11 Responses to “PLAN COMMISSION RUBBER STAMPS, AS EXPECTED”

1. Charlie Says:
   August 23rd, 2008 at 11:19 AM "Dr. Karvelas and the parents who coach for the Lincoln Park High teams should contribute to POP’s legal fund. Without our intervention, Latin School would be monopolizing this field when completed and her students would never have access to it." But you're still trying to stop the field from being completed, aren't you? Wouldn't their contributions at this point be used to help you file a lawsuit to stop the field rather than help Lincoln Park High School gain access to it?
2. Tom Tresser Says:
   August 28th, 2008 at 08:41 PM Well, what are we teaching our kids in high school these days? At the Latin School it is apparently "We have the wealth and clout to flout the law, ignore public process and rip up priceless lake front land because it suits us." At the Lincoln Park High School the lesson looks like, "We have no regard for the rule of law or the counsel of the Lincoln Park Advisory Council or Friends of the Parks or the Sierra Club and instead are guided by a selfish desire for a well groomed playing field." There is a right and wrong here. But you are correct - a contribution to our legal fund is a vote for due process and honest government and for returning the site to a grass meadow.
3. Charlie Says:
   August 28th, 2008 at 10:38 PM Tom, As an educator and a bright and articulate public policy expert, you should be able and willing to acknowledge that there is rarely an absolute right and wrong in these kinds of debates, but rather competing interests. Schools and sports leagues favored the construction of an artificial turf field so they could use Lincoln Park for soccer and other sports, even in rainy weather that currently leaves the park full of puddles and mud. You and your colleagues favored protecting the grassy meadow to preserve the beauty and open space of the park. Nobody is "wrong" here, and the Framework Plan does not offer a clear and definitive vision for South Lincoln Park. I think it's terrific that you have fought for what you believe in, but I wish you were a bit less certain that the people who dare to disagree with you are selfish, lawless and morally inferior.
4. Tom Says:
   September 2nd, 2008 at 09:55 PM This issue is pretty black and white. The community said "NO" to this project in 2002. Six years later it was negotiated in secret and passed in haste with no public input. The Lincoln Park Advisory Council was not told of the involvement of the Latin School. They were told of a vague plan to build an artificial turf soccer field in the south field and that SHOULD'VE alerted them to action, but it didn't. POP sued and two courts agreed that the process was corrupt. Period. Now, to come in after the deal has been exposed and construction well along and say - "competing interests" should be listened to and the field allowed to stand seems, to me, to be morally indefensible. The rule of law was flouted. Clout - not merit - created the project as no studies of any sort were done before construction started. It's what happened at Meigs Field and Soldier Field. Clout caused that field to be built. Plain and simple. Is that how you want city government to work?
5. Charlie Says:
   September 2nd, 2008 at 11:31 PM I agree with you that the process was not good. The project came through under the radar, and community groups didn't get a chance to express their views early on. From this point of agreement, however, you begin to lose me, largely because of your inaccurate and inflammatory language ("corrupt," "morally indefensible," "rule of law was flouted"). The Latin-CPD deal was never deemed illegal or corrupt by the courts. The courts found only that there were insufficient public hearings (such as a hearing before the city's Plan Commission). The courts did not weigh in on the legality of the deal itself, and they actually didn't make any formal finding on the process being "corrupt," either. All they did was grant a temporary restraining order (which led to a settlement, as you know). The CPD then terminated the deal with Latin, went back to the Plan Commission, and held additional public hearings. The CPD has done what the courts wanted them to do. There are a lot of people who want this field completed. I disagree that the completion of the field at this point is "morally indefensible."
6. Fact Checker Says:
   September 3rd, 2008 at 09:10 AM The fact is that the TRO was granted because the Park District and Latin violated the the Lake Michigan and Chicago Lakefront Protection Ordinance. Another fact is the defendants admitted that the agreement between Latin and the Park District was illegal. Yet another fact is that Friends of the Park, LPAC, Sierra Club, Save Grant Park and thousands of Chicago residents oppose an artificial turf soccer field on this site. And the fact is that restoring the meadow to grass would cost less than 1/10th of what the Park District plans to spend to complete the project, which would free up enough funds to build 3-4 fields where they are truly needed and actually wanted.
7. Charlie Says:
   September 3rd, 2008 at 11:03 AM Your first sentence is close to accurate; the TRO was granted because there was sufficient evidence that the LPO had been violated. (The court would probably have ultimately determined that the LPO was violated if the case had been heard, so I'll give you this one.) This violation pertains to process (not going before the Plan Commission, not holding enough other public hearings), not to the substantive CPD-Latin agreement. Your second sentence is one of the many outright lies that your group has repeatedly told. The defendants never "admitted" that the agreement was illegal, nor do they even believe that it was illegal. If you can find a single piece of evidence to support your assertion that the defendants admitted that the agreement was illegal, please produce it. Your third sentence may be correct, although you are assuming that the people who signed the original petition opposing the CPD-Latin deal also join you in opposing the current field project, which is not necessarily the case. There are too many false financial assumptions in the last sentence to give the idea any credence.
8. Eric Says:
   September 3rd, 2008 at 08:50 PM If the CPD-Latin deal only violated process (public meetings, Plan commission, etc.) then why did the CPD decide to terminate their agreement with Latin instead of submitting the Latin deal to the Plan Commission? CPD realized that the Latin agreement could never withstand a number of potential legal challenges, so they gave up on it. The Park District is clearly flouting the will of the majority of the citizens for the benefit of a very small group. They knew this to be the case, otherwise they would not have pushed the secret, hurry up process. So yes, there is a "right" and a "wrong", here, not just two opposing sides with equal moral standing.
9. Charlie Says:
   September 4th, 2008 at 09:38 AM That very small group who want the field includes thousands of members of the Chicago Sport and Social Club; thousands of youth soccer players from AYSO, FC Drive and other leagues; students from Latin, Lincoln Park High School and probably a bunch of other schools who will be able to use the field; and (according to the CPD) the Lincoln Park Conservancy, the North Dearborn Association, and the Gold Coast Neighbors. So this argument about the "will of the majority" opposing the field is inaccurate. And as for the "secret, hurry up process," you are buying into the rhetoric of CKLPP without regard to the fact that the CPD has spent the last several months meeting with community groups and moving slowly toward the Plan Commission hearing in August. (They could have gone to an earlier Plan Commission hearing this summer if they had wanted to.) There is no longer any secrecy in this project, and there has not been an unusual rush to complete it, either. (The trial judge who had earlier been supportive of the plaintiffs' case dismissed their complaints about this yesterday.) In answer to the question about why the CPD terminated the agreement with Latin, you may be correct that it would not have withstood legal challenges. We know the trial judge didn't like the deal and set things up to dissolve it. The CPD might, however, have determined that it could ultimately win the legality argument but would lose the public relations battle, as the anti-Latin rhetoric from CKLPP resonated with a lot of people. I've said repeatedly that I think the CKLPP served its original mission very effectively, knocking out the public-private deal that they objected to. Is it OK to congratulate CKLPP on their victory and still be happy that the Park District is building the field, or is that too morally complicated a position to hold?
10. Eric Says:
    September 5th, 2008 at 06:19 AM My reference to a "secret hurry up process" was regarding the original Latin deal. Certainly that deal was not supported by all the groups that you mention, because under the contract with Latin, these other groups would have been locked out of the field except for the unusable winter months. It is difficult to quantify how many people are and were lined up on each side. Most of us opponents cannot leave work to attend Park District meetings during business hours. One Protect Our Parks meeting was a very full auditorium. That large group was only the tip of the iceberg that knew about the meeting and felt so strongly as to attend. But the best evidence that the CPD was acting against the overwhelming majority position was the CPD's own process. The CPD would not have scrambled to complete the Latin project and avoided public discussions unless the CPD themselves knew that they were acting against the will of the majority for the benefit of a small group. Even Vi Daley claims that CPD did not even notify her. And how did CPD know that the public would be outraged? Because the public was outraged by the 2002 version of the plan. Regarding your last question: the current version is not as abhorrent as the Latin deal. No billboards that Latin would rent to corporations. Probably more open access, although Latin will still try to lock up the best times from their buddies at the Park District. But a precious multi-purpose open park space in a congested area will be lost forever. The CPD is still choosing one the worst possible locations for a field only because that location is favored by their Latin-school buddies.
11. Charlie Says:
    September 5th, 2008 at 07:44 AM You get the last word on this. Thanks for chatting, and I sincerely wish you the best.

Sorry, comments are closed for this article.