Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Letters to the Editor’ Category

Courtesy Google Maps (Click on image to enlarge)

Daily Herald Letter to the Editor

Barrington residents and students have asked District 220 for years to address the parking shortage at Barrington High School. The community has been clear: we need more parking, but we need a solution that makes sense.

Unfortunately, the school board’s current proposal defies logic.

The board has refused to consider a viable option that would create 216 parking spots at a cost of roughly $18,518 per stall. Instead, they are choosing to spend nearly $50,000 per stall to build just 40 spots by demolishing homes on North Hager Avenue and Main Street.

Why would the District choose to pay 2.5 times more for significantly less parking?

This proposal is not just fiscally irresponsible; it is destructive. It needlessly tears down attainable homes, uproots residents and erodes the historic character of Walnut Grove. School officials confirmed at the Dec. 2 board Meeting that cash reserves are available for the larger parking solution. There is no financial excuse for choosing the destructive path over the efficient one.

Barrington values thoughtful planning and stewardship. Tearing down historic homes for a small, overpriced parking lot undermines those values.

District 220 still has time to change course. We urge the board to listen to the more than 400 residents who have signed our petition. Choose the plan that expands parking meaningfully and uses taxpayer dollars responsibly — don’t destroy a neighborhood for 40 parking spots.

Margaret Van Duch
Barrington

Related:Zoning change defies village policy,” “Paving paradise?: Historic Barrington neighborhood opposes District 220’s plan to buy land for parking

Read Full Post »

Courtesy WalnutGroveBarrington.org

Daily Herald Letters to the Editor

I am writing to express concern about the Barrington 220 proposal to expand the “Lincoln Lot,” a parking lot originally planned for residential parcels along Hager Avenue.

In September, the district initiated the Special Use Planned Development process with the Lincoln Lot included, seeking to rezone R-6 residential lots to P-L institutional zoning to allow a use otherwise prohibited in a residential neighborhood. After significant community concern, the district withdrew the Lincoln Lot from its submission — an implicit acknowledgment that the proposal did not comply with the village’s zoning requirements.

Both Chapter 11 (Planned Developments) and Chapter 3 (Special Uses) of the Village of Barrington Zoning Ordinance make clear that flexibility in zoning is granted only when a proposal protects surrounding neighborhoods and provides meaningful public benefits. Chapter 11 requires that a Planned Development preserve the value of surrounding residential areas, remain compatible with neighborhood character and provide benefits that accrue to the village — not merely to the applicant. The Lincoln Lot meets none of these standards.

Replacing long-standing homes with an asphalt parking facility would increase traffic, noise, lighting and stormwater runoff while permanently altering the character of a stable residential street.

Chapter 3 further requires that a special use not adversely affect surrounding properties and remain in harmony with the intent of the zoning ordinance. The district’s need to rezone these properties — and its withdrawal of the parking lot — makes clear that it could not meet these criteria.

It is also important to note that the district has already authorized the purchase of these residential parcels, despite withdrawing the Lincoln Lot from the application. This, combined with the district’s ability to resubmit the parking lot as a separate application, makes it essential that the village consistently enforce the standards of Chapters 11 and 3 to protect neighborhood stability and property values.

Wende Dau
Walnut Grove
Website – WalnutGroveBarrington.org

Related:Paving paradise?: Historic Barrington neighborhood opposes District 220’s plan to buy land for parking

Read Full Post »

Suburbanites riding the commuter train to and from their jobs in Chicago read the newspaper on April 28, 1970. | Alton Kaste/Chicago Tribune

By Kellie Walenciak | Posted in the Chicago Tribune

My father had a simple ritual. At 6 a.m., he would read the New York Post and Daily News cover to cover. At 6 p.m., he tuned into the evening news — an hour of straightforward reporting, not commentary. He formed his own opinions, and then he moved on. The news didn’t dominate company picnics or poker nights with the neighbors. A staunch Republican, he didn’t shun his Democratic relatives in Scranton. He stayed informed without being consumed.

That balance feels almost quaint today.

Instead of a daily digest, Americans now live inside a 24/7 outrage machine. We spend an average of two hours and 24 minutes on social media every day, check our phones 159 times a day and will collectively log 4 trillion hours online this year. Nearly half of us say we now watch more user-generated content than TV or streaming. Information is available and, quite frankly, unavoidable.

The results are corrosive. Every story is framed as existential, and every disagreement is a loyalty test. Unlike my father’s poker table, where the stakes were bragging rights and a few bucks, today’s debates play out before an invisible audience of strangers in all caps and fury. In the 1970s and ’80s, Dad didn’t have to choose between competing realities. Everyone argued from the same facts. Today, news is no longer a shared resource but a marketplace of outrage: 24-hour cable channels fighting for loyalty and algorithms on Facebook, X and TikTok feeding us headlines designed to reinforce what we already believe. It feels like information, but it’s really affirmation. And the more affirmation we consume, the less empathy we extend.

That distortion has real-world costs. Utah Gov. Spencer Cox urged Americans to “log off, turn off, touch grass. Hug a family member.” He said it after conservative activist Charlie Kirk was assassinated and the U.S. recorded its 45th school shooting of the year. The juxtaposition was hard to miss: Online talk of civil war collides with headlines of real violence. And yet, in the communities where we actually live, most Americans behave very differently than our feeds would suggest.

At a Mets game I attended this summer, thousands of fans of every background and political persuasion stood together to sing “Take Me Out to the Ball Game.” In my neighborhood, many are MAGA supporters. We don’t pretend otherwise, but our daily conversations are about work, tennis, children, and who’s bringing dessert to the holiday party. When my husband had COVID-19, one of those neighbors — a Donald Trump voter — was the first to text and check in. When my mother-in-law was sick, another ran down to sit with her while we were out. These are not the actions of enemies on the brink of civil war.

That disconnect — between the civility of daily life and the hostility of digital life — tells us more about warped incentives than it does about the character of the country. Social media platforms don’t profit when we feel at ease with one another. They profit when we fight.

Of course, none of this is an argument for ignorance. Democracy requires informed citizens, and there are moments when it is irresponsible to look away. But being informed is not the same thing as being consumed. And right now, we are confusing one for the other.

So what’s the alternative? I call it the 6 o’clock rule — my father’s discipline, adapted for a digital age:

  • Time-box your news. Get what you need once or twice a day. No alerts. No midnight doomscroll.
  • Cross-check. Read one outlet you’re inclined to agree with, one you’re not and one that gives you just the facts.
  • No comments. Learn; don’t perform. Resist the temptation to treat every headline as a personal referendum.
  • Skip the algorithm. Buy a local newspaper. Algorithms reward outrage. A print paper, or even its website, forces you outside your echo chamber.
  • Model it for your kids. Children learn media habits by imitation. Set shared house rules (no screens at meals, charge phones outside bedrooms) and narrate your own cross-checking so they can copy it.

It sounds small, but it’s not. After a month of following this rule, my screen time was down by a third. I still knew what mattered, but I also got back into reading for fun, started biking and, ironically, felt more informed and more hopeful.

Democracy depends on informed citizens, not exhausted ones. We need the discipline to step back if we want a country that looks more like our neighborhoods than our newsfeeds. The 6 o’clock rule is a good place to start.

Kellie Walenciak is the chief of global marketing and communications for Televerde.

Read Full Post »

People walk in Chicago’s downtown on May 2, 2022. Chicago has seen a mass exodus of large companies and now is experiencing a high vacancy rate in office buildings. | Armando L. Sanchez/Chicago Tribune

By Jon Banner | Published in the Chicago Tribune

We often hear Illinois leaders speak about making the state a magnet for business, but unfortunately, their policy choices tell a different story. By putting new burdens on the companies that fuel the state’s economy, Illinois policymakers are putting the future of our great state at risk.

It could not come at a worse time. In recent years, Chicago has seen a mass exodus of large companies and now is experiencing a 25% vacancy rate in office buildings. Job growth for 2025 ranks 48th in the nation, and Moody’s reported recently that the state has already slipped into recession.

The way Illinois’ leaders are turning away from its business community is a deeply troubling break from the past. For nearly 70 years, McDonald’s has been proud to call Illinois home. From our roots in Des Plaines to our move downtown in 2018, we’ve invested in this state and this city because we believe in its potential. More importantly, because we believe in its people. Across Illinois, McDonald’s creates tens of thousands of jobs, partners with local organizations, and provides employees with the opportunity to further their educations and careers. McDonald’s supports more than 67,000 jobs in Illinois and contributes more than $5.2 billion to the state’s gross domestic product.

This is a moment to consider new approaches to keep and attract companies, and yet lawmakers are doubling down on the policies and politics that will hamstring our economy. Earlier this year, lawmakers in Springfield passed a $55 billion budget that included a last-minute expansion of corporate taxes aimed squarely at global companies headquartered in Illinois. This measure taxes profits that multinational companies make overseas — profits not earned in Illinois but taxed by the state solely because of the address of a company’s headquarters.

Now, the mayor of Chicago is threatening additional taxes in an attempt to plug a billion-dollar budget deficit, most recently a plan called a “head tax,” which would levy more than $250 per employee per year on companies with at least 100 employees. Some have argued that this plan merely reinstates a prior head tax that was eliminated a decade ago. It’s important to remember, though, that the prior tax was $4 per employee per month, and even at that low level, the tax was reversed because of how much it punished the businesses that were successfully creating jobs for the state.

The stated justification for these proposals is that multinational companies will receive tax breaks from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. That is false. The act changes many things, but it does not change tax rates for multinational companies.

The mayor characterized his tax plan as “pro-business” because the proceeds will purportedly be used for public safety. We strongly support increasing support for law enforcement, which is why our company was a leadership donor behind the Civic Committee’s $100 million investment to fight crime. Between the taxes we pay and the voluntary donations we make, McDonald’s already invests millions each year into public safety for the city of Chicago.

To be clear, this is not about skirting responsibility or asking for special treatment. McDonald’s pays taxes in every state and every country where we operate. But the proposals being made in Springfield and Chicago are making Illinois an outlier — one of the few places choosing to disincentivize growth by targeting its most globally competitive and recognized companies.

Aside from the unprecedented and punitive measures themselves, what’s most concerning is the way leaders are shutting out companies that have long bolstered Illinois’ economy. Rather than include the business community in discussions about solutions, we have been blindsided by backroom political deals. Rather than being engaged as a cherished community asset and a force for economic development, large businesses like ours are too often demonized by local leaders.

By targeting long-standing economic partners as a means of scoring short-term political points, these tax proposals only hurt communities in Illinois. If implemented, they would mean fewer jobs across the state. They would mean fewer investments in the communities in which we live, work and serve.

Gov. JB Pritzker has been a strong ally to the business community, and we’ve applauded his ambitious agenda to foster business growth. However, if implemented, these policies would undermine his plans and reinforce the stubborn external perception that an Illinois address is a business liability. The governor cannot be the sole champion for business; he needs partnership from the state legislature and city of Chicago.

We’ve been part of this state’s legacy of innovation and resilience for decades, and Illinois has been part of McDonald’s story since the beginning. But long-term success requires long-term thinking and genuine collaboration. Ultimately, corporations have a choice of where they are headquartered. I hope state and city lawmakers will rethink their approach to partnership with policies that reward investment in Illinois and Chicago — not drive it away.

Jon Banner serves as McDonald’s Corp.’s executive vice president and global chief impact officer. He oversees the government relations, public policy, communications, sustainability and social impact, global security, inclusion, and the Ronald McDonald House Charities teams.

Source

Related: Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson proposes $21 per employee corporate ‘head tax’,” “Lawmakers push DoorDash, Uber Eats delivery tax statewide for Chicago transit,” “DoorDash, Uber, Ticketmaster and toll road hikes: $1.5 billion in potential taxes explained,” “Without reforms, pension insolvency will eat Chicago alive,” “Illinois taxpayers each owe $38,800 for state’s unpaid bills

Read Full Post »

Daily Herald | Posted September 30, 2025

Today, the Daily Herald is joining a growing list of media outlets that no longer allow website commenting on stories.

Why are we stopping now?

The comment section was intended to be a tool to spur dialogue among our readers. Sometimes it succeeded in doing that.

Over time, however, it has become increasingly negative, with comments crossing the line into hate speech, bullying and name-calling. Too much time was being devoted to moderating the comments so that readers with thoughtful and relevant commentary could still have their views heard. For those well-meaning readers, there are other ways to weigh in on content and issues of the day.

Commenting is still allowed on stories posted to Facebook and other social media outlets.

We also welcome letters to the editor at fencepost@dailyherald.com.

Thank you for reading.

Source

Read Full Post »

In Wednesday’s Tribune (After latest threat, Pritzker says Trump is ‘losing it’), Gov. JB Pritzker is quoted as saying that President Donald Trump is “losing it.”

Instead of running for president, the governor of our state should be focusing on solving problems right here at home. His deafness to the people will result in his failure to realize his ambition. He has already lost it.

— Bobby Ferguson, Barrington Hills

Source

Read Full Post »

Former Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan leaves the Dirksen U.S. Courthouse after being sentenced to 7 1/2 years in prison and fined $2.5 million during a hearing on June 13, 2025, in Chicago. | Audrey Richardson/Chicago Tribune

By Matt Paprocki

Former Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan was sentenced Friday to 71/2 years in federal prison and fined $2.5 million after being convicted on 10 counts of bribery, conspiracy and wire fraud. While Illinoisans finally see some justice, they also see Madigan’s corrupt political legacy still hurting them.

Madigan was the longest-serving statehouse speaker in U.S. history. Under his reign, Illinois achieved the nation’s lowest credit rating and ranked as the second-most indebted and corrupt state. On average, more than one Illinois public servant per week — for 40 years between 1983 and 2023 — was convicted of corruption just in federal court, not including local prosecutions. High taxes, the pension crisis, massive debt and corruption have driven residents to better-governed states. Much of it can be traced to Madigan and how he pulled the levers.

The structure Madigan built concentrated power in ways exclusive to Illinois. He crafted rules that continue to give Illinois House speakers unparalleled power to control which bills become law, he is responsible for the state’s extreme gerrymandering and he nurtured the culture of corruption that continues to plague Illinois.

Lawmakers must unravel Madigan’s influence and the control he built through little-known rules of procedure. Madigan rewrote these to gather power and co-opt the legislature, effectively silencing voters’ voices when in conflict with leadership’s agenda.

Through these House rules, the speaker wields nearly absolute control over the legislative process. The most troubling of which allows the speaker to effectively control which bills, amendments and motions even make out of the Rules Committee. Madigan designed the process so everything must first pass through this committee, so that the speaker hand-picks the majority and bills opposed by leadership can simply die there through inaction.

Getting a bill out of the Rules Committee requires either unanimous consent — virtually impossible — or three-fifths support from both parties’ caucuses, with each supporter required to sponsor the bill. That’s an extraordinarily high barrier found in no other state. The Rules Committee has rarely voted contrary to the speaker’s wishes.

Madigan’s successor, Speaker Emanuel “Chris” Welch, has adopted a similar rule by which only bills with 60 Democratic sponsors get called for a vote on the House floor. That makes it very difficult for bills without a large, progressive-leaning caucus to emerge.

Additionally, Madigan championed the state’s extreme gerrymandering by drawing the maps during the 1980s, 2000s and 2010s, plus influenced the 2020s effort. It was how he first started gathering power, saving Chicago Democrats’ seats in the state legislature by nipping off just enough of the growing suburbs to dilute their voting power. By doing so, he exacerbated Illinois’ uncompetitive elections in the following decades, leaving voters without choices and little reason to go to the polls.

When more than 560,000 registered voters in 2016 tried to stop him and ensure legislative maps were independently drawn, he used one of his ComEd cronies to sue and kill the effort. That decision still thwarts any reforms unless state lawmakers initiate them.

Illinois lawmakers should make that break with Madigan’s corruption by adopting an independent political mapmaking process for the people’s representatives in Springfield and in Washington, D.C. There’s little they could do of greater significance than giving voters back their power.

In addition to the elimination of Madigan’s rules and creating independently drawn political maps, the state needs comprehensive ethics reforms. Those reforms must go beyond the toothless package the legislature passed after his indictment. They include:

  • Implementing a one- or two-year idle period before former lawmakers can perform any lobbying, closing loopholes that currently let them game the system.
  • Providing the legislative inspector general with full investigative powers, including subpoena authority and the ability to publish findings without permission from the lawmakers on the Legislative Ethics Commission.
  • Requiring lawmakers to provide complete financial disclosures for their immediate families, not just joint accounts.
  • Giving the Legislative Ethics Commission independent oversight by requiring some number of members who are not current or former lawmakers. The current system of lawmakers policing themselves represents an obvious conflict of interest that undermines accountability.
  • Preventing sitting public leaders from controlling party campaign funds. As chairman of the Democratic Party of Illinois and speaker of the Illinois House, Madigan was able to control millions in party campaign funds and thus the fealty of lawmakers. Fifty-seven current members of the Illinois General Assembly benefited from and would not have been elected without funding controlled by Madigan, an Illinois Policy Institute analysis found.

Until Illinois reforms gerrymandering, ethics laws and House rules to better reflect democratic principles seen in other state legislatures, Madigan will continue controlling us. The power to make law will remain concentrated in the hands of a few.

Madigan’s punishment should include sitting in his cell knowing his machine is being dismantled. That would be full justice for Illinoisans.

Matt Paprocki is president and CEO of the Illinois Policy Institute 

Published June 17, 2025 in the Chicago Tribune

Read Full Post »

Right, in front, third from left, is Shreeya Gandhi of South Barrington before Barrington High School graduation at Willow Creek Community Church in South Barrington on May 30, 2025. | Karie Angell Luc/Pioneer Press

By Karie Angell Luc | Chicago Tribune

The 672 graduates of the Barrington School High School Class of 2025 were celebrated at a ceremony inside Willow Creek Community Church in South Barrington on Friday evening, May 30.

The Class of 2025 for the Broncos and Fillies had students beginning freshman year during the COVID-19 pandemic.

To Pioneer Press, Craig Winkelman, superintendent of schools for Barrington 220 School District, said, “I’m very proud of them for obviously being able to come back from the pandemic.

A graduate crosses an aisle as other students file into the auditorium at the Barrington High School graduation at Willow Creek Community Church in South Barrington on May 30, 2025. | Karie Angell Luc/Pioneer Press

“It was hard,” Winkelman said of early COVID-19 years. “I’m just so happy for our kids and so happy that they get to have a night like tonight.”

Jonathan Curbelo of Barrington offered the senior speech, reflecting on a freshman year launched during the COVID-19 pandemic.

“Our greatest challenges are what form our new beginnings because we know that sometimes the sun shines the brightest after the storm hits the hardest,” Curbelo said.

“And when it comes down to it, that’s what defines the Class of 2025.

“The sheer will and resolve to carry on through the storm is what defines a Bronco and a Filly,” Curbelo said.

“We have yet to cease facing adversity, but if there’s one thing I have learned from BHS, it’s that we can choose how we respond and our destiny.

Jonathan Curbelo of Barrington offers the senior speech at the Barrington High School graduation at Willow Creek Community Church in South Barrington on May 30, 2025. | Karie Angell Luc/Pioneer Press

“We can choose who we are, who we will become, and what we do,” said Curbelo, who concluded with, “Never stop climbing that mountain.”

Read more here.

Editorial note: There was some disagreement recently among commenters as to where Barrington High School graduation ceremonies took place prior to when Poplar Creek Music Theater became available in June of 1980.

Someone who read the comments and who attended a 1970’s BHS graduation ceremony was kind enough for forward the photo below and (insisted) we post it.

Barrington High School 1970’s graduation ceremony.

They also provided a scan of a 1970’s BHS yearbook supplement which can be seen here, and verified that graduation did occur in the BHS gymnasiums (apparently walls between multiple gyms could be opened for larger assemblies).

Related:Barrington High School graduation ceremonies are tonight at Willow Creek

Read Full Post »

The Illinois Firearms Association recently the following on their Facebook page:

“J.B. Pritzker and the Dems in Springfield just rammed a gun control bill (Senate Bill through the Senate, but they didn’t do it alone! RINO-Traitor Darby Hills voted for this crap, even though it could put gun owners in prison for years! Get the details by watching our video in the comment section….then call Senator Hills TODAY!”

Their post has drawn 174 comments and 163 shares at the time of this posting.

Additionally, they posted a video commentary on YouTube which can be found here.

Read Full Post »

The Illinois state flag flies outside of the George W. Dunne Cook County Office Building on Jan. 14, 2025. | Eileen T. Meslar/Chicago Tribune

By Brad Weisenstein | Published in the Chicago Tribune

Illinois is considering whether it needs a new state flag. Why? Because Gov. JB Pritzker said “it may be time we create a new one that exemplifies the values of our great state.”

But when it comes to politics, some of our state’s values ain’t so great.

We are about to see whether the man who ruled Illinois as speaker of the Illinois House for nearly 40 years will spend several years in a federal cell for corruption. We’ve also seen four of 11 past governors go to the federal pen. There are 200 Illinois politicians on the Chicago Tribune’s “Dishonor Roll.”

Corruption and Illinois’ way of doing politics also created six-figures in pension debt for promises made to government unions after their generous support of politicians. The Chicago Teachers Union put one of its own in the Chicago mayor’s office. Government union hegemony is enshrined in the Illinois Constitution.

With all that to fret about, who really cares when politicians create a sweet little competition to redesign the state flag? Well, here’s why you should care.

Illinoisans are currently voting online for a new state flag. A commission narrowed 5,000 submissions down to 10 new potential designs. You can vote for one of the new designs, or two historic state flag designs, or the current flag.

Please. Vote for the current flag.

That’s not because the current flag is so great. It’s pretty plain — much like the bulk of our state before we started filling the plains with windmills and solar farms. It was adopted in 1915 and designed by Lucy Derwent of the Rockford Daughters of the American Revolution with the state seal on a white background. Nearly 55 years passed and a Vietnam vet decided our unexciting flag needed the word “Illinois” added because his fellow soldiers had no clue what the white flag represented.

Much more imagination was used on the 10 potential flag redesigns. There’s a cute butterfly, and one that looks like India’s national flag, and ones that look like we’re all about the U. of I. or love Chicago’s six-pointed star. But you should vote for the current flag because anything else wastes our tax dollars.

Something is certainly missing from this tally, but if we only replace state flags on the 102 county courthouses, 1,300 city halls, roughly 4,000 schools and 8,700 state buildings, we are talking $2.5 million for all those all-weather state flags to post outside the buildings. Then there are flags for meeting rooms, classrooms and others.

So, as a taxpayer who will ultimately pay for this excursion into history, symbolism and nylon, you should vote and vote every day as the commission has deemed is fair. Vote to keep what we’ve got, including our money.

There are plenty of things Illinois could use $2.5 million for, especially when our state budgets keep growing. We are at a record $53.1 billion currently, which is $15 billion more than when our current governor took office. Next year’s budget faces a projected $3.2 billion deficit and who-knows-what tax and fee hikes to fill it.

While $2.5 million is nothing compared with $53.1 billion, this flag vote is symbolic. The vote can be part of a taxpayer revolt. It can tell state politicians they are spending someone else’s money. And if this mini revolution succeeds, at least they won’t be spending your tax dollars on more than 14,000 new state flags.

It’s a chance to truly exemplify the values of our great state and tell Illinois politicians your patience with their shenanigans, distractions and excesses is, well … flagging.

Brad Weisenstein is the managing editor of the Illinois Policy Institute, a group working to expand liberties and prosperity in Illinois.

Once again, you can vote for your choice here.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »