The Forest Preserves under Threat

Today at the October 7, 2009, meeting of the Cook County Forest Preserve Board, I watched a controversial vote in which a majority of Cook County Commissioners approved going ahead with"only a conversation," yet this "conversation" will only serve to compromise one more of Cook County's beleagured Forest Preserves.

The piece of land in dispute focuses on a section where Hinsdale currently leases a small baseball field that has not been developed in a way that has permanently disrupted the surrounding natural landscape. Now Hinsdale wants to significantly expand and develop this land, taking more than two dozen acres away from the habitat and wetland buffer, adding bathrooms and finished soccer and baseball fields.

The Chicago Tribune editorialized strongly against this deal. The "Friends of the Forest Preserves" turned out one of the largest rallies in its history at the Board today in protest. Forest Preserve legal experts and the staff that the county government has hired to professionally manage our wonderful natural resources have said that this "it's only a conversation with Hinsdale" line of discussion violates the Forest Preserve's land use policy and its central mission to protect inviolate the natural lands in the forest, river, and lake preserve system.

You would think that would have been the end of the discussion. County Board officials should not be able to approve even an exploration of any project that violates the land use policy and central mission of the Preserves. And worse, no one has addressed the very dangerous precedent this deal with Hinsdale would set in the future for similar attempts by others in Cook County who see the Forest Preserves as potentially valuable plunder whenever they need undeveloped land for new projects, recreational or otherwise.

But nine Commissioners voted to continue the negotiations with Hinsdale, including my opponent, the incumbent Commissioner Goslin, representing the 14th District, against whom I am running. (All the votes are listed below.)

The 14th District also has the second largest allocation of Forest Preserves in Cook County.

One of the aspects of the debate that surprised me the most was that several city-based commissioners, who admittedly have no forest preserve land in their districts, supported Commissioner Gorman's initiative from her home district to let go of the natural and habitat purposes of this forest preserve land for Hinsdale's local recreational purpose, and dare I say, perhaps compensating for poor planning at the outset for adequate park lands of its own.

The Commissioners' rationale included references to personal behind-the-scenes "deal making" between them, and the forest preserve land being only for "rats and squirrels," while another likened this decision to converted recreational use of urban spaces such as a skateboard parks under the highway.

Clearly there is a significant educational piece missing here for many Commissioners on the differences between "parks and recreation" and "natural preserve and conservation." As the nation recently has watched in Ken Burns's inspiring documentary series aired on public television on the National Parks, America's Best Idea, we are a nation that largely has embraced and profoundly benefitted from sacred and pristine wild space. And we have always had to fight to protect its full unspoiled nature from the forces of development and profit. This is especially true when the resource in question is located in urban areas where land is at a premium.

There is no more precious asset in Cook County than its "emerald necklace," its wonderful natural spaces that are usable and enjoyable by all county residents, rich or poor, young or old, north, south, or west. Whereas most residents of Cook County will never interact with many county systems -- the hospitals, jails, or courts -- these lovely wild spaces belong to each of us collectively, and to the wildlife, flora, and fauna that inhabit them. We are the envy of many other counties.

The unfortunate system in Cook County that enabled this vote is that the Board of Commissioners also functions as the Forest Preserve District Commissioners. And this has put several Commissioners in direct conflict of interest with the forces of development.

Cook County government has the sad pattern of sometimes creating unnecessary departments, dividing and duplicating function unnecessarily at times to create more jobs for more people in a patronage system; and then at other times consolidating power for greater control where a natural conflict of interest exists, and checks and balances should instead be in place.

This Hinsdale "land grab" issue is an example of the latter problem in the structures of Cook County government. The Cook County Board and the Forest Preserve Board should be separate bodies.

Representative Elaine Nekritz and State Senator Don Harmon have filed legislation in Springfield that would legally separate the two boards. Leading reform Commissioners such as Larry Suffredin are taking the lead to help pass this legislation to separate the boards. I applaud this legislation and will work for its successful passage. In the meantime, if I am elected to the Board of Commissioners, the Forest Preserves will always have a champion and defender and my vote for protection.

I am gratefully supporting the Friends of the Forest Preserves' effort here, and I thank them for being the voice on this very important issue. They have proposed an all-volunteer board of five experts to oversee the Forest Preserves of Cook County, and I will work to support this reform.

My opposition to this initiative of Hinsdale's is based on the following factors:

1. The forest preserve in question is already seriously compromised as habitat with the golf course encroaching within its boundaries on the northeast side of the tri-state and the tri-state expressway itself. Clearing more land would continue to compromise this resource.

2. 26 acres is an enormous area to cut out of the forest preserve, especially when much of that area will be clear cut, sodded, turned into ballfield grass monocultures, and treated with herbicides and pesticides in order to protect and "maintain" the recreational resource.

3. The ballfield is currently surrounded by trees. Development of the immediate area into a soccer/recreational complex would entail removing many trees. How is their replacement being addressed?

4. The area in question also protects the watershed and wetlands around the area of Salt Creek that flows through it. How would the wetland impact be addressed, especially with runoff from the treatments applied to the fields?

Voting yes to continue negotiations with Hinsdale to destroy the Forest Preserve (9): my opponent, Gregg Goslin, R-Glenview; Elizabeth Gorman, R-Orland Park; Joseph Mario Moreno, D-Chicago; Joan Patricia Murphy, D-Crestwood; Tony Peraica, R-Riverside; Edwin Reyes, D-Chicago; Timothy Schneider, R-Streamwood; Deborah Sims, D-Chicago; Robert Steele, D-Chicago.

Voting to end the discussion and follow the land policy (4): Jerry Butler, D-Chicago; Earlean Collins, D-Chicago; John Daley, D-Chicago; Bridget Gainer, D-Chicago.

Voting present (1): William Beavers, D-Chicago.

Absent (3): Forrest Claypool, D-Chicago; Peter Silvestri, R-Elmwood Park; Larry Suffredin, D-Evanston, who correctly opposes this deal.