Here’s a recap of our live coverage of tonight’s Evanston City Council Planning and Development Committee meeting.

Bill Smith is the editor and publisher of Evanston Now.

Join the Conversation

2 Comments

  1. Discriminatory remarks re: proposed program at 524-526 Davis St.

    I am completely disgusted by the derogatory, discriminatory, and downright ignorant discussion regarding people with disabilities participating in the proposed adult programming business at 524-526 Davis Street.  I cannot believe that in 2010, elected officials suggest denying individuals with intellectual or physical disabilities the right to participate in a free program within an inclusive environment.  Is the value of a person decided on how mobile they are? by their intellectual capabilities?  Have the aldermen forgotten about the Americans with Disabilities Act that makes discrimination of individuals with disabilities by businesses and governments illegal and provided a mechanism to create our environments more accessible to all.  Do they realize that is a civil rights issue?   Can’t they have a decent discussion about the value of this business in the proposed location without making such statements?  Apparently the city should have kept on the disability coordinator’s job in this year’s budget if just to educate the aldermen! 

     

  2. Agreed. I happened upon this

    Agreed. I happened upon this meeting while channel flipping, and I was struck by the anti-business tone, and the ageism, frankly. These people imagine powers they don’t have.

    I was astounded at their audacity to voice desires about what kind of business should operate in the space. (And gee-whizzing about what kind of restaurant they’d "like" to see there.) A space vacant for 4 years! With a perfectly responsible and reputable applicant.

    I might have sued the city years ago if were the landlord, over this kind of interference. If these committee people don’t have ironclad chapter and paragraph support in the zoning and/or building code, supporting their rejection, they have one function: to sit there and shut up. (except to voice-approve)

    To be commended are Rainey, as well as Jean-Baptiste and the other male member of the committee (sorry- can’t remember), who essentially raised these same concerns about the city’s economic situation, and the committee’s "place" and how it is conducting itself. Shame on the rest of them.

Leave a comment
The goal of our comment policy is to make the comments section a vibrant yet civil space. Treat each other with respect — even the people you disagree with. Whenever possible, provide links to credible documentary evidence to back up your factual claims.

Your email address will not be published.