Although I have lived in Oak Park for almost 40 years, I must admit to being confused about the village’s vision of economic development. To be sure, such a vision is a complicated, collaborative thing that involves lots of sometimes competing stakeholders. The economic development of a municipality sits at a Gettysburg-like crossroads of economic, political and social forces. So my confusion is both understandable and predictable.
Looking back to my arrival here in 1976, I would have to say there really was no economic vision. Almost all of the village’s energy was centered on dealing with the consequences of white flight from western Chicago neighborhoods. It is well documented that Oak Park citizens utilized a number of innovative policies to manage integration. The flight of whites was stabilized at the Austin border.
Economic development understandably took a back seat. Besides, we were too busy grieving the loss of Marshall Field’s, Wieboldt’s and Montgomery Ward to worry about the commercial future. We were content to celebrate being able to order a beer in a new restaurant.
Thank God the ’70s are over — the longest decade ever. The next two decades saw an emerging conflict between the developers and the preservationists. The community breathed a sigh of relief that Oak Park with its proximity to Chicago, good schools, cheap public transportation and beautiful old homes would actually be a good place to sink some of the gusher of developmental money flooding the nation. Although the specter of white flight was there (it will always be there) that specter slowly faded. But preservationists, Greens, nostalgists, and traditionalists longing for a more genteel, Arcadia-like home were put off by all this development and pushed back. The NIMBY acronym entered our vocabulary, and our elected government grew divided, almost dysfunctional.
And then in 2008 the economic neutron bomb hit in the form of The Great Recession. Big projects ceased. Tax revenues dropped. It became clear that if Oak Park were going to compete for development dollars, it would have to decide between the competing visions of robust economic growth, or a watered down hybrid version.
That decision has been made. A vision has been articulated. We want to grow. The more people who live here the better. Given our taxes and cost of houses, I should say, the more affluent people the better. We have embraced a reality of diminished economic diversity. We are powerless against the tide of capitalism. We will continue to welcome all races, creeds, colors and sexual orientations as long as they can pay a price that includes a hefty surcharge for good schools and sophisticated, expensive law enforcement.
Imagine 75,000 of us living in high-rises, commuting to high-tech jobs in Chicago. These affluent inhabitants will provide markets for all the things rich people buy — Apple stuff, fancy food, designer clothes — all manner of boutiquey stuff. Think Lincoln Park, only cheaper and somewhat less congested. The Chicago Symphony, Art Institute and Lyric Opera are almost as close to Oak Park as Lincoln Park. I see Indonesian food in our future. More old buildings are going to be tumbling down. It is going to get a little more crowded.
Change is coming to Oak Park. Get used to it.
