It’s a question as simple as it is complicated.
Should there be term limits for elected officials in River Forest?
An April 1 election day referendum will determine the answer, but for now, there are passionate impulses on both sides of the issue.
Carlotta Lucchesi says no to term limits.
“If we have people who want to continue to run, I don’t see a problem with that,” said Lucchesi, an eight-year veteran of both River Forest School District 90 and Oak Park and River Forest High School District 200 boards.
Susan Foran, who is responsible for the ballot measure, says yes to term limits.
“River Forest would benefit from a wider range of citizen voices which organically arise when leaders voluntarily step aside to welcome successors,” Foran said. “Absent that willingness, term limits provide the structure by which new perspectives can be included in board deliberations.”
As worded, the referendum is clear on its aims:
“Shall the Village of River Forest, after the April 1, 2025, Consolidated Election, enact term limits for the elected offices of Village President, Village Clerk, and the six (6) Village Trustees for no more than two (2) four-year (4-year) terms total as follows: for each of three (3) Trustees beginning with the April 3, 2027, Consolidated election, and for the Village President, Village Clerk, and three (3) Trustees starting with the April 6, 2029, Consolidated election?”
On April 1, incumbent village president Cathy Adduci is running unopposed. Incumbent trustees Lisa Gillis and Respicio F. Vazquez are running for three trustee seats, with newcomer Megan Keskitalo also running. Incumbent trustee Ken Johnson is not running. Rosa Castellano is running unopposed for village clerk after Jonathan Keller moved out of the area. Terms are not yet up for trustees Bob O’Connell, Katie Brennan and Erika Bachner.
To Lucchesi, referendum passage would limit voter choice, but there’s more.
“It’s also a challenge to find enough volunteers to run for these positions,” she said. “It’s a time commitment and an energy commitment.”
The referendum question appeared on the ballot after village resident Foran filed 63 petition sheets containing 564 signatures in late December. The required number of signatures was 396. By state statute, the number of signatures required is not less than 8% of the number of total votes cast in the previous gubernatorial election. In 2022, 4,941 votes were case in River Forest in that election.
Fellow resident and referendum supporter Deborah Borman said that “serving an extensive length of time reduces constituent involvement and encourages voter malaise.
“A village president with entrenched power, who hand-selects and appoints all the commissioners and committee members, recruits and grooms trustee candidates, and controls the majority of the trustee votes, greatly hamstrings robust public debate on all important constituent issues,” Borman said.
Adduci is running unopposed for her fourth consecutive term as village president. She noted that her first and third times running she defeated an opponent.
She said the referendum is an important question because “it will affect how River Forest will work in the future.” But she added that she is uncertain the purpose of term limits “if you trust the voter in understanding what’s going on in the community and the candidates are doing the work.”
Adduci said candidates that serve consecutively creates a healthy mix of experienced and new leaders.
“We have it in D90 and D200,” she said. “You want that healthy mix of experienced candidates and new candidates. If you prohibit someone [from] running for a third term, it creates more concern and confusion over time.”
As far as what could happen April 1, Adduci said she’s voting no on the referendum, but she added she doesn’t have a bead on what is going to happen.
“I hope the village of River Forest residents know the question and understand the ramifications,” she said.
Bachner said she is “for the referendum as stated,” but she agreed with Adduci on one thing:
“I think a lot of it is how engaged our folks are on this issue,” she said. “Not having engagement in this issue would not surprise me. We have so many uncontested elections this year, which could prove another challenge.”
But what about the fact that if the referendum passes, it would hypothetically impact her in the future?
That’s fine, she said.
“I want to bring in new, fresh ideas,” she said. “That’s what I ran on the first time. Folks who have really great ideas who I have spoken with did not want to run against an incumbent who had quite a bit of political power.”
Brennan said that if the referendum passes, “100% it would affect me.” But to her, there is a bigger picture to consider.
“Lack of term limits affords a strategic advantage to long-term incumbent office holders who want to keep serving year after year and term after term,” she said. “I think term limits helps with that trust and transparency and curbs situations that could be damaging.”
Keskitalo, an anthropologist and research director at a marketing company, views the issue from a different lens.
“I think the one thing that stands out to me about the issue, both sides have identified the same core problem,” she said. “We’re not attracting enough candidates.”
She said she has spoken to community members who weren’t sure they were ready to run, and others that were ready to run, but felt the political climate was too negative. Thus, creating a diverse pool of applications will help ensure local elections “are run fairly and kindly.
“I see the problem existing whether the ballot initiative passes,” she said. “We have to create a culture where people feel comfortable running so we get the diversity of voices in all boards and commissions.”