Elections should focus on experience, qualifications -- not polenta

Back in the early – very early – days of my career as a journalist, I covered the city of Highwood.

Highwood at the time had two bits of notoriety.

One was that due to the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union (WCTU) and archaic liquor laws, the first place north of Chicago along the North Shore where you could get a drink was Highwood. The result was a plethora of bars and restaurants that served drinks.

If nothing else, it led to Highwood being listed in the Guinness Book of World Records for most liquor licenses per square acre.

The other was its mayor, Fidel Ghini, whose diction and command of English put him in the same company as Richard J. and Richard M Daley.

For reasons unbeknown to me, the Highwood City Council met at 7 p.m. on Friday nights.  Yes, Friday nights. Meetings under Fidel’s guidance lasted an hour.

The meetings were a series of aye votes and ended with Fidel’s pronouncement of what a great job he was doing and what a great city Highwood was.

And then it was off to the bars.

There is a book, “Quotations from Chairman Daley” that features some of ‘hiz honor’s’ classic statements. Ghini could have one too.

Fidel never scripted his meetings and you never knew what was coming next. However, one thing was certain – if someone disagreed with him, Fidel brought out the polenta. Not literally, but figuratively.

There were multiple levels of polenta making, depending on the level of anger.

** Mildly upset – “You’re trying to make a polenta” – Polenta is a cornmeal mixture that some people consider a mush.  It is made with hot water.

** Upset – “You’re trying to make polenta with cold water”

** Very upset – “You’re trying to make polenta with no water.”

With the April 6 consolidated elections looming, there is one sure thing. There’s a lot of polenta in Buffalo Grove.

This became evident during the Candidates Forum/Debate sponsored by the Journal & Topics Publications on Thursday. Candidates for District 125 School Board as well as candidates for the Buffalo Grove Village Board had the opportunity to present their positions on various topics based on questions developed by the editorial staff of the Journal & Topics.

It has been said that the road to Hell is paved with good intentions. Thursday’s forum proved that.

With capacity capped at 50 due to COVID-19 restrictions, the opportunity for residents to attend was limited. There was plenty of space, however, as only 24 people attended. This, by the way, included the moderator and candidates. Thanks to village trustee  Joanne Johnson, the village candidates’ forum was available on Facebook live.  It wasn’t must-see TV. Neither was the school board forum.

The school board forum focused more on accusations by Nicole Grimes and Barb Tolbert that the D125 Board is unresponsive and shrouded in secrecy. Lalit Japtap did not participate. To no surprise, incumbents Steven Frost and Fei Shang reputed the charges. Fellow incumbent Gary Corson was not in attendance.

Two things came into my mind during the School Board forum. The first was that Grimes and Tolbert lack familiarity with both the Illinois Open Meetings Act (OMA) and the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Much of the information they claimed was “hidden” is available either by the FOIA or cannot be discussed in public or made available to the public under OMA guidelines. Can things be improved?  Absolutely. However, what was missing from the debate, partly due to the nature of the questions and incessant focus of access to documents, was an exchange of ideas about, brace yourself, education. A novel idea. Stevenson High School did not achieve its nationally known reputation without, whether you agree with them or not, School Board guidance.

Accusations that Frost has been on the Board too long were of no bearing to the debate or the operation of the School Board. Like him or not, at least he has served for 20 years.

Length of service is not, nor should it be, a precursor to running for an elected position. However, it’s important to realize that a School Board and Village Board are not student councils. They are multi-million-dollar operations.

Persons with no experience or background who think they can wake up one morning and decide to run for an elected position just because someone told them there is an opening are doing a disservice not only to the Board they seek a spot on, but also to the community as well. Transparency is essential.

There are five candidates for the Buffalo Grove Village Board: incumbents Joanne Johnson, Les Ottenheimer and Andrew Stein. They are being challenged by former trustee Mike Terson and Gowri Magati.

Thursday’s debate did little to shed new light on the positions of the candidates.  The incumbents did what incumbents do – tout the work they’ve done and pledge to keep the village going in a strong direction.

Terson was in a tricky situation, having served as a trustee and having run against Village President Beverly Sussman two years ago. His positions, especially those related to economic development, are well known. Interestingly enough, Terson said several times that he agrees with some of the positions of the incumbents, especially Ottenheimer.  He also appears to remain wedded to the concept of the failed “Malk” downtown development proposal, something he raised several times during the discussion.

The odd person out was Magati. If the forum did anything, it revealed that she lacks any form of experience in civic matters or comprehensive knowledge related to Buffalo Grove. This, however, is reflected in her campaign.

Magati entered the race two weeks before the filing deadline saying someone informed her that there were positions available on the Village Board. Her original reasons for running focused on representing “her community.” While the goal of reflecting the diversity of Buffalo Grove on elected bodies is admirable, no candidate should run solely to represent a single community.

Magati’s candidacy has been shrouded in controversy as well. Magati’s filing petitions were challenged by former trustee Jeffrey Berman for alleged irregularities. The Electoral Board found that Magati had engaged in “false swearing” and that other irregularities existed in her petition. The Electoral Board tossed out several pages of the petition on that basis. However, the Electoral Board also found the evidence did not support a finding of a sufficient “pattern of fraud” to warrant “striking the entirety of the petition.” As such, despite proven false swearing by Magati, and other irregularities in her petition, the Electoral Board overruled the objection and allowed Magati to stay on the ballot.  By the way, one member voted to remove Magati from the ballot.

Magati, who denies any party affiliation, was represented by Matthew Flamm, an attorney who happens to be active in the Cook County Democratic party. That is interesting, given that Magati apparently had no interest in running, let alone involvement in party politics until, as mentioned, someone told her there was an opening on the Village Board.

Nothing screams civic engagement more than not knowing what positions are open on the Board you are running for.

While I can’t fault her for running, the reality is this – given her lack of experience and knowledge about the Village Board and village issues, her a lack of transparency about her background and backing, and her single “community” interest, a successful Magati campaign would do a disservice not only to “her community” but the community at large.

Again, her lack of substance was reflected in her comments during the forum.

Magati claims the “same roads” are being repaired every year. They’re not. Work done by the village on village streets is prioritized and scheduled every year. There is no repetition. Her responses also made clear that she has no knowledge or appreciation for the scope of the Village’s responsibilities. What she apparently does not realize is that Lake County, Cook County and the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) have jurisdiction over many roadways in the village.

Her stand on retail growth was at best convoluted and reflected a lack of understanding as to what the village has done and is trying to do. One of her “fresh ideas” is to “Build an entertainment center downtown to bring in more revenue” and to “Assure the downtown will attract professionals and young families.” There was No mention of who would do these things, how they would come to pass, or who would pay for them. Oh, and psst, Gowri, Buffalo Grove doesn’t have a downtown.

The debate also revealed that she lacks comprehension of basic facts, including critical statistics she claimed to reference regarding vacancy rates in the village. Vacancy rates, as detailed by village staff and the Economic Development Strategic Plan, reflect that the village has a 3.4 percent vacancy rate for industrial and flex uses, 16.6 percent vacancy for office space and a 13.2 percent retail vacancy rate. The composite vacancy rate in the village is 7.7 percent.

By comparison, the industrial/flex vacancy rate for the North Central Region is 8.6 percent and 7.8 percent for the Chicago metropolitan area.  The office vacancy rate is 18.5 percent for the North Central Region and 13.9 percent for the Chicago metropolitan area.

When it comes to retail, the North Central region rate is 9.7 percent with the Chicago metropolitan rate at 8.5 percent.

Room for improvement in Buffalo Grove?  Absolutely. Does Magati understand how or why? Apparently not.

Magati needs to get her facts straight. When Johnson cited the vacancy numbers during Thursday’s forum, Magati was quick to accuse Johnson of being wrong and asserted the composite rate is 19 percent. She claimed to have gotten her numbers from “the website.”

It was Magati who was wrong. The rate she touted was for the Lake Cook Corridor Tax Increment Financing District. The rate of retail vacancies in the TIF district exceeds 19 percent, with much of it due to the albatrosses known as Town Center and Chase Plaza, site of the vacant Dominick’s. Understanding the problem is the first step to curing it. A misunderstanding of the facts, however, can only lead to flawed conclusions. As the saying goes, “garbage in and garbage out.”

So what’s my take? Magati’s fresh ideas lack two things. Freshness. And ideas. Had she taken an interest in the Village Board before haphazardly seeking signatures and developing a campaign that lacks substance and vacillates more than the Bears’ quarterback situation, she could be a viable candidate.

Right now, however, what she needs to do is learn how to make polenta.

 

Is his transparency going to pot?

            Much has been written, to no surprise, about the use of social media by politicians – especially President Trump who clings to it like a cheap suit.

            Not only has it has changed the landscape of politics, but also the need for transparency by public officials.  It has also raised the level of curiosity by constituents who want to know what their government officials are doing and why.

  

Village Trustee Andrew Stein

(Photo from Facebook)

          However, it is not just a national or statewide issue. Local politicos need to adhere to a high level of transparency as well, especially when posting on social media.

            This includes Buffalo Grove officials.

            Whether on the Park Board, Planning and Zoning Commission or the Village Board, public officials need to be as open as possible.

            Which is why a post by Village Board trustee Andrew Stein on Dec. 15 raised some questions. Stein’s post included a link from the Illinois Policy Institute that “Poll Shows ‘Large Majorities’ Of Illinois Voters Support Legalizing Marijuana” (Marijuana poll). Stein queried Facebook users by asking them “What do you think of this?”

            There were 10 comments, including one I made asking, “Are you proposing this for the village?” to which Stein replied, “I am curious where others stand.”

            Was that really the case? I initially shrugged it off until I got a call from Stein, during which he further reiterated that he was just interested in the possibility of recreational use of marijuana being legal in Illinois. I had no intention of writing about Stein’s post because at first, because it just seemed inane.

            But I began thinking, which is always a dangerous thing, and I could not help but wonder why Stein was interested in what people thought of legal recreational marijuana in Illinois.

The thought stayed with me until recently when I decided to see if, in fact, there was more to Stein’s concern about recreational use of marijuana than a fleeting comment on Facebook.

            There was, and, still may be. 

             Information I obtained through a request filed in accordance with the Illinois Freedom of Information Act, yielded that Stein had more than a fleeting interest in the issue.

For Stein to state on social media that he was just curious as to where others stood appears to be a misrepresentation of his intent.

Stein’s interest is based in the introduction last year of Illinois House Bill 2353, the cannabis control act.  An amendment would, apparently, allow recreation use of marijuana.

Stein began pushing for the village to take the lead in local regulation of recreational marijuana in early October.

In an email sent to Village Manager Dane Bragg and Board President Beverly Sussman, on Oct. 25, Stein wrote, “Time may of the essence on this. I would like to discuss an ordinance to ban the sale and cultivation of Recreational Marijuana in Buffalo Grove. It would be great to have something on the books before legislation makes its way through the State.”

Why was “time of the essence”?  Apparently because at that time the two bills, HB 2353 and SB 316, were on the docket in Springfield and would address legal recreational use of marijuana in the state.

Bragg responded to Stein on Oct. 27, telling him that according to the Northwest Municipal Conference, as well as the Illinois Chiefs Association via Buffalo Grove Police Chief Steve Casstevens, the bills was pushed aside until after the first of the year.

Stein, however persisted, and in an email sent to Bragg, Sussman, Casstevens and Deputy Village Manager Jennifer Maltas, on Nov. 3 wrote “I have been thinking about this and was wondering, does Buffalo Grove wish to be a leader in this and pass an ordinance prohibiting the sale and distribution before the Bill moves? We could be the first and others could follow our lead in telling the State that this is a bad idea? I think that it is worth the discussion. Does anyone agree with me?”

Bragg quickly responded that “Seeing as the bill isn’t going anywhere, I think it is a distraction right now. In addition, the bill as proposed preserves home rule authority to regulate how we want. This may be of more pertinent interest after the first of the year.”

Which, you would think would be the route to go. Stein, however, remains persistent. There’s nothing wrong with a Village Board member taking an initiative on a matter, as Stein has with the recreational marijuana issue, however, what is troubling is his lack of transparency with constituents.

Stein continued to plead his case into November when he once again emailed Bragg and Sussman simply saying “it may be closer than was thought.” His support was a voluminous report from the Stand Strong Coalition, a group which, as indicated on its website (standstrongcoalition.org) was, “formed August 1st, 2014 by concerned parents, Jamie Epstein and Debbie Stern. It is a community-based coalition dedicated to preventing underage drinking and drug use for the youth in our community.” The group lobbied the Board in August to raise the age for tobacco sales to 21, a measure which was approved.

The information Stein provided detailed scheduled public meetings featuring experts who apparently side with Stand Strong Coalition. The question that is not answered is if Stein attended those meetings and if he did, did he do so as a regular citizen, or member of the Village Board.  When I spoke with him in December, he made no mention of his idea for an ordinance or if he had attended or approached Stand Our Ground for support.

Instead, he turned to Facebook with an innocuous post casually asking people how they felt about recreational marijuana being legalized in the Land of Lincoln.

After receiving information from my FOI request, I contacted Stein by email and asked him about the two bills, to which he replied “…I was concerned that legislation to approve recreational marijuana was going to move soon. I am opposed to recreational marijuana. I was considering proposing a resolution by the Village opposing legislation, before it moved forward. When I saw the article that I posted on Facebook, I saw an opportunity to gauge sentiment. You asked me if I was proposing this for the Village and I told you that I was just curious where others stand.”

Got it.  At least he confirmed that he is opposed to recreational marijuana and that he was considering introducing a resolution to the Village Board opposing it.

Which raises more questions

The first being why didn’t he say that on his Facebook post and secondly, what exactly is he looking for – a resolution opposing the bill, or an ordinance prohibiting recreational marijuana in the village?

As noted in the Nov. 3 email, Stein asked Bragg, Sussman, Casstevens and Maltas, “does Buffalo Grove wish to be a leader in this and pass an ordinance prohibiting the sale and distribution before the Bill moves?”

I’m not passing judgment on Stein’s beliefs on recreational marijuana, just the scope of his transparency.

He needs to be transparent in what he’s looking for and an openness as to why.

Otherwise his transparency will go up in smoke.

No matter what’s being smoked.

Who's on first?

The advent of social media has provided candidates at any level a new vehicle by which to deliver their messages.

President Obama used it extensively in both his campaigns as did Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel.

So I was not too surprised when I started seeing various posts by the candidates in the stimulating and issues loaded race for village trustee.  With three names on the ballot, current Board members Beverly Sussman, Andrew Stein and Lester (call me Les) A. Ottenheimer III,  and one write-in candidate, Jeff Battinus, it’s hardly been as exciting as say, an appearance by Carlos Marmol.

The four candidates have all said the usual stuff.  The three current board members have touted their experience and concern for the village, something incumbents usually due.

Battinus has been doing the same too, but since he has not served on the Board, he does not have the experience to fall back on as the other three.  Instead, he has been trying to forge ahead by riding the coat tails of the proposed instant downtown.  At last month’s candidate forum much of the discussion focused on the 65-acre proposal for a central business district along Lake-Cook Road on land currently being used as one of the village’s two golf course. 

A little residential concern, objection and ::poof:: we have a campaign.  Sort of.

With only one proposal on the table a decision does not seem to be in the near future.

If there are other major issues in the race, there has not been much discussion about them.  Yep, folks are concerned about the Weiland Road project.  Yep, folks are concerned about the budget.

But when it comes to hearing what the Village Board has to say about it, there does not appear to be a lot of interest in these topics.  At the past two meetings, there have been more people in attendance to say good-bye to retiring Police Chief Steve Balinski and retiring Public Works Director Greg Boysen than  have been to discuss village issues. 

Oh yes, let’s not forget the parents who came at last week’s Board meeting to celebrate the state champion Buffalo Grove Cheerleaders.

So cheerleaders and public works directors have taken the focus of the village.  In an election year.

As sitting Board members, Sussman-Stein-Ottenheimer III have had the chance to let the public know of their concerns for issues facing the village, but have not made village board meetings campaign forums.

So where’s Battinus during the Village Board meetings?  My guess he’s in one of two places – he’s out running (remember, part of his candidacy announcement was based on his jogs through the village) -- or he’s in Ela Township.

Say what?

Just check social media.  Battinus has made it a point to let the world know that he “likes” Ela First.

The what?   Ela First?

 Ela First, as noted on its Facebook Page is “…Committed to the people of Ela Township, we will Continue to provide quality services while maintaining a Balanced Budget with Integrity, Accountability, and a Proven track..”

I’m not sure why Battinus is interested or concerned in the fine folks of Ela Township – I mean Lake Zurich is beautiful this time of year -- but it seems to me that a candidate running for Buffalo Grove Village Board should be putting Buffalo Grove first.

He’s made it clear his opposition to the instant-mall and has called for development along Dundee Road and Milwaukee Avenue.  But now what?  One local paper endorsed him because of his “fresh voice”.  What it didn’t say is what they fresh voice was going to say.

Yep, the village needs more commercial and retail development – you can’t argue that.  But how should it achieve that?  The campaigns of all four candidates have been pretty mum on that. 

It’s a $64,000 question that a lot of folks in Buffalo Grove have been trying to answer.  And who knows where the answer will come from.

But odds are it won’t be in Ela Township.

Chicken fried election?

I’m still mulling over the village’s Electoral Board hearing, which determined that Jeff Battinus was not eligible to be on the ballot for the April election.

The outcome seemed inevitable.  Not because of who is on the Electoral Board – cynics will say the old guard was out to nail Battinus – but that’s not the case.  The Electoral Board consists of the Village President, Village Clerk and most tenured trustee, which means it was Board President Jeff Braiman, Village Clerk Jan Sirabian and Trustee Jeff Berman.  Period.

The challenge to Battinus’ filing was not by any of the old guard, but by relative new comer Andrew Stein who was elected in 2011 to fill the remainder of ousted trustee Lisa Stone.

To help breakthrough the confusion, I met with local political observer Chicken Little.  “I’m not sure what to make of the whole thing,” Little said.  “I’m actually kind of fried, which is not a good state to be in.”

I asked him what exactly bothered him.

“ Several things. For starters, do you need to be named Jeff to be involved in the village process?  I mean, really, look at who was there --  Jeff Braiman, Jeff Berman, Jeff Battinus, and just for good measure, the attorney consulting Jeff Stein – so we had for Jeffs and two steins.”

A frazzled Chicken Little

OK, so your point is?

“Nothing really,” Little said, “but it would be nice if we had some name diversity.”  So, I asked him, what about other candidates?  Do you think they ::ahem:: chickened out?

“Not sure,” he said, “I’m still trying to figure things out.”

Good luck, I told him.

Breaking through the abundance of Jeffs, "JBs" and multiple Steins, the result of the hearing means that the Village Board election will be uncontested.  There are three candidates – incumbents Beverly Sussman, Lester A. Ottenheimer III and Stein (remember, that’s Andrew Stein) -- for three spots.

So out of a community of 43,000 plus, only four people sought to serve – and because of the ruling by the Electoral Board, we’re trimmed to three.  Quite honestly, it’s pretty amazing, especially given how we’ve been led to believe that the village is corrupt, the trustees are dishonest, the village is going to hell and everyone should flee the coup.

“Hey, don’t get personal,” Little said.

The ruling which took the contest out of contested election was pretty cut-and-dry.  Stein (oops, make that Jeff Stein) told the hearing that there were three cases that addressed election filing challenges and in all three cases, the Appellate Court upheld the ruling.

Which didn’t surprise Battinus.  “I made a mistake,” he said.  “My problem was a clerical error.”  Battinus noted, several times, that the ruling takes away the opportunity for Buffalo Grove residents to have a choice.

Depending on your point of view, Stein – make that Andrew Stein – emerges as a goat or a hero.  Jeff Stein, however, made it clear that there is no way to over ride the statute.

Unlike some previous gatherings in the Council Chambers (ponder this for a minute – why are they called the Council Chambers, when it’s one room and the Village does not have a council?  Just asking.) the atmosphere was actually pleasant and respectful.

“You did the tough part,” Braiman said.  “You went door-to-door and got hundreds of signatures from people on the street.”  Braiman noted that the Electoral Board had “no authority to do otherwise.”

Berman concurred, noting that “whatever sympathies or thoughts we may have, the courts have ruled.”

Battinus, who moved to the village in 2010, was gracious in accepting his fate.  “ I have to be accountable.  I screwed up.”  Battinus says his goal is to serve “my community – that’s it.”  He is mulling a run as a write-in candidate, but still needs to file paperwork with both Lake and Cook counties.  Among other things.

Battinus says it depends on fund-raising, estimating it will take nearly $6,000 to run a campaign, which factors in signs, mailers and even attorney fees.  “A grass roots effort won’t be enough…If nothing else, I have name recognition.”

‘Whatever he does, he’s going to be very careful about crossing his Ts and dotting his Is.  “I won’t make the same mistake again,” he said.

He won’t be able to as long as Andrew Stein is around. 

The process for reviewing candidate filing challenges is cut and dry.  The question is why would someone, in this case Andrew Stein, challenge a candidate’s petition and why.

Stein contends he has done elections in 2009 and again in 2011 when he ran for the Village Board.  He said the reviews were a learning experience and in one case he contacted a candidate’s staff member to tell him that there was an error.  Good neighbor Stein?

Maybe.

Concerned public official?

Maybe.

Battinus, however isn’t so sure, and here’s where it gets interesting.

Battinus told the hearing that Andrew Stein told him on three occasions that he should consider not running.  “The third time,” Battinus said later, “he said someone would contest it (his filing).”

Stein told me that he did in fact talk with Battinus and discussed his (Stein’s) consideration to run in 2009.  “I talked with him about my background in 2009 and that people told me I didn’t have the experience,” Stein said.  He added that he suggested to Battinus to gain more experience and build name recognition.

Stein says he told Battinus that if he followed the directions in the candidate’s guide their probably would not be a problem.

Stein says he did “all the research I could” after the filing deadline and was more than a little surprised when he found that Battinus did not file an economic disclosure form.  Stein said he spoke with Battinus on Jan. 1 to discuss his filing, but did not tell him that it was he who was going to file the objection.  Stein said he discussed the options with Battinus which, Stein said “were to withdraw and save yourself and the village money for legal fees, or right it.”

“I hate to say it,” said Little, “but it seems kind of scrambled to me.”

C.L. might be on to something here.

Battinus did little to defend himself and, barely 14 minutes into the hearing, asked the Electoral Board if they could go to closing remarks.

Had Braiman and Berman, along with attorney Jeff Stein not made it clear that there was no way to go against the statutes, there could have been some interesting debate.  Instead, it resorted to an exchange of polite understandings and Battinus admitting that he made the error and he was not “angry with him (Andrew Stein).” 

All that was missing was a group hug.

“So what happens now?” Little asked.  “Can I run as a write-in candidate?”

“And that is?”

As noted, potential write-in candidates must file their intent to run as a write-in candidate in both Lake and Cook counties in order for their votes to count.

“And if I don’t?” he asked. 

Simple – your votes won’t count.

“Hmmm,” he said.  “What if there’s a crowd of write-in candidates?”

Seems to me there won’t be, especially since there was only one nonincumbent who had planned to run.

“Why do you think that is?” he asked.

Not sure – lack of time, lack of money or lack of interest.

“Or maybe the sky isn’t falling,” Little said.