EDITORIAL

_______________

Kudos to Hamos

If you're reading this on your way to work, call Julie Hamos when you get off the train, bus or el and thank her.

As chair of the mass transit committee in the State House of Representatives, she was responsible in large part for the transportation bill that was approved last week.

Rep. Hamos has the ability to take a problem, dissect and analyze it and see it through to resolution. Her firmness and focus, her unshakable belief in what the future of mass transit should be and whom it should serve is something that will benefit us all – from those whose livelihood depends upon the CTA to those who just want a convenient lift to a Cubs game or to the museum campus.

She has helped us find a way to abandon our dependency on cars; now we have to develop the will. We need Julie Hamos in Springfield, fighting the good fight for all of us.

_______________

Suffredin for State's Attorney

Our endorsement for State's Attorney in the Democratic primary election goes to Larry Suffredin, Cook County Commissioner and Evanston resident.

As an attorney, Mr. Suffredin has experience at the trial and appellate levels in both criminal and civil cases – a diverse rather than monochromatic career. He has been criticized for continuing to lobby in Springfield while serving on the Cook County Board, but we feel he has adequately answered that criticism. While serving as commissioner, a part-time job, he voted "present" on matters before the Board when he felt there was a conflict of interest with his lobbying practice.

He says he would take a strong stance against the possession of handguns – a position he has espoused consistently and publicly for many years. He promises to expand community outreach in order to better understand what types of crime are plaguing Cook County neighborhoods.

Acknowledging a climate of distrust of law enforcement among the county's minority populations, he says he plans to address the department's woeful lack of diversity: Of the nearly 950 attorneys, he says only 7 percent are African American and 4 percent Hispanic. Larry Suffredin has the strength, dedication and compassion to lead this office. He deserves your vote on Feb. 5.

_______________

Vote ‘Yes' on the RETT Referendum

The City has placed a referendum question on the Feb. 5 ballot that asks the residents of Evanston to increase the rate of the real-estate transfer tax by $1, from $5 to $6 per $1,000 of value of real estate. The $5 would continue to go into the General Fund, the City's main operating budget. The $1 would be split between the fire and police pension funds.

Nobody likes a tax increase, and in this real estate slump another cost tacked on to selling a house is one more worry. Yet in the long run we believe most will find an increase in the transfer tax a welcome effort to lessen the blow of a property-tax hike.

We wish it were not so, but Evanston has a lot of heavy lifting ahead – not just to keep our (as it sometimes appears) evanescent quality of life from disappearing altogether but to address a $140 million shortfall in the fire and police pension funds – a legacy, it seems, of poor judgment on several levels.

This increase is just one of many ways the City must find to address the pension-fund debt. Call it an imposition; call it an exit fee; but if your house is still standing and you and your family are safe, call it one way to help pay a debt that is owed in more than just dollars.

_______________

Obama for President

In the Democratic primary election, we endorse Senator Barack Obama for president. Our Illinois Senator wants to unify the country for the common good, putting aside the "friends versus enemies" mode of politics and offering hope that we can be a better country than we are now,

Sen. Obama makes us believe that restoration of our principles is not just necessary but possible. He makes us believe that we can work together and forge solutions to problems that have dogged our country for years. While some question the extent of his experience, we believe he is both intelligent enough and savvy enough to surround himself with knowledgeable and forward-thinking advisers.

Vote for Barack Obama on Feb. 5.

Sanctuary City

By Charles Wilkinson

"When did illegal aliens become ‘undocumented immigrants'?" a friend asked, tossing the latest issue of the RoundTable at me. "Your paper," he taunted, seems to condone the phrase."

I had read Joe Linstroth's front-page story and was not surprised that Evanston was "doing its thing" by taking a community stand on a hot and complex issue, believing that national problems really begin to get solved on the local level. But my friend's question got inside me and would not go away.

The term "undocumented immigrants" seems to be another example of political correctness. An illegal alien is someone to send the Feds after, someone "on the take" who slithers into the country, who is constantly looking over his or her shoulder to find a momentary feeling of being safe before disappearing into the shadows of anonymity. An undocumented immigrant is in fact an illegal alien, most often not fitting the above stereotype. And that is the problem.

Two days later a Chicago Tribune article about Evanston becoming a sanctuary city added to the dilemma my friend's question created. But the more I thought about the two labels, the more I began to see the beginnings of an insight and an idea.

My mother and father were both at one time or other undocumented immigrants, I believe. Mom became a citizen after Pop died, and I am certain the judge never forgot her Irish brogue. My sister and three brothers all served in the U.S. Air Force, and I know of no two people more American than my parents. True, it was a different country back then, but the process of becoming a legal resident (which my father did) or a citizen remains basically the same – and needs to be honored.

Remembering my parents reminded me that, for all except Native Americans, ours is an immigrant nation. Emma Lazarus' words at the base of the Statue of Liberty have made "immigrant" a positive label in our land, providing a dream to aliens of good will to become un-alienated in their new homeland.

Ours has been by tradition a nation of the open door, a history I am proud of and respect. But is it wrong to want to hear a knock and have the opportunity to ask, "Who's there?" before saying, "C'mon in!" and "Welcome"? If citizenship in our land is so greatly desired, is it not worth working for as well as honoring the "rules of the house"? Who would say, "That is too much to ask?"

The tougher question is how to take something as simple as that and make it practical.

Sanctuary cities across the country might be a way to begin – designated "Ellis Islands" where immigrants turn to get legalized.Secure our borders? Of course. But for those aliens already among us, why not a definite period of time to "get legal" in places designed to solve the problem? What better way to show good will on both sides? After the period of grace expires, the question of legality should become workably clear.

One strength of our nation is its diversity; another, its laws. Essential to both is the place of freedom offered to all. But freedom is not a gift, nor is it ever meant to be. Even when offered, it needs to be earned. Its price? Integrity, honesty and good will. Illegal aliens, undocumented immigrants: whatever the label, any person with those qualities should not think twice about knocking. Who among us would not say, "C'mon in?"

Not Here Yet

By Peggy Tarr

January 15th was the birthday of the late Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King, Jr. (1929-68) – Baptist minister, civil rights leader, Nobel Peace Prize recipient. In Dr. King's "I Have A Dream" speech, he said he dreamed that one day people would not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. That day is not here yet. Headlines still echo the theme of America: racism, racism, racism. Barack Obama is a glaring example of how the color of one's skin is emphasized.

"Since we live in a changing universe, why do men oppose change? If a rock is in the way, the root of a tree will change its direction." – Melvin Tolson (1900-66), African-American poet and educator.

I spent last Thanksgiving in South Carolina at the house of one of my sisters. My oldest sister, who is in her 80s, also came for the holiday, taking Amtrak from New Jersey to Charlotte, N.C., the closest Amtrak station. When we took our oldest sister to Amtrak to return home, we went into the station with her to make sure she got on the train okay. I had made arrangements for her to have a wheelchair or be driven to the train via cart.

This didn't happen. The man at the entrance to the ramp going to the trains wouldn't let us escort our sister to the train because we weren't passengers; he would not get a wheelchair for her or drive her to the train.

Fortunately, there was a push-cart nearby, on which we put our sister's luggage and watched her totter down the ramp. I was mad as #*&+.

A white woman in her late 20s arrived at the entrance with her mother. She had a large piece of luggage on wheels. The gatekeeper (with all the racial connotations that go along with this term) loaded her suitcase onto the motorized cart and drove her and her luggage to the train. I thought my head would explode as I loudly pointed out this discrepancy in treatment. I loudly accosted the gatekeeper about this when he returned. How could he let an 80-year-old person totter down the ramp alone but give a young person a ride?

The gatekeeper came up with several excuses for his behavior, which I quickly attacked, but then offered the most revealing and most accurate reason for his behavior by asking: "Do y'all live here?"

My anger rapidly descended into pity. This was a black man in the south, and in spite of the (mythological?) progress that has been made, Dr. King's dream was not here yet. The color of one's skin is still the determining factor in how one is treated.

"Even the smallest victory is never to be taken for granted. Each victory must be applauded, because it is so easy not to battle at all, to just accept and call that acceptance inevitable." – Audre Lorde, 1934-92, African-American poet and writer. (1929-68)

"The tyrant is only the slave turned inside out." – Egypt

One Saturday, late afternoon, prior to my trip to the South, I was walking down Main Street here in Evanston when I observed a bicycle on its side with a man sprawled on his back in a shop doorway across from the bike. I assumed there had been a mishap. I stopped and asked the man if he was all right. He responded with something that I know my body heard because my stomach dropped, but it did not yet register in my brain. I asked again, "Are you all right?"

The man repeated what he had said. This time my brain clearly heard what the man said, which was: "I don't like ni---rs." I looked down at this little white man, then looked down the street to see if the large black man who had passed me was still in sight. He wasn't. I looked down at this little man again and contemplated the possibility of lifting my 200 pounds high enough to let the physics of mass and velocity impact his body.

"Don't hate – it's too big a burden to bear." – Rev. Martin Luther King, Sr. (1899-1984). I thought about going to jail for my actions and that this little man had to be crazy to say something like this to me while stretched out in such a vulnerable position. I moved away from the crumb and continued on my way but thought about whom I could call if the crumb was still there when I returned.

Will Dr. King's dream of a society in which color doesn't matter ever be more than a dream? I doubt it. It's certainly not here yet.

Letters to the Editor

Address to the School Boards

My name is David Futransky and I speak to you tonight as President of the Teachers' Council of District 202 – the professional organization that represents the teachers of our high school district. I come before both school boards of our community after much thought over the past 6 weeks. I come before you in hopes of taking what has been a monologue focused on pointing fingers at schools and teachers, and creating a discussion for the community. Words such as "accountability" and "responsibility" have been thrown around in the local newspapers and by board members. The outcomes of our educational systems have been maligned. In framing the discussion this way, the wrong questions are being asked.

For the past 15 years we have overused the proverb that it takes a village to raise a child. But, there is a lot of truth in proverbs. Schools are not now, nor have they ever been, the sole responsible institution for the education of a child. It has been the village, a partnership of school, family and community that successfully helps young people grow into contributing members of our society. To isolate the accountability and responsibility for success in one third of the equation ignores the very important roles that we must all play in helping our children.

Let me focus on two areas of recent discussion and discourse. One is the item on tonight's agenda which discusses test scores and the comparison of certain standardized tests. The other is the strengths of the faculties in our schools.

Right now, the two districts are locked in a battle of words. Is the ISAT a valid test? Why do we use Explore scores to place students in 9th grade? What is the correlation between the two? How do these tests factor into NCLB? Why do kids "pass" the 8th grade test, but then are placed in classes below grade level at 9th grade? These are great questions. But they are the wrong questions.

Standardized tests are the gatekeepers in many areas of life. Laws are structured so that we look at a moment in time and not at longitudinal progress. Tests are a part of schools and a part of lives. We have to live with them, they are important, but standardized tests and the scores on those tests are not education. We have lost sight of the agenda. The issue is not how kids do on some standardized test; the issue is how do our children do in life. Do our students have the tools to succeed at school and work after they leave our institutions? Can they make critical and important decisions? Can they read and write and do math well enough to perform in whatever area of life they choose to enter?

We know that some students come to ETHS lagging behind others. We know there is an achievement gap. We know that it has not closed, in our community or nationally. In the past week, the Chicago Public Schools have announced major initiatives to try to help the transition from 8th to 9th grade. They are not focused on the score of a test but with helping kids move to the next level in ways that will allow them to be successful.

But in our community, we are asking, "Who is responsible?; who is accountable?" We are asking the wrong questions and looking in the wrong places.

Educators and schools are not the sole answer to this problem, any more than they are the sole cause. Education is a process. It involves family, community, and schools. It cannot be successful without all the partners making equal contributions. This nation and our community have had conversations about universal preschool and the need for effective early childhood education. Secondary schools are feeling the lack of these programs at the early childhood level today.

We have been caught up in the language of No Child Left Behind. The US Secretary of Education was quoted in the Chicago Tribune on January 8th as saying that 266 schools in Illinois are in restructuring and that is an "ok" number. What Secretary Spellman did not say is that this number will change dramatically over the next few years. 37 high schools fall in that category this year. But almost 300 will be there next year (having missed AYP for 4 years) and as many as 550 the year after. This only shows that we are looking at standards that don't make sense. In 2011 and 2012 when 95-100% of our nation's students are supposed to be at grade levels, no matter what subgroup is counted, how many communities will make the cut?

We are caught up in the wrong battle. The Evanston/Skokie community should not be consumed over AYP on any particular test. We should be concerned with what is best for our students. We should not be unduly focused about accountability on a standardized test. We should care about the responsibility and obligation we owe to all our children to equip them to deal with the world after high school

The other element that I wanted to mention is that we are going through a period of intense complaints about teachers and their dedication, expertise, and desire for student success, a form of teacher bashing that is both wrong and inappropriate. I am not sure if it is because both districts are negotiating contracts with their professional staffs or if it is a coincidence. I am sure that it has to stop.

Both districts have amazing staffs. The Evanston/Skokie community is very fortunate to have the best teachers and staffs in place to support our students. We have attracted and retained the best and the brightest. Our schools have been nationally recognized for excellence and we can all agree that our faculties and staffs play a large part in the delivery of top quality education. But, we must have the commitment and resources from the entire partnership of schools, parents, and community if we are reach our common goal of success for all our students.

We in District 202 have had some of the top educational consultants in the country analyze our programs of curriculum and instruction. In his remarks to the ETHS staff a year ago, one of these nationally recognized experts, Jon Saphir, praised us for the dedication and effort our faculty provides to all students. District 202 Supreintendent Dr. Eric Witherspoon last month spoke to our staff and also recognized our hard work, dedication and professionalism. We know that similar comments have been made by the District 65 leadership on behalf of its outstanding professional educators. Both districts stand ever ready and totally willing to work with all members of the partnership to help our students achieve.

As a community we need to change the agenda and the discourse. Both school districts need to declare war on illiteracy, lack of numeracy, and the factors that negatively impact our children. We must put our petty squabbles behind us. We need to recognize that the professionals we entrust with our children's futures are the best, brightest, most dedicated and hardest working group that could ever be found. We need to pay them fairly, expect appropriate outcomes and not ask them to do by themselves that which can only be achieved with the equal participation, partnership and responsibility of families and community.

You as school boards and your administrations need to help get all families and community institutions involved in being part of the solution. You as school boards need to stop arguing over test comparisons and instead, spend your time looking at solutions for the issues and problems of transition from 8th to 9th grade. You as school boards need to help our community develop more programs to reach out and support our children from early childhood through early adulthood. Together, we will impact the future of our children by closing the gap and preparing our children for the challenges of the future; divided, we will not achieve either of these.

Thank You.
-David Futransky
President of the Teachers' Council of District 202

Vote to Begin to Repair Fire, Police Underfunding
Editor:

A referendum on the Feb. 5 ballot will give Evanston voters the opportunity to show our support for the men and women of our police and fire departments,

As you probably have heard, the pension funds for our police and fire departments have been underfunded for many years. The deficit has reached $140 million, and Evanston's bond rating has been lowered as a result.

Distressing as this is, you may be taken aback to realize that the pension fund for all other City employees is properly funded. In other words, as to pension funding, police and fire personnel have not received the same level of support as other City employees.

A "yes" vote on the Feb. 5 referendum would add an additional $1 per thousand to the real estate transfer tax, the tax paid by sellers at the time of sale of their property, and would earmark this amount to the police and fire department pension funds. It will affect only those who are selling their property, a relatively small percentage of taxpayers in any given year.

Will this solve the problem? No. Will other things need to be done? Yes. Should there be thorough discussion about how we got into this mess and what our options are? Yes. The problem and its potential solutions are very complex. But in the meantime, a "yes" vote on the referendum will be a start.
We can use this referendum to remind us that the single most fundamental reason why any city government exists is to provide police and fire protection to its citizens.

We ask our police and fire personnel to do their best to protect us, even at the risk of their own safety. A "yes" vote takes a small but tangible step toward putting police and fire pension funds on a par with those of other City employees.
--Tom McMahon

Opposes Increasing Real Estate Transfer Tax
Editor:

I am writing to oppose the referendum to increase the real-estate transfer tax in order to fund the pension fund for police officers and fire fighters. I appreciate the police officers and fire fighters, and they deserve a fully-funded pension, but I think this is the wrong tax to implement. Emergency service workers benefit all Evanstonians, not just those who may buy or sell a home in the future. An increase in the general property taxes would ensure that everyone shares the cost of our emergency services. The attempt to raise the real-estate transfer tax (again) seems to be a way to shift the tax burden to the young and mobile from older and wealthier Evanstonians who are already settled in a home for the long haul. I see this as fundamentally unfair, and will vote "No" on Feb. 5.

--John Wirtz

More Taxes
Editor:

Don't fall for logic of bureaucrats
Who imply a false need for more tax.
Then they give a source choice
So you'll think you have voice
But, truly, the need needs caveats.
-- Robert Bagby

Property Tax Increase Not Viable for Evanston
Editor:

The City Council is proposing an increase in the property tax rate. Did they flunk economics in college?

Property values are going down (some are calling for a re-assessment after the large increase of last year that no longer reflects market values), foreclosures are increasing, apparently new construction is being delayed, etc.

Yet the City wants to tax more.

The first to be hit will be the poor and elderly, who will not be able to afford the taxes, especially after the fall in prices and mortgage meltdown. Yes, this will help the North Shore liberals who support white-elephant City Hall and old Kendall College keep affordable housing out and still keep their liberal status by claiming taxes are needed to put up art (?) works in downtown, preserve more ‘historic properties' (i.e. I got my place now keep everyone else out) and all the other projects near and dear to their hearts.

Next will be those, middle-class and above, who are bordering on mortgage problems or even foreclosure. Then will be those young professionals who wonder why they should live in Evanston, with its taxes and crime and schools, when they can go to Wilmette -- many of whom in north Evanston already think of themselves as really "Wilmette," i.e. when they give directions, they say. "I'm just six blocks south of Wilmette," instead of "I'm in the mid-north of Evanston." Already people who can "afford" to pay the existing taxes decide to move north out of principle and to escape the problems in Evanston.

With the tax base falling because of these people leaving -- and we probably have not heard yet from those who paid top dollar for the high-rise condos/apartments -- increased taxes will only hasten the decrease in funds available.

Evanston has tried to be "all things to all people" -- college town, retirement community, integrated community, home to young professionals and NU faculty/workers, home to affluent lakeshore and historic-district owners, halfway houses, and on and on -- and not doing very well with any of this.

The Council continues to drag out every issue instead of making decisions. This costs taxpayers not only in governmental expense but in otherwise productive time in attending all the sessions. It reminds one of the time/money the council wasted on making Evanston a "nuclear free zone" when the Research Park was proposed -- only to have the Council finally get exhausted and make a bad deal. Remember all the department, electronics/appliance, wide range clothing/shoe, drug stores (CVS is nice but small; kicking out the larger Osco sure leaves a gap), etc. -- stores we use to have? Then when Sears was possible, the council dragged their feet until Sears pulled out. Then there is industry (manufacturing and even service like Washington National and Shand-Morahan that was pushed out by taxes and I'm sure regulations that made no sense).

The Council and education boards took the easy way out for "labor peace," and now we pay for it with bad contracts and liabilities and bloated government. The City needs to look at not only the costs in up-front dollars for government but the costs to citizens and business-owners -- remember the "sign inspectors" -- which I'm sure have only increased over the years.

Government needs to see what "real" services are needed (instead of what they learned in their art and sociology classes) and clean up its own house before trying to empty our pockets.
--John Fuqua

Uglification, Squared
Editor:

As I drove by Church Street the other day on Chicago Avenue, the congealing traffic focused my thinking about the proposed tower on Church. I could not help wondering what the traffic in that area will look like if the tower is built, and about several other aspects of the proposal as well.

A striking aspect of what I have read about the proposal is the lack of fundamental analysis in the arguments for the tower.

Perhaps the most troubling aspect of these arguments is their failure to confront, let alone consider in any meaningful way, the irrevocable change the tower would produce in the character of the city. That is no mere detail. Rather, it is the central issue in the debate. The proponents of the tower seem to focus on details of design and construction, like the amount of setbacks and the fact that the tower will be a LEEDS building, almost as if the major conclusion does not have to be supported by evidence and reasoning.

I have read the section of the "finding of facts" on the tower put into the record at the meeting of the Planning and Development Committee on Dec. 19, 2007,focusing on pages 12 through 45 of the transcript of the proceedings.

This supposedly factual presentation is laden with abstractions, generalizations, and unsupported conclusions. I'll give just a few examples:

• The development "promotes Evanston as a viable ... tourist destination" (page 21)
• It "promotes awareness of environmental issues and encourages practices that sustain a healthful environment" (page 22)
• It "will not have a negative impact on traffic congestion and circulation" (page 29)
* "It will create dramatic images as one approaches downtown, but minimizes the visual impact of the tower to the pedestrian experience in downtown where the base of the building will be the image of the building that pedestrians and drivers will experience." (page 40). A friend to whom I showed this convoluted statement said, "That means, ‘Don't look up.' "
* One somewhat embarrassing feature of the "findings" is its listing of "preservation of the Hahn building" as a "public benefit." (page 38) You have to be straining when you say that a benefit of a wrecking operation is a token that it leaves behind.

It would be interesting to have the proponents issue a public statement – ­not just one that you have to dig out on the web­ – that sets out crisply the positive case for the effects of the building on the suburban character of this town. It would also be interesting to see a specific defense of the almost certain negative effects:
• The physical shadow the building will create
• The economic shadow it will produce on the small businesses which have been a vital part of this community
• The changes in micro-climate, including wind-tunnel effects
• The constipation of traffic that must inevitably result from such a building
• The problems for fire safety, given what I understand is the fire chief's opinion that the City does not have enough "first responders" to fight a fire in such a building. There is also the puzzling piece of pablum in the statement in the "finding of facts" that "mutual aid agreements ... will make this project safer than most other buildings in the City" (page 24).

I've mentioned here just a few things that seem obvious to me, admittedly a community member without professional training in urban planning. But a particularized defense by the proponents should respond to the findings of fact of the minority of the planning commission, all of whom have professional training in relevant subjects. And the proponents should have to respond orally, in public, point by point, to the minority commissioners.

We call ourselves a "Tree City, U.S.A." But it would appear that the tower would overshadow any vegetation – ­anything natural – in the area. Instead, it would introduce a monstrosity out of place in even the welter of new condominiums that have already uglified the downtown area.

Let's see a brief for the tower that is longer on facts and shorter on boilerplate. Let's see specific responses to each of the negative effects this structure would create.

And above all, let's see how proponents justify a final conversion of one of America's distinguished suburbs into a cruel and pale imitation of a big-city downtown, given that those who wish to partake of such an environment need travel only a dozen miles to do so.
--Marshall S. Shapo

City of Evanston Spins Transfer Tax
Editors:

The North Shore-Barrington Association of Realtors (NSBAR) believes the City of Evanston is deceptively representing Evanston's Transfer Tax.

The City, using taxpayer dollars, mailed a brochure to Evanston residents regarding a referendum on the Feb. 5, 2008, election ballot that asks voters if the real estate transfer tax should be increased by 20 percent – from $5 to $6 per $1,000 -- to help cover the City's pension debt; the tax is encumbered by the seller.

While the City did not urge residents to vote in favor of the referendum, which would have been in violation of state law, the City did seemingly craft the brochure to speciously make it appear that Evanston's transfer tax lies within the middle to lower-middle spectrum compared with other communities. Within the brochure, Evanston placed a chart titled "current real estate transfer tax rates around Chicagoland" which serves to compare Evanston's current transfer tax with other municipalities.

"The City's comparison is blatantly deceiving," stated Howard Handler, government affairs director for the NSBAR. "By picking and choosing several communities with abnormally high transfer taxes, the City is clearly trying to hide the fact that Evanston already has the highest transfer tax of any nearby suburb."

Of 15 contiguous suburban municipalities that surround Evanston, nine do not have a transfer tax; the remaining six have a transfer tax of $2 or $3 per $1,000. However, Evanston's mailing positions the City's current transfer tax of $5 per $1,000 as below average – the Evanston mailing depicts transfer taxes ranging from $2 to $10 per $1,000 with the average being $5.95 per $1,000.

Additionally, NSBAR contends with 8th Ward Alderman Ann Rainey's position that a transfer tax increase will impact 1 percent or less of Evanston residents.

"I get that the City really wants more taxpayer dollars, but they are being intellectually dishonest with its residents," Handler continued. "The fact that an alderman believes the transfer tax will impact less than 1 percent of Evanston residents demonstrates that either they are trying to deceive residents or don't understand the tax themselves."

The North Shore-Barrington Association of Realtors is the area's leading private-property advocate and the recognized voice for real estate. NSBAR, along with affiliated "REALTOR" associations, is a strong advocate for a healthy business environment and a resource for its members to deliver ethical and professional services to the public and to one another. "REALTORS" is the largest trade association in North America; NSBAR represents approximately 4,500 members.
--Howard Handler, North Shore-Barrington Association of Realtors

Against the Immigration Resolution
Editor:

Six aldermen and 50 pro-illegal immigrant-organizer/supporters/lobbyists do not represent the voice of the majority.

I resent Ms. Heumann's assumption that she speaks for me or for thousands of working- class, blue-collar, middle-class Americans. We are seeing our country, our schools, overrun by illegals who are eroding our public services, social eco-structure and national sovereignty.

Every day thousands more assault our border unchecked, and cities like Chicago, New York and Los Angeles and counties like Cook declare themselves sanctuaries and subvert and illegally divert millions of dollars in tax revenue in support (aiding and abetting known and suspected fugitives from the law) in rewarding these illegals in the furtherance of their illegal activities.

This is not immigration bashing. These laws against illegal immigration are in place to protect and serve me and millions like me: legally born, tax-paying, legitimate United States citizens. When you as a governing body choose to avoid your public obligation and ignore standing laws that are in place for the explicit purpose of ensuring my own and other legal U.S. citizens' legal rights, protections and personal welfare, you are doing a disservice and are acting in direct attack against these same citizens in favor of special-interest lobbying groups and illegal aliens who aren't even supposed to be here in the first place.

I resent and deplore the use of my tax dollars in the illegitimate, unlawful, intentional support of the aiding and abetting of known illegal aliens. When will public officials get their collective heads out of the sand and come to the overall job of serving, protecting and watching out for the people whom they are obligated by law to serve: legitimate, bona fide U.S, citizens. These illegals and their lobbyists are unneeded, unnecessary and unwelcome.

In addition to all of the disservice, disregard and threat to my welfare, these people impose on me (the unwilling host to unwelcome pests), I should not have to bear the burden of having to pay to have them here in the United States. My tax dollars would best be spent in assisting these people back to their own homes in their own countries where they belong.

Remember Herndon, Virginia, and what's become of that city's mayor and city council for diverting city funding in favor of illegals.
-- James J. Schmidt

Kudos to Hamos
Open Letter to Julie Hamos:

On behalf of the 650 member companies of the Evanston Chamber of Commerce and their 25,000 employees, I want to personally thank you for your tremendous leadership, perseverance and courage in forging a financial solution for the Regional Transportation Agency and its operating agencies. The legislative road was strewn with broken ties, tired engines and third rails but you remained stationed in your principles and goals.

Over 18 months ago, representatives from the Evanston Chamber met with you and encouraged you to seek a long-term regional solution for mass transit funding. Although there were many times during the long and convoluted process where you could have accepted just a short-term fix, you had the tenacity to keep your sights on a permanent funding stream, a reformed benefit package for transit employees, and changes in organizational structure which will have long-lasting benefits.

As a transit-oriented city whose workforce, residents, future development, and economy are so dependent on public transportation, we are proud of your efforts and your political leadership. Thanks to your support and your ability to build key coalitions, Evanston and the region can be assured that its transit system will be reliable and will have the capacity to make needed investments.

Again, thank you for your guidance and heroic efforts.
-- Jonathan Perman, Executive Director, Evanston Chamber of Commerce

Weigh in on Downtown Zoning
Editor:

Evanston's Plan Commission (citizens nominated by the Mayor and appointed by the City Council) is currently holding hearings on the proposed downtown plan that seeks to revise the zoning in Evanston's center. One of its key components is a new philosophy of city planning called form-based zoning. This concept addresses not only the uses in an area (office vs. retail vs. residential) and the permitted density as in traditional zoning, but also the look and height and architectural quality of the neighborhood. The plan is available on the City's website (www. cityofevanston.org/downtown).

Members of the Preservation Commission were invited to share their views on the downtown plan, especially as it impacts the historic and landmark buildings downtown.

Some of their comments included the impact of the downtown plan on the new docent-led Downtown Evanston Walking Tour of the Chicago Architecture Foundation that will debut in spring on Wednesday and Saturday mornings; the pros and cons of saving facades; the description of various sub-zones within the downtown and their boundaries, and the effects of these boundaries on the context of transitional blocks; and the protection of downtown landmarks.

Landmarks downtown include the former Marshall Fields, the Carlson, Hahn, University and Chandler's buildings.

Inclusion in a historic district and/or landmark status can provide significant financial assistance to owners who restore their buildings. This assistance includes real estate tax freezes for 12 years, income tax deductions and potential eligibility for grants (the Main Street program) and loans from the National Trust for Historic Preservation, our national preservation advocacy organization. There have been discussions about nominating a Downtown Retail Historic District, but no action has been taken.

There will be additional meetings of the Plan Commission to consider the Downtown Plan. If you would like to add your views to the Commission's deliberations, check the City's website for dates and times of their future meetings.

The next step after the Plan Commission votes on the Plan is for their recommendation to go to the Planning and Development Committee (a committee of all the aldermen) for its review and ultimate introduction to the whole City Council for approval.

Let's hear your voice on what you want our downtown to look like in the next year and the next decade. Attend and speak at Plan Commission, Planning and Development and City Council meetings.

Remember: none of us is as smart as all of us.
– Mary O. Brugliera,
Associate Member Evanston Preservation Commission