In 2015, then governor Bruce Rauner signed into law Public Act 99-0434 which requires public high school students to complete a semester-long civics course covering government institutions, current and controversial issues, service learning, and democratic simulations.
Four years later, Public Act 101-0254 expanded the requirement, mandating at least one semester of civics education in public schools for grades 6, 7, or 8.
The folks in Springfield got it. Civics education is important.
But wait, there’s more, HB5289 is pending down in the statehouse, which if it becomes law will – brace yourself – “require public high school students to attend a live or virtual local government meeting, such as a city council or county board meeting as part of an updated civic engagement unit starting in the 2027–2028 school year.” Imagine that.
Bravo to sponsor Justin Cochran (D-55) of Des Plaines and cosponsor Rep. Joyce Mason (D-61) of Gurnee for realizing not only the importance of civics education, but civics engagement,
Civics engagement is nothing new for Buffalo Grove. On Monday, Sept. 28, the village will host its annual Civics Forum which features students from Buffalo Grove and Stevenson High School as village officials and village board members. Talk about extra credit.
The forum was started back in the 1990s by Village Clerk Jan Sirabian, an exhaustive advocate for Civic Engagement. Despite her reminders about election registration, filing dates and, of course voting, which are a staple at Village Board meetings, the reality is some folks seem to confuse civic engagement with civic enragement.
And this goes beyond the wags who wail on social media sites.
Case in point – the consideration by the village to purchase 8.3 acres and the 96,731-square-foot building at 1100 Lake-Cook Rd. as the site of a new Village Hall and Police Station. While the purchase price is $6.25 million, renovation costs are estimated at a cool $52 million.
So how does this impact citizen engagement?
Some residents have insinuated that the village has purposely kept the project under wraps presumably to railroad it through without the public knowing.
This could be due to a less than ideal progression by which the village disseminated initial information about the project. It had a circuitous beginning starting on Dec. 5 when village officials met with “local media” to announce the project.
What local media? Village officials wriggled to explain what local media was invited to this press briefing and why just two reporters were invited. Said one, “Friday’s meeting intentionally had a limited audience," while another said “I believe the rationale for only including The Daily Herald and Journal and Topics reporters is that they are the 2 print media outlets that cover Buffalo Grove on a regular basis. “
Yet a third tried to justify the meeting because “…"We selected the two print news publications with the broadest reach in our community. We knew that, because of the timing commitments for the agreement and the Village Board’s availability, the information would have to go public on a less-than-ideal Friday afternoon schedule.”
Focusing on print media in 2025 is somewhat akin to going into an auto dealership and asking for a vehicle with manual transmission. It’s archaic and lacks insight into contemporary trends, in this case, in the media.
This was followed up by the first public meeting about the project scheduled for 5 p.m. on Tuesday, Dec. 9. An unusual time to be sure, but at least the village made an effort to hold an open meeting. That meeting and ensuing ones have rattled some people including Trustee Dave Weidenfeld has made it clear on several occasions that he thinks the public needs to know more about the project and have the opportunity to ask questions and let village officials and staff their feelings about the project. Weidenfeld, who is not running for re-election in 2027, has also questioned the timing of the project because of its cost amid a litany of other expenditures the village is embarking on. Weidenfeld does, however, support the project, just not the timing of the expense.
The sparsely attended Dec. 9 meeting provided information about the due diligence period that was originally supposed to have been 30 days. It went a lot longer.
The Village Board held a special committee of the whole meeting Aug. 31 that addressed one issue – the 1100 Lake-Cook Rd. building.
You would think that after almost nine months, the Council Chambers would be packed.
They weren’t.
Only three residents had comments for the Board two of whom chided the Board for a seemingly a lack of transparency by the village regarding the project.
One resident, Craig Horwitz, told the Board that the building is “just wrong and unneeded.” He claimed that the only way he knew about the project was an article in the village newsletter.
Horwitz is vehemently against the project, and claims that there have been three executive sessions about the project in order to avoid public input. While it may be true that the project was discussed in executive sessions, it was done so within the framework of the Illinois Open Meetings Act which allows public bodies (village board, city councils, school board, etc.) to meet in closed session for several topics, including land acquisition, litigation and personnel matters.
As for hiding information, the village has made efforts to make details about the project public. Most village records are available to the public, but navigating the website can be a challenge, but a little effort can yield results. Information about the 1100 Lake-Cook Rd. project is available at this link.
Despite this link and information posted on social media and in the mainstream media, some residents think more should be done to inform residents about the project.
Nothing is perfect. Could the village have done a better job when it unveiled the project? Absolutely. The media announcement and Dec. 9 meeting lacked polish. Since then, information about the project has been on the village’s website, social media and printed materials sent to residents, something Horwitz acknowledges.
But there is so much the village can do to get residents civically engaged. Slogans, banners and graphics may lead a horse to water, but they can’t make it drink.
The onus of civic engagement lies with citizens.
The Illinois legislature knows this, and seems to realize that education is the key to civic engagement and that citizens have to take the lead when it comes to holding government officials at all levels accountable. They just cannot sit back and complain.
Because in the end, civic engagement can be more productive than civic enragement.
