Dear presidents Paris and Dudek:
I am writing this letter after attending the village meeting Jan. 9 where the proposal for lighting the west side of Keystone Park was discussed. I am coming to this issue late, so I am writing with the audacity of a nave fresh observer, but also as a concerned citizen.
I have enjoyed Keystone Park in many ways, from watching my children in organized sports, to playing tennis with friends there, to attending community gatherings, to just chasing my children when they were young.
I have lived in the community “south of the tracks” for 15 years, buying three times in that area because the neighborhood connections are so vibrant and good for my family. I know how rare such neighborhoods are. Its vitality is as important to home values and the qualities that draw and keep people in River Forest as are organized sports activities and attractive parks.
So, like many, I have interest in supporting good use of that park. Like many I want to support the lighting if truly needed but see nothing that merits that support in the present approach taken by the park district.
What struck me about this meeting and the other information I have seen is how much room there is for reasonable solutions that can serve those interested in organized sports and those interested in neighborhood quality. Yet these were being pushed aside by a power struggle.
As “for the children” was an oft-cited concern, I suggest we be good examples for our children and focus on solving the problem rather than getting stuck in who can impose their will on whom.
Two suggestions mentioned in that hearing seem most useful, and I urge you to follow them as the two civic leaders in this matter:
1) Prepare an agreement that recognizes the impact of lights and noise on the community by preparing a policy agreement that “has real teeth” and describes promised limitations of usage type, times, frequency per week, and times during the year, related to lighting and needed refitting to diminish intrusion into neighbors’ homes.
2) Take this year to examine park usage and “unmet need” regarding organized sports and other uses of the parks. The level of contention about the lighting seems to beg for stepping back and examining all of the park space in regard to usage and implications for lighting. Engage and inform the community about this process, providing full information about what is found and what is the actual need.
What is done here will have lasting impact on River Forest in two very important ways. One is how much organized sports can occur in the parks during late fall and early spring evenings. The second is how residents will view the park district and their residence within River Forest when future issues arise.
The good news is the various interests can be met well here. Although with enough heat of emotion and hardheaded insistence, conflict can persist and block that. Hopefully, real leadership will be used here and the workable solution found.
Patrick H. Tolan
River Forest