Wilmette park commissioners agreed Monday to split their proposed $14.5 million bond April ballot question into two referendums; one question focusing on the lion’s share of the work to be done at Gillson Park, the second aimed at borrowing for Langdon Park improvements.
The unanimous Dec. 8 decision was made in a bid to increase the chances that the larger Gillson referendum would pass, free of controversy about Langdon’s projects affecting that decision.
But commissioners learned Monday that some Langdon Park fans don’t want a Langdon referendum on next April’s ballot at all.
A packed audience, many of them sporting red “Save Langdon” stickers, made it clear in more than two hours of generally polite testimony that they don’t necessarily mind the rest of the $14.5 million proposal; they just don’t want change at Langdon – especially a beach house at the previously undeveloped park just south of the Kenilworth border.
More Top Picks Best Desk Lamps With Usb Charging
“What I like about Langdon Beach is there’s nothing on it,” Michigan Avenue resident Joe Zuercher said, to whistles and applause.
Two dozen speakers agreed with Zuerchner. Among their worries: the need for more security for a busier Langdon; how higher lake levels would affect a beach house; and the change in character the project would bring. Many repeated opposition they had voiced earlier this month at the board’s lakefront committee meeting.
“I was surprised that after the kind of feedback given (then) about the environment, the cost, the joy of a pristine beach, about all of those aspects, that this plan wasn’t removed but came out as a proposal for a separate referendum,” Ashland Avenue resident Bill Hart said.
Many also complained about the cost of the entire project, reminding the board that voters just last month approved a weighty New Trier bond referendum. Romona Avenue resident Danielle Mergner pointed out that the district’s bond rating was just downgraded by Moody’s Investor Service.
Most speakers acknowledged that the district needs to upgrade, repair or replace aging or broken infrastructure like sewers and lakefront roads, but some felt it could be done more cheaply.
If audience members were passionate, so were park board commissioners.
Long time member Jim Brault was the board’s main spokesman, working with slides to show what he said was the accurate financial picture. The district’s long term planning has cut its total debt by more than half between 2004 and now, he said, allowing it to shoulder new debt for the lakefront project without adding taxes.
“This structure is not by accident,” he said. “We’ve refinanced almost all our debt because we’ve known for years that Gillson was deteriorating and we’d have to tackle the lakefront.”
Brault also challenged what he called fabricated misinformation circulated by some opponents of Langdon development, bringing up slides of pictures taken from the group’s Facebook page which he said had, in turn, been taken from the board’s own drawings of the proposed Langdon beach house and altered to show what he said was a false water level.
“This was taken directly off our website and photo-shopped. I find it, frankly, distasteful,” Brault said, going to tell listeners that he welcomed opposing views but didn’t want to hear lies.
That generated the evening’s only overt tension, when at least one attendee shouted that Brault shouldn’t blame everyone for the altered pictures.
Board President James Crowley warned the audience that he’d adjourn the meeting if further shouting occurred. Minutes later, Brault apologized to Laurel Avenue resident John McCarthy, who came to the podium to repeat the shouted plea.
“I apologize if I offended anyone with the intensity of my comments,” Brault said.
Once public comments were complete, the board room emptied, but commissioners continued to talk about the plan. Nearly all continued to support the two-referendum idea, although Commissioner Amy Wolfe wondered if what the board had heard that night didn’t mean they should consider putting off the Langdon referendum.
Her colleagues told her that voters should decide which of the projects got bond support.
“The reason I think we got to the plan we have today is because we had a balance of opinion we collected over time,” Brault said. “It’s important to put this in front of our residents. Until we do, we don’t know whether what we heard tonight was a conclusive opinion or a more recent group that just got fired up about one issue.”
“We’re meeting the needs of the larger community,” said commissioner Shelley Shelly, while John Olvany said the Langdon project would improve access for the large number of seniors living near Langdon in lakefront condominiums.
Splitting the original lakefront master plan bond referendum into two isn’t the final step; that comes at next month’s board meeting, when commissioners approve the final language.
As directed by the board, one referendum question will ask for approval to issue bonds for the estimated $1.3 million in Langdon Park improvements, including the beach house and improved beach access, for about $650,000, as well as landscaping and ADA-required upgrades.
The second, larger, referendum question will cover the remainder of the $14.5 million plan, which would pay for Gillson Park improvements.
Those include up to $4.1 million to replace the Gillson Park beach house, $2.8 million for road, sewer and lighting improvements, $1.6 million for ADA improvements at Gillson and almost a million for landscape improvement there. The plan also includes roughly $980,000 in assorted architectural and consulting fees, plus a 20 percent contingency fee. The last three items together could add up to a maximum of $3.4 million.
More Top Picks Best Pillows For Sleep Apnea
If one or both of the referenda pass, the district will begin projects in the fall of 2015.