One of the keys in moving our business community along (both retail and commercial), is to have a village board that has the vision and passion to see the value of development, and how that development provides not only better services and lifestyles for our community, but a significant tax base for all.

I want to personally thank the current Village Board of Trustees for their many hours spent in study, planning, listening, and discussing the various options that will be the greatest benefit to our community. With over 30 business building vacancies, the current economic climate, and the shortage of $1.3 million in tax revenues (versus forecast), we must continue to have a strong, broad-minded, supportive Village Board of Trustees.

As a “large” cheerleader for Oak Park, a board member of the Village Manager Association (VMA), and a local business person, I want to personally encourage many of you who are “on the fence” about local government to participate in our VMA Selection process. Whether you are interested in running for one of the five positions open next year, or are interested in joining the Selection Committee (a group of citizens like yourself who will help interview applicants starting in early September for the open positions, and will choose the best candidates to run for Village President, Clerk, and Trustee with VMA endorsement), you can learn more by coming to our Marion Street Cheese Market Event on Tuesday, August 26th beginning at 7:00 pm. You can also contact Bob Tucker via www.vma-oakpark.org/selection or robert_g_tucker@comcast.net.

Volunteering for the VMA Selection process could be a very rewarding experience for you….and also very important for our great community.

Sincerely,

Paul Beckwith
VMA Board Member
2007 Dominican “Entreprenur of the Year”
President of The Sachem Company

We are looking for those individuals who have a positive attitude and the necessary skills, background, character and desire to effect change in our community. These jobs can be difficult at times, but they also can be very rewarding.

While a great deal of attention will be given to national politics in the months ahead, important local issues are facing our Village now and will continue to face our Village in the years ahead. In the last Village election, the VMA endorsed slate of the Citizens for Progressive Action candidates, Ray Johnson, Jon Hale, John Hedges, and Jan Pate, received the overwhelming support of the electorate, and since their swearing in as Trustees, the Village Board has made tremendous progress. The VMA hopes to build on that progress.

If you want to be part of a group that can work together for accountable, responsive and fiscally responsible government, ongoing and inclusive diversity, and balanced and sensitive economic growth, then I urge you to contact us. Applicants for Village President, Clerk and Trustee will be interviewed by a volunteer group of citizens later this fall. These citizens will then choose the bestqualified candidates to receive the VMA endorsement for the next election.

VMA endorsed candidates have served Oak Park with great distinction. Once elected, our candidates listen and learn from members of the community and make informed decisions for the benefit of all Oak Park. If you would like to learn more about the VMA selection process, please go to our website at vma-oakpark.org/selection. You can also call us at 386-3228 or e-mail us at BobTucker@vma-oakpark.org. If you would like to submit an application for Village President, Clerk or Trustee or serve on the citizen committee which will recommend a VMA candidates endorsement, please contact us.

Robert Tucker
Chair, VMA Candidate Recruitment Committee

• The Oak Park Village Board meetings are no longer an embarrassment. We see a return to responsible, civil discourse at the Board’s table with fewer meetings, which end at reasonable hours, giving both Board members and members of the public sensible opportunities for engagement.
• This Board has addressed the serious Village fund balance issues by making difficult cost cutting moves, with plans to monitor the process throughout the year in advance of the next budget session. Over $3.5M in nonessential expenses was cut from the 2008 budget. Village-owned properties are being sold and returned to the tax rolls.
• Concrete action has occurred despite the very challenging economic times. For example, continued capital improvement throughout the Village is taking place, with a renewed emphasis on street resurfacing and alley reconstruction. The village is reaching out to Springfield and Washington, D.C. to secure State and Federal dollars for added capital improvement and infrastructure projects.
• Movement is occurring on the Colt/Westgate area. The Board has implemented the new idea of competition with development teams, which is aiding this movement.
• Public safety initiatives have been started, along with police deployment reviews with Police Chief Tanksley.
• The Village is working strategically with its neighbors as evidenced by: outreach to Chicago Aldermen for North Avenue improvements; partnerships with Berwyn and Cicero for Roosevelt Road improvements; and continued inter-governmental cooperation with Forest Park and River Forest for resource sharing.
• Efforts toward becoming a sustainable community have increased, demonstrated by Oak Park hosting Green Town, the Barrie Park Green Homes RFQ, the Bike Plan, and the recent effort to consolidate commercial waste collection.
• The Board has focused on improved parking efficiencies and cost/expense ratios designed to reduce the parking fund deficit.
• Work has started on a new vacancy ordinance that would seek to reduce the number of commercial vacancies in the village by encouraging building owners’ efforts and progress and improvements to properties.

Three cheers for this outstanding team, which, true to its name, has made PROGRESS and ACTION the new theme of Oak Park governance.

Sincerely,

Bob Kane
President of the VMA Board of Directors

The feature article did have some inaccuracies, however, which I’d like to clarify. One important point to make clear is that the VMA does not develop a political platform. Rather, the VMA selects and endorses candidates, who then develop a platform of their choosing as they compete to represent the Village as a Trustee. The VMA as an organization is governed based on its Guiding Principles of Accountable and Responsive Government, Ongoing and Inclusive Diversity, and Balanced and Sensitive Economic Growth.

I would also like to call attention to the fact that our selection process is a very open one, and all can apply – all we ask is membership in our organization and agreement to our Guiding Principals. I invite you to go to our website at vma-oakpark.org for more information on the Guiding Principles and our selection process, or for membership opportunities. The desire by VMA members to make Oak Park a great place to live is our sole motivation, and we welcome all who share that vision to join us!

NLC/VCA Spin – This Village Board approved $5.8 million in new spending to support business districts along Harrison Street., Chicago Avenue., Roosevelt Road., North Avenue., and Lake Street.

Fact – The actual amount is $6.0M ($1.2M for engineering and $4.8M for streetscape improvements. While we believe the implementation of the various plans approved by previous VMA majority boards do need to move forward, the current board may need to borrow up to $6.0M to implement these plans and our current debt load must be carefully managed.

The fact that the $6.0M debt load could be handled within the current 2006 budget and beyond is in large measure possible because of the 2005 budget approved by former VMA President Trapani’s board, which came in at 95% of budgeted expenses and 102% of projected revenues. That 7% difference allowed our fund balance to remain at the 20% target encouraged by our financial advisors, and ensured our bond rating remained high. For the NLC and VCA to take credit for 2006 infrastructure momentum gives short shrift to previous boards fiscal prudence.

The current NLC and VCA board majority is not as fiscally prudent as past boards or as prudent as they would have us believe. Ask yourself a simple question – is it wise or prudent to spend anywhere from $7.2M to $10.0M on “saving” the Colt building?

NLC/VCA Spin – This village board expanded the Retail Rehab Grant Program previously available only in downtown to all village business districts.

Fact – While technically correct, the previous VMA majority board put this into motion during 2004/5 so that funds could be allocated in the 2006 budget. This is yet another example of expansion of a program created by a VMA majority board where the costs associated with the program’s expansion could be absorbed into the budget without a tax increase due to strong fiscal management of the 2004 and 2005 budgets. In addition, the many business district plans created by VMA majority boards allow for strategic and tactical investment with the goal in mind of expanding our sales tax base, creating the potential for the Village to reduce its share of your property tax.

But are our efforts regressing? Ask yourself a simple question – are vacancies in town going down or up? What was really behind the Lane Bryant fiasco? Why did the NLC/VCA board majority vote against filling vacant space in the Marshall Fields building downtown – which continues to carry a 75% vacancy rate?

NLC/VCA Spin – This Village board raised the caps on grant and loan amounts available from Oak Park Development Corporation (OPDC) to gateway businesses on Oak Park’s borders.

Fact – This is actually correct and we agree this is a good enhancement to a program put in place in partnership between OPDC, the Village and past VMA majority boards. The fact that was conveniently omitted however, was that NLC/VCA Trustees Milstein and Brock voted against all partner agency contracts, which included OPDC, as part of a sweeping NO vote for a large consent agenda during a December 5, 2005 board meeting. Ask yourself again – how can they take credit for something they are on record as voting against?

The perpetuation of half-truths and misleading attacks against a wide range of Oak Parker’s who worked hard to serve the public, actually does nothing to solve today’s problems.

As was exemplified by the NLC/VCA campaign of 2005, just because someone repeats something often enough and loud enough for everyone to hear, that doesn’t mean it’s a fact. We urge you to review the village board minutes @ www.oak-park.us and to watch TV-6 to see for yourself what the facts truly are. And, while the NLC/VCA ‘One View’ includes an awful lot of sound-bites, we still await sound policies which address the real issues at stake in the community – issues like recent property tax bills which threaten the ability for many to remain in Oak Park and the consistent, high-volume, personal attacks against developers, investors, and some in the business community from NLC/VCA board members.

We are proud of the record of the VMA over the years. We also appreciate a healthy debate of issues that are important to Oak Parkers. Our common bond as Villagers is that we care about the Village and misstating facts threatens that bond. As President John Adams said, “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”

Sincerely,
Bob Kane
VMA President on Behalf Of the VMA Board of Directors

In particular we would like to know what Dress Barn or which Lane Bryant Store anywhere in the U.S.A. does not have a competing store within 200 feet of their front door? In general and perhaps more to the point, we would like to know why the Board majority appears to be so generally hostile to the business community? The simple truth seems to be that this group has an agenda and ran on a platform that is anti-business and anti-development.

We sadly remember how the de-facto leader of this Board argued with Seymour Taxman and how Taxman walked away from Oak Park with 27 million dollars in his bank account that could have been invested here. We also sadly remember how the Board guaranteed a low tax assessment for the former Fields building by denying usage by a private tax paying school. We wonder why the Board majority felt obligated to lecture the downtown retailers while denying their pleas to fast track additional parking. We also wonder why this Board thought that a moratorium on development would be a good idea. It is however, no wonder that developers now are not going through the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process, opting to build within right because the Board has made it cumbersome as well as confrontational and the public thrashing seems to be a scare tactic for developers who would want to step up to the plate.

For us, however, we only have to look at the Wednesday, July 5 Board meeting for everything to be crystal clear. The Board was reviewing construction changes to ok’d projects. One particular project is on North Avenue where MB Financial Bank had brought to the Board changes to the shape of their latest branch to conform to a newly adapted nationwide design standard. The Board rightly informed them that they needed to review the changes with the neighbors — but it seems the Board was also going to teach them a lesson. They wanted MB to wait in line or start the approval process over. It will take three months for them to be heard and a new review started. Our Village Board, in its wisdom, is going to teach the 9th largest banking group in the U.S. a lesson. In the meantime, North Avenue will have a crater which will cause a public safety issue and exist as an eye-sore for the next seven months because this Board thinks its job is to teach lessons.

The only lesson which will be understood is that Oak Park is a very unfriendly place to make a living, and that this current controlled Board has never had Oak Park as its first priority. Balanced and sensitive development is possible, but you have to want to see it happen first.

Statements attributed to Mr. Milstein in that same article that denigrated and, indeed, called the departing Village Manager a liar are uncalled for, counterproductive and damaging to the Village. Calls by Trustee Milstein for the Village legal staff and HR Director to seek employment elsewhere and innuendo that the Village is unfair to its employees confuses and compromises the Trustee’s role. We fear that such conduct may have irrevocably damaged the ability of residents to entrust to him the stewardship of the Village.

The Village Manager form of government works because it trusts a Village manager to run the day-to-day business of the Village so that the Board can concentrate on developing policy that advances the Village as a whole. Trustee Milstein’s recent conduct in denigrating its Manager and other Village staff undermines the Village manager form of government – indeed at a critical time when the Village is seeking a new manager! Ask yourself if you were an applicant seeking a Village Manager position whether you would apply for a position where your ability to run the Village’s business is compromised and micro-managed by those very Trustee’s who have entrusted you with your position?

Trustee Milstein’s conduct should be publicly repudiated by the Village President and all other Trustees who wish to restore confidence and integrity in the Village’s ability to govern.

Submitted on Behalf of the Board of Directors of the Village Manager Association.

Sincerely,

Bob Kane, VMA President

A change in the Village Manager presents many challenges. Residents, the business community, staff, local and regional governmental entities and other stakeholders will look for a blueprint of the future in the credentials of the new manager. The challenge statement and the position description should be available on the Village web site as soon as possible. Communication and transparency foster confidence in the process and the ultimate decision by the board.

The Village Board sets a course for the future beyond its own tenure. The past 10 years have yielded unprecedented increases in our home values, median incomes, tax revenues, and bond ratings. Oak Park has solidified its reputation as a diverse, solid, and reputable community in the Chicagoland area. A new manager must have impeccable administrative qualifications to keep it as such. Our vision for the future, however, requires the Board and citizens to be creative and bold and look beyond those requisite skills in the selection of the next manager. We look for a manager who can achieve the following:

1. Be a strong leader in the community with demonstrated rapport among all constituents.
2. Enhance Village Hall performance in terms of timely responses to citizen requests.
3. Demonstrate empathy and respect in all interactions with citizens and staff.
4. Explore the challenges facing an historical “urban” suburb with full disclosure, and provide practical solutions for long-term viability. There should be no hidden agendas and no manipulation of data and resources simply to appease the Board or the community.
5. Increase the level of inter-governmental cooperation with surrounding communities, examples of which include our consolidated dispatch center and emergency response systems.
6. Increase and expand the existence of intra-governmental cooperation efforts like the Drug and Gang Task Force, the TIF carve out agreement, shared expenses, and long term budget planning to ease the tax burden.
7. Expand our focus on regional planning and transportation systems.
8. Increase with local legislators opportunities for state and federal funding such as for education, local roadway improvements and the “Cap the Ike” project.

To determine a roadmap for the future, we must first look inward to assess our willingness to embrace that future with non-partisanship and open agendas. We therefore ask the current Board to ask itself the following questions during its deliberations:

1. Will the current Village Board commit to the independence of the Village Manager? Can the board clearly articulate goals and allow the Village Manager to implement those goals without daily interference?
2. Will the Village Board recruit a Village Manager with a strong background in responsible economic development? If yes, will the board allow the new manager to use her/his experience to guide the board?
3. Will the board refrain from micro- managing the village staff during the time of an interim manager? Retirements, potential retirements and terminations have already placed a burden on the staff. Will the board be tolerant and supportive publicly and privately during this period?
4. Will the board give the new manager time to put a new team in place? Patience will be required from Board members. Will potential candidates be impressed by current board protocols with staff? Will Village staff have an increased or diminished role in the future?
5. Will the current board have the courage to put the best candidate in the position? Can individual preferences be overcome for the greater good? Each candidate represents a unique opportunity, yet over 50,000 individuals depend on the administrative and managerial skills of the Village Manager.
6. Will the current board be truly non-partisan in its selection process? Will all members of the community be listened to equally? Will opportunities to influence be given to all?
7. Will the board act quickly? Any delay in the process of selection has ripple effects throughout the community.

In choosing a new Village Manager, the current Board is making a choice that will have impacts lasting well beyond its tenure. We feel strongly that this is a time to look beyond how a manager conducts process in Village Hall. Instead it is a time to move to hire the best individual to lead our Village into an exciting future.

Bob Kane, Presiden, Village Manager Association (VMA)

The strength of our community rests on the strengths of our schools – and our schools hold our future leaders. They deserve the best. Past Village Boards have forged strong partnerships with our schools and given them much-needed support that was not forthcoming from the State. For example, under the leadership of former Village President Trapani and the stewardship of Village Manager Carl Swenson, the Village negotiated the Tax Increment Financing (TIF) “carve out” agreement, that removes properties from the downtown TIF district and allows for earlier distribution of funds and much-needed short term infusions of capital. The prior Village Board also passed a Resolution in support of House Bill 750, which would reform school financing and provide property tax relief to homeowners.

In addition, the Village Board provided monetary support for District 97’s transportation and diversity programs, and support for the schools weighed heavily in the decision of a majority of the prior Board to extend the downtown TIF which will provide long term financial benefits to the schools.

We believe that it is important that Oak Parkers understand the direct, positive connection between economic growth, which can be balanced and sensitive, and the plight of school funding. If we are to maintain and improve our school system, then it is a matter of choices. Without meaningful school finance reform, we believe that the choices lie in three broad categories: Increased real estate taxes, increased TIF carve outs, or increased tax-generating development. The Village has seen a steady increase in real estate taxes driven in part by bond issues for necessary school, parks and library infrastructure improvements, and increased property valuation driven by soaring property prices which are, in part, due to the value that home buyers place on a robust school system. Real estate taxation is potentially at a point where the potential for flight from the Village and falling property values could occur. Increased TIF carve outs or even the elimination of TIFs is a short-term fix that does not address long-term tax generation brought about by development using TIFs as a tool. Increased tax-generating development will produce economic gain for the Village through increased tax dollars for our schools, parks, libraries and Village government. In addition, sensitive development allows for increased sales tax revenue which could help offset the apparent increasing need for greater property tax revenue at the Village level. Development stagnation will result in a long term economic detriment and downward spiral for the Village. We cannot risk such a result.

We urge the Village to explore ways that it can expand our tax base to assist our local public educational institutions, as well as our parks and libraries, while not overburdening our home owners. We further urge you to lobby for school finance reform within the State of Illinois.

We also urge the Village board to move swiftly on the development and redevelopment of downtown Oak Park. The sooner this is achieved, the sooner the Village, and thus our schools, parks and libraries will benefit from the increased sales and other tax revenues. The situation is dire – please move promptly with progressive and appropriate development.

Submitted on Behalf of the Board of Directors of The VMA

Sincerely,

Brad Bartels, VMA Vice President