Two local Oak Park governments — the parks and the elementary schools — were discussing their long range capital improvement plans last week. These are important and complex conversations for elected and appointed officials to have.
Happily for both entities, Oak Park taxpayers have recently approved notable tax hikes for each body and they now have both cash and considerable debt capacity to use as they plan capital investments. In discussing their varied plans, officials from both entities pointed to interest rates, which are at historic lows, as a factor that makes taking on debt more appealing even in this difficult economic environment.
So why did one entity get a reasonably warm response to their plan while the other has come under early criticism after we reported both stories at OakPark.com? Here’s our working theory:
The parks: The Park District of Oak Park has earned great credit over the past decade for its thoroughgoing and transparent planning processes. The current initiative is to spend up to $30 million to remake Ridgeland Common, acquire the old Aldi grocery on Lake Street and then to expand both its popular gymnastics center and its invisible-to-the-public storage and garage facility.
Taxpayers have been reading about these plans for several years. Those motivated enough have joined the public discussion and had impact on the plan. There is no real surprise here.
Plus, a lot of locals find their way to Ridgeland Common in the course of a year to use the pool or the ice rink or the fields and they know this is one tired facility. When the park district says repairs to an obsolete facility are now nearly perpetual, it resonates with homeowners who face fix-ups to 100-year-old homes. No one wants to throw good money after bad.
Further, regulars at the gymnastics center both love the program and can attest to the chronically overcrowded conditions. Spending money on a program that actually makes money has appeal.
The park district has laid a good foundation for its proposal.
The schools: The referendum battle in District 97 schools is both more recent and raw. And the pledges made by the district on what it would invest in, should the referendum pass, did not include any $4 million for a new or refurbished administration building. The school board said it would invest in maintaining and expanding specific programs — music, arts, foreign language. Capital plans focused on new classroom technology and re-imagining long-ignored outdoor spaces at the schools.
Since the referendum passed, a bold concept was floated for a Therapeutic Day School that might allow the district to keep a range of special needs students in the village rather than busing them long distances for specialized service. That is an interesting idea, one that needs much study, but one that would be supported by taxpayers who voted yes to support educational services aimed directly at kids.
It has long been known that the current admin building is a dog. Has been since the district hastily bought it in the 1970s. But few parents or residents ever visit the building and upgrading even poor facilities for office workers is not going to sell. Pair it with a new facility for special ed and you might have a plan.
Better to bury the whole idea for five years until you’ve made good on the educational vision and the market for Madison Street real estate recovers.
Collaborate: Better yet, how about some of that much ballyhooed collaboration. The schools and parks have, over the years, tentatively discussed shared facilities. Now with some $60 million in capital improvements on the table, how about some creative problem solving? The vote on the referendum was Yes, but there was a stern message embedded and that was to work actively, aggressively on behalf of tapped-out taxpayers. Here’s the opportunity.