Sometimes we as writers listen to the wrong people for the information we use to build a story or a column and sometimes we don't do our proper homework with that data.
As someone new on the block (I actually have not been reporting on La Grange regularly since around 2001, not that that's an excuse), I really have been trying to get back up to speed lately on all the issues and positions. But in doing so, I made a mistake in my Sept. 16 column entry about the Citizens Council of La Grange, specifically involving incumbent Village President Liz Asperger.
Asperger, as many know, could not be a bigger proponent of Tax Increment Financing, as evidenced in part by her most recent Village Board comments about the request by the La Grange Theatre owners for TIF funds to help in their planned renovations. I thought I was told otherwise.
At the time, Asperger called the request "an appropriate TIF project" and referred to the downtown TIF District as "a phenomenal success" for which La Grange has "kind of become the poster child in Illinois" because of its "forward-thinking manner" regarding TIF funding.
Asperger will have the same opportunity to share her feelings about the TIF when La Grange Theatre funding options are formally presented to the Village Board during a special meeting scheduled for 7 p.m. Monday, Sept. 29, in Village Hall.
As to whether Asperger plans to seek the Council endorsement again this fall, she said she has not yet reeived an application but will likely do so.
We still do not know whether the forces who did not support her four years ago still remain in large enough numbers, but bet it's doubtful. She's done a lot to heal wounds, move forward and soften divisiveness in town since taking office in 2005.
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
IT'S THAT TIME OF YEAR AGAIN, VOTERS
Newspaper men like the joke that there are two seasons in Illinois: winter and construction.
True that, but at least in the case of construction, you have a choice. You can take different roads. Yet that's not always the case with the biennial rite in every local municipality (and another exciting season): elections.
Those who support and comprise the establishment candidate endorsement organization called the Citizens' Council of La Grange strongly believe it is a system that works well for the community. It has rarely seen competition to its endorsees, who win most of the time.
But as in the case of the last two municipal elections in the village -- in particular the last contest for village president in 2005 -- things don't always go as planned.
Every election season, a new group of Council members, led by their own by-laws, gather monthly at Village Hall to vet, recruit, interview, research, endorse, then lobby for their choices for seats on the Village, Park District and Public Library boards.
Except, for the most part, the last two elections, "independent" candidates for public office in La Grange do not typically fare well at the polls. In other words, they rarely win.
Just ask onetime "independent" trustee hopeful Larry Gess, who was not endorsed the first time he sought Council backing -- for which he didn't get and ran anyway as an independent, losing his fight.
The former downtown candle shop owner only won a trustee seat when he was later endorsed and backed by the Council. Go figure.
Unlike its municipal counterparts in most neighboring communities throughout Cook and DuPage, La Grange does not boast an active two-party system, where one slate of endorsed candidates runs at election time vs. another slate of endorsed candidates (Or in the case of, say, Lyons or Willow Springs, three parties).
That's not the going way, the status quo, and hasn't been for more than 70 years in La Grange.
Rather, the 11-district Council vets all the candidates -- this year that means three Park Board, four Library Board a five Village Board vacancies -- and endorses those it feels best represent the village as a whole and "not in ny narrow sense represent any particular organization, business, social group or special interest," as per its bylaws.
Its delegates seem to be dedicated, hard-working people out for the town's best interests. But its numbers are severely lacking.
While the Council endorsees end up running, often as a political party, without opposition, that is by design, not happenstance. Its president, Orlando Coryell, puts it this way: They are but they aren't political.
The Council firmly believes its role is a fair and democratic one which its ever-changing members attest often takes the politics out of typically partisan contests so often dividing communities and those who govern them like nearby Brookfield, Countryside or La Grange Park.
Two years ago, the Council endorsed three for trustee, but couldn't get them to sign a unified statement about their candidacies, said Coryell. Signs sprouted up in town not just for those three, but for an "alternative" slate comprised of two of the three and another guy who failed to win the endorsement -- who later ended up losing the race.
But the real test of the Council occurred in '05, when its membership (in private, as usual, by the way), endorsed former trustee Theodore "Ted" Hadley for village president over challenger Liz Asperger, the current mayor.
Hadley, a close ally of state Sen. (and former village trustee) Christine Radogno, was an often outspoken official with a lot of great ideas who had his loyal backers, obviously.
But many of those in the business community and of the status quo in La Grange threw their support behind the successful Asperger instead.
The characteristically vitriolic relationship between Hadley and his onetime detractors was not more evident when, at the close of the latest Council meeting Sept. 10, one prominent businessman and new Council member came by to shake hands with fellow new member Hadley.
He was flatly denied, ignored more like it. So everyone on the Council doesn't get along. That's another factor that makes it so unique, its political(oops) and philosophical differences.
After all, as the adage goes, politics does make strange bedfellows.
Take Asperger, who has enjoyed a fairly positive first term as she helped usher in proposed new mixed-use developments on both ends of the downtown. One wonders how comfortable she will be in seeking the Council's endorsement this time around -- if she even bothers.
One of the biggest problems facing the Council this year, like many others, is apathy: not just among interested candidates for the seemingly less prestigious offices of Park Commissioner and Library trustee (which often don't have as many interested candidates as open spots without a little arm-twisting), but those wanting to be Council members.
The organization seems to be run well, like a finely oiled machine, but sometimes it acts like a family, with so many differing opinions.
Over time, some residents and political pundits have even viewed the Council's existence as unnatural, undemocratic perhaps, especially given that it, more frequently than not, is comprised of far less than the ideal maximum of 88 members.
This fall, for instance, the group boasts a grand total of 47 members. That's a fraction of 1 percent of the town's residents and not much more than 1 percent of those who voted in the last mayoral election in which Asperger won by a nearly 2-to-1 margin.
Coryell says the Council is seeking to expand its geographic diversity beyond members and candidates from the historical center of town. The council limits membership to eight delegates per district, but rarely has attracted that many. Plus, its leaders are not crazy about publicizing where it is lacking members, for some reason.
To become a delegate, an applicant must be a registered voter who has lived in the village for at least one year. You can't be a current canidate or married to one.
Another interesting factor this year is the fact that since the last election, Coryell has become a bigger name in town. The husband of a longtime Library Board trustee, he mounted a successful legal challenge to the Park Board's controversial decision to sell part of Gordon Park to a private developer.
Coryell says the council board was made aware of his efforts and was OK with his actions, and he doesn't think his very public position will affect any potential Park Board candidates -- even the incumbents who favor the land sale. Hmm.
Besides a protracted debate over whether to use flyers vs. email to attract new members, the Council spent a good part of the evening last week debating whether to accept more new members before slating takes place in November and December, whether to endorse for village president, clerk and three trustees sooner than later and whether holding another meeting in October will help or hurt the vetting process.
Council board secretary Rob Pierson repeatedly made it clear in rejecting Hadley's idea of holding a second meeting to grow the Council's ranks when he suggested that would only "open the door" to outright abuse by partisan factions.
Those factions, which he said have the "tendency and ability" to pack the Council with their allies "just to do slatemaking then disappear into the night" to assure their candidate is endorsed rather than someone who represents a broad spectrum of the village, is qualified and involved, has past experience and an open mind -- qualities the Council says it strives to atract.
If those same people were only encouraged to take a chance and run for office without feeling they had to appear before the Council first, voters could make an informed choice as to who they would like running their village.
Things, it seems, would be much more in the open. Transparent. And voters would have a clear choice.
After all, what would it be like if a specified group of U.S. citizens met and endorsed just one candidate for president, and when we went to the polls, he or she was the only one on the ballot?
My guess is that many voters would definitely have something to say about that. Ya think?
True that, but at least in the case of construction, you have a choice. You can take different roads. Yet that's not always the case with the biennial rite in every local municipality (and another exciting season): elections.
Those who support and comprise the establishment candidate endorsement organization called the Citizens' Council of La Grange strongly believe it is a system that works well for the community. It has rarely seen competition to its endorsees, who win most of the time.
But as in the case of the last two municipal elections in the village -- in particular the last contest for village president in 2005 -- things don't always go as planned.
Every election season, a new group of Council members, led by their own by-laws, gather monthly at Village Hall to vet, recruit, interview, research, endorse, then lobby for their choices for seats on the Village, Park District and Public Library boards.
Except, for the most part, the last two elections, "independent" candidates for public office in La Grange do not typically fare well at the polls. In other words, they rarely win.
Just ask onetime "independent" trustee hopeful Larry Gess, who was not endorsed the first time he sought Council backing -- for which he didn't get and ran anyway as an independent, losing his fight.
The former downtown candle shop owner only won a trustee seat when he was later endorsed and backed by the Council. Go figure.
Unlike its municipal counterparts in most neighboring communities throughout Cook and DuPage, La Grange does not boast an active two-party system, where one slate of endorsed candidates runs at election time vs. another slate of endorsed candidates (Or in the case of, say, Lyons or Willow Springs, three parties).
That's not the going way, the status quo, and hasn't been for more than 70 years in La Grange.
Rather, the 11-district Council vets all the candidates -- this year that means three Park Board, four Library Board a five Village Board vacancies -- and endorses those it feels best represent the village as a whole and "not in ny narrow sense represent any particular organization, business, social group or special interest," as per its bylaws.
Its delegates seem to be dedicated, hard-working people out for the town's best interests. But its numbers are severely lacking.
While the Council endorsees end up running, often as a political party, without opposition, that is by design, not happenstance. Its president, Orlando Coryell, puts it this way: They are but they aren't political.
The Council firmly believes its role is a fair and democratic one which its ever-changing members attest often takes the politics out of typically partisan contests so often dividing communities and those who govern them like nearby Brookfield, Countryside or La Grange Park.
Two years ago, the Council endorsed three for trustee, but couldn't get them to sign a unified statement about their candidacies, said Coryell. Signs sprouted up in town not just for those three, but for an "alternative" slate comprised of two of the three and another guy who failed to win the endorsement -- who later ended up losing the race.
But the real test of the Council occurred in '05, when its membership (in private, as usual, by the way), endorsed former trustee Theodore "Ted" Hadley for village president over challenger Liz Asperger, the current mayor.
Hadley, a close ally of state Sen. (and former village trustee) Christine Radogno, was an often outspoken official with a lot of great ideas who had his loyal backers, obviously.
But many of those in the business community and of the status quo in La Grange threw their support behind the successful Asperger instead.
The characteristically vitriolic relationship between Hadley and his onetime detractors was not more evident when, at the close of the latest Council meeting Sept. 10, one prominent businessman and new Council member came by to shake hands with fellow new member Hadley.
He was flatly denied, ignored more like it. So everyone on the Council doesn't get along. That's another factor that makes it so unique, its political(oops) and philosophical differences.
After all, as the adage goes, politics does make strange bedfellows.
Take Asperger, who has enjoyed a fairly positive first term as she helped usher in proposed new mixed-use developments on both ends of the downtown. One wonders how comfortable she will be in seeking the Council's endorsement this time around -- if she even bothers.
One of the biggest problems facing the Council this year, like many others, is apathy: not just among interested candidates for the seemingly less prestigious offices of Park Commissioner and Library trustee (which often don't have as many interested candidates as open spots without a little arm-twisting), but those wanting to be Council members.
The organization seems to be run well, like a finely oiled machine, but sometimes it acts like a family, with so many differing opinions.
Over time, some residents and political pundits have even viewed the Council's existence as unnatural, undemocratic perhaps, especially given that it, more frequently than not, is comprised of far less than the ideal maximum of 88 members.
This fall, for instance, the group boasts a grand total of 47 members. That's a fraction of 1 percent of the town's residents and not much more than 1 percent of those who voted in the last mayoral election in which Asperger won by a nearly 2-to-1 margin.
Coryell says the Council is seeking to expand its geographic diversity beyond members and candidates from the historical center of town. The council limits membership to eight delegates per district, but rarely has attracted that many. Plus, its leaders are not crazy about publicizing where it is lacking members, for some reason.
To become a delegate, an applicant must be a registered voter who has lived in the village for at least one year. You can't be a current canidate or married to one.
Another interesting factor this year is the fact that since the last election, Coryell has become a bigger name in town. The husband of a longtime Library Board trustee, he mounted a successful legal challenge to the Park Board's controversial decision to sell part of Gordon Park to a private developer.
Coryell says the council board was made aware of his efforts and was OK with his actions, and he doesn't think his very public position will affect any potential Park Board candidates -- even the incumbents who favor the land sale. Hmm.
Besides a protracted debate over whether to use flyers vs. email to attract new members, the Council spent a good part of the evening last week debating whether to accept more new members before slating takes place in November and December, whether to endorse for village president, clerk and three trustees sooner than later and whether holding another meeting in October will help or hurt the vetting process.
Council board secretary Rob Pierson repeatedly made it clear in rejecting Hadley's idea of holding a second meeting to grow the Council's ranks when he suggested that would only "open the door" to outright abuse by partisan factions.
Those factions, which he said have the "tendency and ability" to pack the Council with their allies "just to do slatemaking then disappear into the night" to assure their candidate is endorsed rather than someone who represents a broad spectrum of the village, is qualified and involved, has past experience and an open mind -- qualities the Council says it strives to atract.
If those same people were only encouraged to take a chance and run for office without feeling they had to appear before the Council first, voters could make an informed choice as to who they would like running their village.
Things, it seems, would be much more in the open. Transparent. And voters would have a clear choice.
After all, what would it be like if a specified group of U.S. citizens met and endorsed just one candidate for president, and when we went to the polls, he or she was the only one on the ballot?
My guess is that many voters would definitely have something to say about that. Ya think?
Monday, September 15, 2008
THUMBS UP FOR THE THEATRE?
As the Village Board continues to debate the merits of giving a grant or loan to owners of the "historic" La Grange Theatre -- from either Tax Increment Financing or General funds -- one payback mechanism has emerged: a possible 50-cent "entertainment tax" added on to the existing $3.50 per person admission ticket.
The seat tax or user fee would be specifically designed for the theatre, for the village to recoup its investment over time.
Theater owners John Rot and David Rizner revealed the idea of a proposed user fee recently to the La Grange Business Association recently, 10 days after publicly addressing elected officials.
And they didn't get by easy, as one LGBA member questioned their motives, their plans and even inquiring why the $1.725 million request is so controversial.
Rot, in turn, put up a good case. They are not "looking for a profit" off La Grange just to get free money and they didn't ask for help for any reason other than to afford the estimated $3.4 million revitalization the 83-year-old movie house they contend needs to survive.
"You hear about a lot of negative stuff, but David and I never started this out to become a target," Rot told the crowd. "We do truly believe ... this is a community asset."
LGBA President and (theater neighbor/Roly Poly owner) Michael LaPidus told his peers the theater renovation and funding request was an easy decision to support.
He said La Grange Theatre brings more than 200,000 people here annually, noting downtown consultants consider a theater a natural asset to those lucky enough to still have one that's open.
"It's an economic engine that brings people to town," he said. "They are willing to keep it (operating as) a theater as long as it has community support."
I am not sure whether people really back the idea or really care one way or the other except to be assured the place will remain open. We might not know that until years from now.
But I have to agree with LaPidus. The theater owners have a vested interest in La Grange. They have been here for years operating the seemingly successful Horton's and they've already invested nearly 10 percent of the estimated "project cost" into updating the theater -- with promises of dropping another third of the total cost of renovations into the building.
So they want help from the village, kind of like a sports stadium or hotel (with its own special room taxes) that contributes to the local economy and creates jobs. Even though most of them are in other businesses.
While it seems Rot and the Village Board should be more publicly forthcoming about his business finances if he wants money from the public and they want to give it, one can also understand his desire to conduct his business in private. But he is asking for a lot from the town -- regardless of whether it will ever be reimbursed -- and the project deserves some public attention.
I've spent a lot of time in La Grange and see Rot and his staffers everywhere (just like his friend and retail neighbor Steve Palmer and Co.), but most importantly at civic functions, restaurants and most importantly, like any successful entrepreneur, around the businesses he owns and operates.
I believe him when he swears the subsidy is not being sought to bail them out of a bad business decision, that they are really just trying to save a community asset -- and that they don't want to turn the property over to another developer, especially if it only means more condos and vacant storefronts built by one of the two developers he says have expressed interest in the property.
But Something's Got to Give. And while the village may be that very entity, so should Rot and Rizner. We know the only way the CTA got the General Assembly to budge when it needed a cash infusion earlier this year was to give something back to the riding public -- and that turned out to be free rides for seniors.
Maybe the proposed developers of the old YMCA property should give something back to the community, other than a new mixed-use development, if they end up buying park land they desire. That gift could be another 2-3 acres they can buy elsewhere in town and give away to be used as park land. Perhaps on the East Side where there are more than a few available parcels.
But like I've said before, that's another story we'll discuss soon enough.
So back to the theater and its gift, other than new auditoriums, accessible ground floor rest rooms, a new concession stand, community room and modern marquee on the village's dime. Since the only thing missing since they upped ticket prices from the long-standing $2 appears to be seniors (and we don't mean LTs), bring 'em back. In droves. Let them reminisce and pay the old price for a flick, every weekend. Senior Sundays, or something like that. Then maybe the theater wouldn't be a target of critics and the village's gift might seem more palatable.
And, he told the LGBA, if La Grange loses it, they will never get it back. How true.
The seat tax or user fee would be specifically designed for the theatre, for the village to recoup its investment over time.
Theater owners John Rot and David Rizner revealed the idea of a proposed user fee recently to the La Grange Business Association recently, 10 days after publicly addressing elected officials.
And they didn't get by easy, as one LGBA member questioned their motives, their plans and even inquiring why the $1.725 million request is so controversial.
Rot, in turn, put up a good case. They are not "looking for a profit" off La Grange just to get free money and they didn't ask for help for any reason other than to afford the estimated $3.4 million revitalization the 83-year-old movie house they contend needs to survive.
"You hear about a lot of negative stuff, but David and I never started this out to become a target," Rot told the crowd. "We do truly believe ... this is a community asset."
LGBA President and (theater neighbor/Roly Poly owner) Michael LaPidus told his peers the theater renovation and funding request was an easy decision to support.
He said La Grange Theatre brings more than 200,000 people here annually, noting downtown consultants consider a theater a natural asset to those lucky enough to still have one that's open.
"It's an economic engine that brings people to town," he said. "They are willing to keep it (operating as) a theater as long as it has community support."
I am not sure whether people really back the idea or really care one way or the other except to be assured the place will remain open. We might not know that until years from now.
But I have to agree with LaPidus. The theater owners have a vested interest in La Grange. They have been here for years operating the seemingly successful Horton's and they've already invested nearly 10 percent of the estimated "project cost" into updating the theater -- with promises of dropping another third of the total cost of renovations into the building.
So they want help from the village, kind of like a sports stadium or hotel (with its own special room taxes) that contributes to the local economy and creates jobs. Even though most of them are in other businesses.
While it seems Rot and the Village Board should be more publicly forthcoming about his business finances if he wants money from the public and they want to give it, one can also understand his desire to conduct his business in private. But he is asking for a lot from the town -- regardless of whether it will ever be reimbursed -- and the project deserves some public attention.
I've spent a lot of time in La Grange and see Rot and his staffers everywhere (just like his friend and retail neighbor Steve Palmer and Co.), but most importantly at civic functions, restaurants and most importantly, like any successful entrepreneur, around the businesses he owns and operates.
I believe him when he swears the subsidy is not being sought to bail them out of a bad business decision, that they are really just trying to save a community asset -- and that they don't want to turn the property over to another developer, especially if it only means more condos and vacant storefronts built by one of the two developers he says have expressed interest in the property.
But Something's Got to Give. And while the village may be that very entity, so should Rot and Rizner. We know the only way the CTA got the General Assembly to budge when it needed a cash infusion earlier this year was to give something back to the riding public -- and that turned out to be free rides for seniors.
Maybe the proposed developers of the old YMCA property should give something back to the community, other than a new mixed-use development, if they end up buying park land they desire. That gift could be another 2-3 acres they can buy elsewhere in town and give away to be used as park land. Perhaps on the East Side where there are more than a few available parcels.
But like I've said before, that's another story we'll discuss soon enough.
So back to the theater and its gift, other than new auditoriums, accessible ground floor rest rooms, a new concession stand, community room and modern marquee on the village's dime. Since the only thing missing since they upped ticket prices from the long-standing $2 appears to be seniors (and we don't mean LTs), bring 'em back. In droves. Let them reminisce and pay the old price for a flick, every weekend. Senior Sundays, or something like that. Then maybe the theater wouldn't be a target of critics and the village's gift might seem more palatable.
After all, Rot likens the theater to more like a public institution than an individual business, and such institutions do give back to the community quite a bit, in more ways than one.
It's nice to see the LGBA stepping up to raise money to help replace the marquee by more visible and nostalgic and even nicer to see Rot & Rizner's vow to update inside and out.
Whether the village recovers its investment is not as vital to a town that has handled its finances as well as La Grange, but it's an appropriate use of TIF funds which are typically used to bring business to town and help existing ones stay.
If they go with the entertainment tax instead, fine. Especially if raising ticket prices even more means better releases and a vastly improved environment. After all, they do it in Hodgkins and those flicks are $9.75 apiece.
Through its facade improvement program, the village has given out many loans to business and property owners who have improved entryways and window displays; they assembled Triangle properties to assist in the private development of Trader Joe's, Caribou Coffee, Pier One and Borders and they have improved streets and train depots with benches, lighting and kiosks.
It's already clear four of the seven Village Board members are in favor of some kind of subsidy for the theater, which seems to keep kids off the streets and surrounding businesses thriving.
Just think of the downtown without the theater. Ask the folks in Hinsdale or Lombard what it meant to them. In Lombard, the village bought the DuPage Theatre, then later demolished it.
The village appears in favor of the request, so what method of financing should they choose? Should they make it a loan? Seek a payback of some sort? Or just make it a gift?
And, he told the LGBA, if La Grange loses it, they will never get it back. How true.
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
HISTORY NOT THE SAME FOR EVERYBODY
When I first started covering La Grange for another publication a decade ago, some of the most intriguing folks I met resided in the neighborhood commonly known as the East Side, for it seemed as though many of them had lived two distinct lives.
Some of the residents I befriended came from the South, where living was easy but where they said racism was still running rampant in the 1950s of their youth.
As African Americans, they were used to the fact that in some people's eyes, slavery may have been long gone but still lived on in the way they were treated, all too often as second-rate citizens.
They were used to "white only" water fountains and "white only" public restrooms, and they felt if they came up north to start a new life, things would be different. After all, it was believed, folks up here had a different view of "colored" people.
But no sooner than they got off the bus -- the back of the bus, no doubt -- did they encounter the same kind of discrimination they were used to back home, without the signs, right here in La Grange.
Not only were blacks prohibited from patronizing the dress shops on the west side of Fifth Avenue (La Grange Road as it is known today), but they couldn't share seats alongside whites at the Walgreens lunch counter -- that is, as one longtime East Sider once recalled to me, until they staged a sit-in to force attitudes and policies to change.
Someone even told me once the name on the YMCA, Rich Port, only reminded them of times gone by. After all, Port headed up the state real estate association at a time when redlining (discrimination in housing) was stll a common practice.
Spurred to action by the likes of Rosa Parks -- who in 1955 refused to obey a bus driver's order that she give up her seat to make room for a white passenger -- the residents of La Grange's East Side embraced their civil rights and made many a stand, only sometimes with success on their side.
One of the biggest falacies perpetuated about the East Side is that the neighborhood is where the servants of area white families lived. But while that may be true, many old-timers also tell stories of how some of their homes were actually moved there from the West Side of town decades earlier. Some of those very homes still stand east of Bluff Avenue (and the tracks, ironically) to this day.
Another disputed fact is that the annual Pet Parade has always been held downtown. The parade, according to many longtime East Siders, started on the East Side, where it had its beginnings as a bicycle and dog march to the sound of pots and pans. I guess we'll never really know for sure.
And while blatant racism does not seem to be as prevalent nowadays, as children are even taught to embrace diversity in the classroom, we are still often reminded about our differences and should never forget those times.
Though some will attest how far we have come, we may not have come that far after all, especially given the attitudes of some folks regarding our Democratic nominee for president. You don't have to go that far from the city to find people who still vote for or against color and creed.
That's why the efforts of The CommUNITY Diversity Group of La Grange* are so vital in today's society: to teach everyone to not only embrace diversity, but to really understand what racism and discrimination is all about.
At 6 p.m. Friday, Sept. 12., the film "The Great Debaters" will be shown at the La Grange Public Library, 10 W. Cossitt Ave. The movie, a real eye-opener, portrays the struggles of a 1930s debate team from a historically black Texas college, and a discussion is to follow. It would benefit anyone to come by.
Then, 3 p.m. Sunday, Sept. 14, is the 17th Annual Race Unity Rally and Diversity Days outside La Grange Village Hall, 53 S. La Grange Road. The more the merrier.
The event will feature speakers and a musical tribute to La Grange native John Lewis, who directed the Modern Jazz Quartet, one of the longest running and most successful jazz ensembles of all time.
Performing selections of Lewis' music will be La Grange resident and composer and arranger Jack Gallagher and Tom Tallman, music professor and director of jazz ensembles at the College of Du Page in Glen Ellyn.
The theme to this year's rally, coordinated in part by event chairwman Linda Eastman,
is "Building a More Inclusive Community" and will focus on integration and housing.
The keynote will be by Rob Breymaier, executive director of the Oak Park Regional Housing Center, a national model for sustaining diverse communities.
A fair housing advocate, Breymaier is expected to discuss strategies that foster integration and examine what perpetuates segregation.
An annual achievement award will be presented to Debra Williams, pastor of Davis Memorial AME Church in La Grange, recognizing her commitment and support of diversity.
In addition, several teens are scheduled to speak on their experiences of diversity.
*An interesting footnote is that the CommUNITY Diversity Group had its roots in the aftermath of the 1991 videotaped beating of African-American taxicab driver Rodney King at the hands of Los Angeles police officers, after being chased for speeding.
The resulting public outrage after the King incident raised tensions between the black community and the LAPD, increased anger over police brutality and issues such as unemployment, racial tension, poverty and profiling. When the four officers accused of the beating were acquitted, the announcement sparked the 1992 Los Angeles riots, which of course had nothing to do with La Grange.
Some of the residents I befriended came from the South, where living was easy but where they said racism was still running rampant in the 1950s of their youth.
As African Americans, they were used to the fact that in some people's eyes, slavery may have been long gone but still lived on in the way they were treated, all too often as second-rate citizens.
They were used to "white only" water fountains and "white only" public restrooms, and they felt if they came up north to start a new life, things would be different. After all, it was believed, folks up here had a different view of "colored" people.
But no sooner than they got off the bus -- the back of the bus, no doubt -- did they encounter the same kind of discrimination they were used to back home, without the signs, right here in La Grange.
Not only were blacks prohibited from patronizing the dress shops on the west side of Fifth Avenue (La Grange Road as it is known today), but they couldn't share seats alongside whites at the Walgreens lunch counter -- that is, as one longtime East Sider once recalled to me, until they staged a sit-in to force attitudes and policies to change.
Someone even told me once the name on the YMCA, Rich Port, only reminded them of times gone by. After all, Port headed up the state real estate association at a time when redlining (discrimination in housing) was stll a common practice.
Spurred to action by the likes of Rosa Parks -- who in 1955 refused to obey a bus driver's order that she give up her seat to make room for a white passenger -- the residents of La Grange's East Side embraced their civil rights and made many a stand, only sometimes with success on their side.
One of the biggest falacies perpetuated about the East Side is that the neighborhood is where the servants of area white families lived. But while that may be true, many old-timers also tell stories of how some of their homes were actually moved there from the West Side of town decades earlier. Some of those very homes still stand east of Bluff Avenue (and the tracks, ironically) to this day.
Another disputed fact is that the annual Pet Parade has always been held downtown. The parade, according to many longtime East Siders, started on the East Side, where it had its beginnings as a bicycle and dog march to the sound of pots and pans. I guess we'll never really know for sure.
And while blatant racism does not seem to be as prevalent nowadays, as children are even taught to embrace diversity in the classroom, we are still often reminded about our differences and should never forget those times.
Though some will attest how far we have come, we may not have come that far after all, especially given the attitudes of some folks regarding our Democratic nominee for president. You don't have to go that far from the city to find people who still vote for or against color and creed.
That's why the efforts of The CommUNITY Diversity Group of La Grange* are so vital in today's society: to teach everyone to not only embrace diversity, but to really understand what racism and discrimination is all about.
At 6 p.m. Friday, Sept. 12., the film "The Great Debaters" will be shown at the La Grange Public Library, 10 W. Cossitt Ave. The movie, a real eye-opener, portrays the struggles of a 1930s debate team from a historically black Texas college, and a discussion is to follow. It would benefit anyone to come by.
Then, 3 p.m. Sunday, Sept. 14, is the 17th Annual Race Unity Rally and Diversity Days outside La Grange Village Hall, 53 S. La Grange Road. The more the merrier.
The event will feature speakers and a musical tribute to La Grange native John Lewis, who directed the Modern Jazz Quartet, one of the longest running and most successful jazz ensembles of all time.
Performing selections of Lewis' music will be La Grange resident and composer and arranger Jack Gallagher and Tom Tallman, music professor and director of jazz ensembles at the College of Du Page in Glen Ellyn.
The theme to this year's rally, coordinated in part by event chairwman Linda Eastman,
is "Building a More Inclusive Community" and will focus on integration and housing.
The keynote will be by Rob Breymaier, executive director of the Oak Park Regional Housing Center, a national model for sustaining diverse communities.
A fair housing advocate, Breymaier is expected to discuss strategies that foster integration and examine what perpetuates segregation.
An annual achievement award will be presented to Debra Williams, pastor of Davis Memorial AME Church in La Grange, recognizing her commitment and support of diversity.
In addition, several teens are scheduled to speak on their experiences of diversity.
*An interesting footnote is that the CommUNITY Diversity Group had its roots in the aftermath of the 1991 videotaped beating of African-American taxicab driver Rodney King at the hands of Los Angeles police officers, after being chased for speeding.
The resulting public outrage after the King incident raised tensions between the black community and the LAPD, increased anger over police brutality and issues such as unemployment, racial tension, poverty and profiling. When the four officers accused of the beating were acquitted, the announcement sparked the 1992 Los Angeles riots, which of course had nothing to do with La Grange.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)