Below are candidate-submitted answers to a biographical survey Wednesday Journal sent out to candidates running for public office this year.
Age: 45
Previous political experience:
- Six years as a Oak Park Board of Health Commissioner (Fitzsimmons Award Winner)
- Chairperson- U.S. Senate Exploratory Committee for Cook County Commissioner Richard R. Boykin
Previous community experience:
- President, Rescue Foundation & Felony Franks- A community-based business and NFP organization that employs and trains ex-offenders.
- Treasurer, Sugar Beet Schoolhouse- A community based NFP that teaches food literacy, cooking, and sustainability to local youth.
- Board Member, Suburban Unity Alliance- A NFP organization that showcases the diversity of suburban communities, raise discrimination awareness, and bring entire communities together based on empathy, collaboration, and equitable philanthropic endeavors.
- Board Member, The North Avenue District- A NFP organization to establish a Special Services Area (SSA) on North Avenue.
- Oversight Board Member, Chopin Elementary School Orchestra- A Merit School of Music after-school strings orchestra program in an underserved neighborhood.
- Former Board Member, Oistrakh Symphony of Chicago
Occupation: Consultant, and Social Entrepreneur.
Education: Bachelor of Arts in Business, DePaul University
Residential real estate development is a major issue in the village with the recent completion of Vantage Oak Park, new developments under construction (Elevate Oak Park, District House), and several proposed developments (Albion, Oak Park and Madison by Jupiter Realty, and the Harlem and South Boulevard development by Lincoln Properties). Please address your thoughts on all of the aforementioned developments and proposals. Do you support or oppose these proposals and why? What are your concerns for each project as they relate to traffic, shadows, affordability, density, impact to schools and other community resources, impact on the tax base, the changing nature of Oak Park or any other issue you would like to address?
Oak Park is a landlocked community that faces annual operational cost increases that surpass the CPI, causing recent tax levies to rise much faster than the rate of inflation. With very little control over labor costs, the residential tax burden is rising at an unsustainable rate. High taxes threaten diversity and quality of life for many existing residents. One of the best ways to ease the current tax burden is to expand the residential and commercial tax base. Doing so requires building vertically, most logically near rail lines and other mass transit. In general I am in favor of all current developments being built (and recently finished) in Oak Park. Vertical growth in downtown areas is pragmatic and will bring much needed density to support local businesses. I would like to see more caution and consideration for the public’s concerns over Austin Gardens with regard to the Albion proposal.
While many complain of parking and traffic I believe both of these issues are temporary. The proliferation of ride sharing and transit-centric residents will have a positive impact on traffic and parking. In the future, self driving cars and shuttles will require less and less parking. I am optimistic that traffic is going to be a short-term challenge. At the same time I am sympathetic to villagers who find traffic to be a problem.
Density slightly concerns me. Oak Park’s peak density was roughly 20,000 more residents than we currently have. However those increased numbers were sprinkled throughout the village (larger families, room renters after WWII, etc.). As a result business districts throughout the village were more vibrant, and students were distributed across all local schools. Increased density today is focused more on downtown Oak Park. While enrollments are up all over town, Holmes School will like face additional challenges. I believe that the village and the school districts can do more to prepare for increased density, though I am confident that each challenge can be effectively mitigated.
Growth does have an impact on our community. Downtown Oak Park is now a vibrant bustling neighborhood. I remember when the walking mall was a disgrace and vacancies were ubiquitous. Today’s downtown Oak Park is the best I’ve ever seen it in my 45 years here. I hope the trend continues. I don’t believe the increase in density will change the otherwise quiet and residential character of Oak Park. Diversity and inclusion are important to me and many Oak Parkers. My only critique of the development around town is that I believe the village could have done more to encourage developers to consider affordable housing.
Crime is at historic lows in Oak Park, but there is a perception that the village is unsafe. What are your thoughts on safety in the village and the perception of safety? What initiatives would you pursue to improve safety in the village and improve the perception of safety?
I recognize that Oak Park’s crime rate is at historic lows. Crimes, especially violent crimes, are rare enough that they make an impact on perception when they occur in Oak Park. In the last several weeks there have been armed robberies, a shooting, and a car-jacking. These are serious crimes that cause distress and in some cases minor panic. Overall I feel very safe in Oak Park (I live at Lombard & Division). Our fantastic police are doing exactly what they should be doing- Increased patrols, continued community policing, and hosting regular local meetings, which by the way are largely empty. As a trustee I would encourage villagers to get involved in the community policing model and attend monthly meetings. I would further work toward better communication using social media so that villagers in each neighborhood can connect. One example is a Facebook group I started (North East Oak Park Neighborhood Community Group) that had 1,100 sign up in 24 hours! Finally with the proliferation of inexpensive and high quality security video systems, I would explore ways for the village to help residents and business owners increase the use of cameras. In the end, I would always point people the actual statistics so that decisions and perceptions are based on facts over fear.
What is Oak Park’s role as it concerns the Chicago neighborhood of Austin, if any?
Oak Park should be a good neighbor to our friends in Austin. As leaders of progress, diversity, and equity I believe that Oak Parkers have a responsibility to support our neighbors to the east by patronizing Austin businesses and community events. Several non-profits are doing great work in building bridges between Austin and Oak Park. As a trustee I would help to raise awareness to the good work already being done. I would also want to work closely with elected officials on economic development and educational initiatives. I do not think that Oak Park per se would be the catalyst for any such initiatives; I see the village in a more supporting role.
Transparency has been repeatedly noted by candidates and residents as an issue with the village. Do you believe Oak Park has a transparency problem, and how would you address it?
Oak Park has a communication problem that leads people to believe that there are transparency issues. Development deals are complex. Some deals involve the OPEDC, others do not. Certain developments require zoning variances, recommendations from commissions, and trustee approval. The process from inception to completion is different for each type of development. Many find it difficult to follow projects. As frustration grows, people become suspicious. As a trustee I would like the village to do a better job communicating about developments, deadlines, requests for proposals, and processes.
Residents frequently note the high property taxes in Oak Park and have argued that rising taxes are making the village less affordable and, therefore, less diverse. The village’s portion of the property tax burden is roughly 15 percent (the rest is from other governing bodies – schools, library and park district). How would you address the rising property tax burden and how would you work with other taxing bodies to reduce the tax burden in Oak Park?
The rising tax burden is a real concern. The two best ways to ease the burden are:
1. Residential development- I addressed this in question 1.
2. Intergovernmental Cooperation- IGOV at the moment is not nearly as efficacious as it could be. I have gone on record saying that I believe that projects over a certain budget should need approval by other taxing bodies. We have had too many missed opportunities to work together to build bigger and better projects. The best example is the OPRF pools. I graduated from there in 1989 and the pools were old then! At the same time Ridgeland Commons was also old and disgraceful. There was also a parking problem. Had the village, D200, and the Park District worked together in the early 90s to plan and save for a joint project, we could have built something spectacular. The school could have had new pools, there could have been plenty of parking, there could have been new fields, and Ridgeland Commons could have been better with more parking. It was a total missed opportunity. Now we are faced with re-doing Madison Street, using a study that was done more than ten years ago! I fear we are going to have another missed opportunity to get buy-in, input, and cooperation from other taxing bodies. I have been championing the idea of a singular vision for Oak Park, led by a more powerful IGOV agreement. Working together could create a more cohesive vision for Oak Park, and economies of scale that can save tax payers millions of dollars. I have publicly stated that I would like to see cooperation be mutually agreed upon and mandated.