who began the process, could not meet our criteria and never returned. We'll be looking carefully at our figures and bringing the board a complete report in the near future. We'll be glad to share figures with you if you're interested since it is important that your reporting be accurate and not just hearsay."

"We will be reviewing and revising our process for next year. Our goal is to protect our taxpayers and at the same time be a parent_friendly organization. The two together can be challenging!"

Stu Hamilton has been Glen Watching again and has some serious concerns: "In my twice a week bike ride through The Glen on my way to work on Lehigh, I noticed that trenching and temporary windbreak fencing were being done on the median strip running along Patriot and Chestnut. What is this for? This had to cost the village $20,000 or more. To protect the grass? They could waste taxpayers money to save grass while refusing to spend taxpayer money to save more prairie? This has to be the most wasteful expenditure in The Glen since turning 35 acres into a mudhole filled with semi_polluted water that we taxpayers will have to spend a minimum of $60k per year to keep the carp out. How about we spend an equal amount to keep developers influence out of our village boards. At least the carp maintain silence while they do

their business."

"I liked the reference concerning Trustee Patton's homeboy only concerns. Wasn't he the crybaby wailing about how the new multi-story Optima condos were going to block his Circles neighbor's sunshine? What about the rest of Glenview's residents who will be stuck in never ending traffic jams throughout our village, courtesy of our uncontrolled development?"

"Also, during a meeting several months ago I asked Village President Firfer if the village was aware of the dangerous curve that was constructed at the entrance to The Glen from Chestnut. She assured me that the village was going to erect a sign that would eliminate any problems. Guess what? The sign is worthless as are the yellow stripes on the road as you approach the 15 degree turn to the right that drivers must negotiate. I have seen two cars proceed straight through, ignoring both signs and stripes __ directly into oncoming traffic! This is a fatality waiting to happen. Why doesn't our village act on this before the emergency medics are called in? This entry was skillfully (?) designed to slow down traffic. I guess it will slowdown to view the accidents that are sure to happen."

AB is upset with Glen Redevelopment Commissioner Novotny who opposes additional prairie preservation and doubts the need for wildlife protection: "Funny how Glenview can not afford to protect any more open space when other less affluent suburbs are able to. I don't buy that for a second. It is ALL about money!! People like Mrs. Novotny should not voice an opinion when they don't have any idea what they are talking about."

The Watch replies: We have also been disturbed by Novotny’s public remarks about wildlife. Recognizing birds and other animals on the prairie can take time, practice and expertise. Novotny paid one visit to the prairie and presumed to speak. On the other hand, Glenview resident Jeff Sanders has spent years observing butterflies. Last week he saw eight species on the prairie while seasoned birder Rob Blomquist reported two green herons and a great blue.

SS wonders: "How does one get the village of Glenview to clean up Lake Avenue, especially between Waukegan and Milwaukee Ave? It is so trashed out with weeds, needs landscape maintenance, removal of garbage, and the sidewalk is in disrepair."

The Watch replies: Lake Avenue is owned and operated by Cook County which is supposed to clean it three times a year. Improvements are scheduled over the next three years with the Milwaukee to Waukegan stretch set for work in 2002. When that happens, the village has tentative plans to improve the land along Lake with new sidewalks and trees. In the mean time, Glenview street crews sweep the curb line every four to six weeks.

Both Cook County Commissioners Greg Goslin and Cal Sutker read the Watch, but it wouldn’t hurt to contact them directly. Sutker’s number is 312-603-6383. Goslin can be reached at 312-603-4932.

NM asks: "Isn’t it time the village used technology to better inform the public by posting the agenda for village board and commission meetings on its website? And by the way, it appears that site hasn’t been updated since 1999!"

Gayle Nelson-Blomquist writes: "I recently discovered two more reasons why I like the Watch so much. I know who writes it and I can respond to it easily. I came to this conclusion after I received a copy of "Glenview Straight Talk" in the mail. There was no return address on the envelope and no e_mail address in the copy. I found this very odd because the mailing included a section entitled: Responses From Readers. If I wanted to respond like I do in the Watch from time to time, I have no idea how I can do that. To top it off, "Glenview Straight Talk" is written anonymously by people who call themselves "Citizens for Truth in Glenview." Apparently they are too scared to back up their "truth" with their names. Finally, unlike the Watch, which highlight's editorial comments with clear credit, "Glenview Straight Talk" mixes a few facts with numerous blatant insinuations that are opinions at best. Hats off to the honest and open forum that the Watch provides. I get enough unsolicited junk_mail, and my copy of the Glenview Straight Talk is already in my recycle bin."

Your Turn. What's on your mind? Send us an e-mail. We are Sandy Hausman and Dean Schott – GlenviewWatch@aol.com.

To read past isssues of Glenview Watch, Click Here