Differences between 7th Ward Candidates

Over the course of this campaign, I have endeavored to articulate my positions and explain my reasoning process. I have spoken at City Council meetings, written blogs and responded to others'. My opponents in the 7th Ward aldermanic race have not been as prolific, but with several forums and multiple questionnaires from various community groups, differences in positions and opinion are beginning to emerge.

Start with the “third rail of the 7th ward”, the branch library on Central Street. At the League of Women Voters forum, I described the branch library as an important part of what makes Central St. “a little village within the city.” I emphasized that the appeal of the branch library needed to be broadened beyond a small passionate group of supporters if it was to stop being used as a budgetary football. I offered several suggestions about how that might be accomplished.

Jane Grover expressed her support for the branch and then added, “That being said, I don't think funding the North Branch will always be compatible with keeping a healthy overall library system... We may reach the point where we have to decide [to] keep up the quality of the collection at our main branch or ... spread the wealth so that we retain our branch libraries.” Given the economic situation, I fear that point will be reached sooner, rather than later.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6mu1lMcrRs

On the issue of taxes, all candidates state their opposition to raising taxes. But subtleties exist in candidates' responses to other questions about taxing districts. In the Central Street Neighbors Association questionnaire, candidates were asked if they supported the creation of new taxing districts to support the branch library and/or the parks. My opponents answered yes; I said no. Creating a new taxing district means the total tax bill increases. Given we all oppose tax increases for the City's budget, I can only assume my fellow candidates think it OK to raise taxes just for homeowners in the 7th and possibly 6th wards.

On the issue of the Civic Center, my position is firm. I feel the Civic Center is a wonderful seat of government that represents the “character” of Evanston and needs some tender loving care. Unlike myself, Jane Grover said “yes” to the CSNA question asking if she supported selling some of the land around the Civic Center to pay for renovations. But her commitment to the existing site is better revealed by her response to my question at the LWVE forum, “if money were no object, would you still support keeping the Civic Center the seat of Evanston's government?” Her response: “The question is whether this building is indeed the best place to house Evanston's government, not for the next 5 years, but for the next 50 years.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jw4izpicC-Y

Sometimes what is not said can be more revealing than what is. In the case of the LWVE question asking our opinions about Ald. Liz Tisdahl's record, Jane Grover's refusal to answer the question is puzzling. Her husband is listed as a Tisdahl for Mayor supporter. Obviously, some voters strongly feel one way or another about Ald. Tisdahl's record- is not answering her attempt to not offend anybody? I do not know. I stated I felt Ald. Tisdahl's record is mixed. I recognized her achievements, but noted some specific issues I disagreed with. One of those issues was the Eastwood (Central St.) condo development. I spoke against the project in the past and spoke before the Council urging rejection of a permit extension when that issue came up. On the CSNA questionnaire, it looks like all 3 candidates oppose extensions for Eastwood. However, Jane Grover's response was “clarified” to mean opposition to any further extensions, and that was qualified by “without more information about the viability of the proposed project...” She supported the most recent extension.
http://www.centralstreetneighbors.com/?q=node/502

In an ECMC cable TV interview, former Ald. Art Newman raised an important point, “she's going to want to spend a lot of money on social services...she's not going to want to cut mental health services, she's not going to want to cut affordable housing...  So I think her job is going to be impossible, and she will not keep her commitment on that (not raising property taxes.)” Let me be clear- consider a triangle with essential services (like police, firefighters, streets and sanitation), social services, and tax hikes on each point. If budgetary considerations force a decision, my position will be closer to the essential  services than the other two points.
http://evanstonnow.com/story/news/bill-smith/2009-03-17/former-alderman-handicaps-campaign

Last but not least, subtleties exist in our attitude to the 708 Church St. project. I've displayed a “Stop the Tower” yard sign since the day they were available. Jane Grover's earliest opinion is listed on the CSNA website from a year ago, “I suspect there are more of us out there who are well-informed and interested and don't consider ourselves in opposition to the development proposal for 708 Church. There's just no yard sign slogan that expresses positive ambivalence about it.”
http://centralstreetneighbors.com/?q=node/398

So, the race for 7th Ward Alderman offers candidates with distinct differences that the voters must choose from. This election is a referendum on many issues. How much do you support the Central St. Library? How much do you support the Civic Center? In a budget crunch, what would you cut or would you raise taxes? Do you support condo development? I await your decision.