.

Park Board Sought Transparency With Rosewood

With the vote on the Rosewood Beach redesign a day away, Patch talks to residents, board commissioners and Mayor Nancy Rotering about how the proposal process unfolded and what it says about Highland Park politics.

On Thursday, the Park Board members will sit down in and cast their up or down vote for the Rosewood Beach redesign proposal. 

The vote comes at the end of a yearlong process that has involved outreach meetings, online resources, FOIA requests and countless public comment from members of .

Want Highland Park news in your inbox every morning? Subscribe to Patch's newsletter.

For Park Board President Scott Meyers, the participation and input from the community has been a welcome and deliberately sought after part of this process, beginning with the assembly of a to put the plan together. The small group of residents, led by Dave Fairman, began meeting a year ago with architects to figure out how their proposal would take shape.

"We really tried to collect a group of interested professionals from all four corners of Highland Park," Meyers said. The group met regularly, toured the beach and, . "The way they conducted themselves was exactly the way we wanted them to."

After the task force presented its proposal to the board in June, board members began hearing reactions to the design from residents. The park district encouraged this feedback by posting renderings of the plan online along with an FAQ and cost information.

"The emails we received were very helpful, not so much from a headcount standpoint but more from trying to understand the more substantive comments," Meyers said. "They give us an idea of what people thought and cared about."

The plan involves a guard house, restrooms, concessions and . The total estimated cost for the project is $4,661,372.

A push for transparency

It's the proposed interpretive center that has frequently been the center of questions and attacks from residents opposed to the proposal. Ravinia Neighbors Association (RNA), one of two community organizations that has been actively following this plan's development, has come out against the interpretive center at park board meetings, meetings and . The group has also filed FOIA requests for additional information from the park district.

RNA Publicity Director Doug Purington believes that the board would not have been as transparent throughout this process if not for the RNA's persistence.

"Without us having to push for it it may not have been as transparent," he said. 

RNA members have handed out flyers to residents explaining their opposition to the proposal and have sought signatures for petitions against the plan to deliver to the park board.

"We feel we did a better job reaching out the public than the park district did," Purington said. "It's amazing how many people had no clue at that point what was going on."

Friends of Rosewood, another community group, has come out in favor of the Rosewood Beach redesign proposal. Michelle Holleman, a member of that group, has been "extremely pleased" by the process in which the plan has unfolded.

"The park district has bent over backwards to give us information," Holleman said. "There's no guarantee how they're voting, but I feel like we've been heard. We've been taken seriously."

A sea change in government

According to Meyers, the past two election cycles in Highland Park have brought new faces into office, as well as a strong public desire for voters to know what those new faces are up to.

"The last two election cycles at Park Board and City Council and School Board have really been a sea change in terms of the people who are now governing," Meyers said. "There was a perception that under previous administrations there was not sufficient transparency."

One Highland Park politician who has often spoken of the importance of transparency is . She commended the park board for how they've proceeded with the Rosewood Beach project.

"I think the Park Board has done a terrific job of having these conversations in a format that promoted public participation," Rotering said.

Purington, however, believes the board could have done more to make the process more open. He said the community meetings should have started earlier and that the park district should have sent surveys to residents about the beach right when the task force formed last year.

Yet even he acknowledges the park district has made a genuine effort to get the community engaged in the process.

"They have, to their credit, encouraged people to attend and voice their opinions," Purington said. "It's not perfect by any means, but I have to say its better than it was."

For more news and updates, "like" us on Facebook or follow us on Twitter.

forest barbieri August 22, 2012 at 06:25 PM
While you will never be able to please all the people all of the time, we have very competent and committed elected officials sacrificing a lot of personal and family time serving our communities interests. Thank you to all who serve!
David Greenberg August 23, 2012 at 06:12 PM
This is the THIRD time that the Park District has pitched this ill-conceived plan to the Public. Once, many years ago - they posed a referendum question on a ballot. It failed miserably. Second, a few years ago with a ridiculous plan that came up around the same time as the pension scandal. That plan was again rejected, and the Public rightly kicked out the majority of the Park Board for their antics. Now here we are today. The THIRD request for this plan which has been twice rejected. How many times does the Public have to say "NO - WE DON'T WANT AN INTERPRETATIVE CENTER OR BEACH HOUSE AT ROSEWOOD BEACH"? How many petitions do we have to sign? How many times do we have to kick out the Park Board? There has been, and continues to be, great opposition to the plan for a Beach House/Interpretative Center at Rosewood Beach (especially one that's larger than some houses in HP). We WANT restrooms. We can live with a concession stand. THAT'S IT. Understand? We don't want this facility, and especially not at Rosewood Beach. We have enough facilities. Our taxes are TOO HIGH. Is it crystal clear yet? Or do we, the Public, have to kick out yet another Park Board, and maybe demand that the upper-echelon of Park District Managers be replaced too?
Dan Jenks August 23, 2012 at 07:31 PM
Complete fabrication of the facts, David. This is the 1st time this proposal has come before the PDHP Board, not the 3rd time. Some of your past critiques of the Interpretative Center were more reasoned – this last posting just sounds desperate.
forest barbieri August 23, 2012 at 09:13 PM
David: Appreciate and respect most of your contributions. However, you have to stop getting those 5 shot latte's just before you post:)
David Greenberg August 23, 2012 at 10:12 PM
LOL... I promise to cut back... 4 shots! :-)
David Greenberg August 23, 2012 at 10:17 PM
I'm sorry Dan, you are correct in that THIS current proposal has been presented one time. However, the overall theme of wanting restrooms, concession stand, lifeguard station, and Beach House (or interpretative center) in one form or another at Rosewood Beach has been a recurring theme for what now, 15, 20 years? I think it's analogous to a small child asking a parent for a Butterfinger Bar in the grocery line checkout. Mom says no. Child says "SNICKERS!", mom says no. Child says "PEANUT BUTTER CUP!", mom says no.... repeat ad nauseum. The Park District is doing the same thing here... And when we tell them no, they come back and try to dismiss the persons who have told them no many times, and then ask again...

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »