Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Letters to the Editor’ Category

A goldfinch feeding on coneflowers. (RJ Carlson/Chicago Botanic Garden)

By Tim Johnson | For the Chicago Tribune

I have developed an interest in bird-watching and would like some advice on how to attract more birds to my garden. 

— Maria Alvarez, Grayslake

I was also motivated to start bird-watching after a fun vacation sighting of a pink flamingo on St. John, U.S. Virgin Islands, last December. Another highlight this winter was seeing eight mourning doves feeding on the ground outside my home at one time. Winter is a good time to plan to enhance your garden with plants that will attract birds all year long. It takes more than feeders, birdhouses and a bird bath, along with some flowers for a truly bird-friendly garden. Birds need a complete habitat that includes food, shelter, nesting areas and perching spots. A good garden for birds tends to have more of a natural look. Design your garden so that there are different vertical levels, each attracting and providing something important to different bird species. Some birds prefer the canopy of tall trees, while other birds perch in the understory trees and shrubs. Different species of birds have varying requirements and preferences for nesting, eating and shelter. Try to create as many of these levels as possible in your backyard garden to attract a larger variety of birds. Birds use a stand of hemlocks in my garden for shelter while using the feeders. Even open areas of soil can be beneficial by providing an area for birds to take a dust bath.

Select plants to provide food for birds at different times of year. Fruits of different plants ripen in different seasons. For example, serviceberries provide spring-ripening fruit, red-twig dogwoods provide summer fruit, while hawthorns and crabapples provide fruit in fall and winter. I just replaced some invasive Callery pear trees with serviceberries in my garden. Perennials such as purple coneflower and grasses such as a prairie dropseed provide seed for a food source. Sunflowers are quick-growing annual flowers that produce seeds that are attractive to birds. Nectar-producing plants such as penstemon, bee balm, and columbine appeal to hummingbirds. Include a mix of evergreens in your planting to provide year-round shelter for birds. When feasible, leave some dead branches on living trees to provide something for the birds to perch on. Prune any dead branches that are safety hazards though.

Leave the leaf litter in your garden beds next fall as an easy and environmentally friendly method to recycle material and help meet some of a bird’s basic needs. Other organic materials such as small twigs, fallen seeds, fruits and berries should be left in the litter too. Many insects thrive in leaf litter and insect-eating birds will be attracted.

There are many kinds of seeds and feeders to choose from if you decide to start a feeding program. Squirrels can be a nuisance and eat more seed than birds do, so choose a squirrel-resistant feeder. We have had good luck with a cylindrical, squirrel-resistant feeder. Take time to research options, as different species of birds prefer different types of seeds and feeders, and no one type is preferred by all birds. Avoid buying bags of mixed birdseed as they tend to contain a lot of filler such as red millet, which most birds won’t eat. The filler ends up on the ground where it rots. Place your feeder in an open area where it is easy to see, 10 feet or so away from protective cover and convenient to refill. If feeders are too close to large plants, squirrels will have easy access to them. Be consistent feeding birds and they will become accustomed to your feeder. Stamp the snow down under the feeder to accommodate ground-feeding birds such as doves and dark-eyed juncos. To maximize the number of species that visit your feeders, offer a variety of food at different heights above ground.

Black oil sunflower seeds attract a wide variety of birds including cardinals, woodpeckers, blue jays, goldfinches, purple finches, chickadees, titmice, and nuthatches. Safflower seeds also attract a wide variety of birds, with the advantage that squirrels, blue jays, starlings, and grackles do not like this seed. Nyjer is a good seed to attract goldfinches. Nyjer is a very small, black seed best used in a feeder designed for it, which can be hung close to a viewing window under an eave. White millet seed can be spread on the ground to attract ground-feeding birds. Suet is another option for feeding birds. Suet is rendered animal fat that is usually mixed with seeds and dried fruit and sold in small cakes. It is best to place it in a cool, shaded area in amounts that the birds can eat in a few days to keep it from spoiling, so it works well for winter feeding.

For more plant advice, contact the Plant Information Service at the Chicago Botanic Garden at plantinfo@chicagobotanic.org. Tim Johnson is senior director of horticulture at the Chicago Botanic Garden. 

Read Full Post »

Comedian Jeff Ross, left, and host Kevin Hart pose at “The Greatest Roast of All Time: Tom Brady” at the Kia Forum, May 5, 2024, in Inglewood, California. (Chris Pizzello/AP)

By Robert Lynch | Special to the Tribune

Laughter evolved as a form of play in mammals. It began as a training ground to practice predator-prey interactions. Humor emerged later, alongside language, and is still at its core risky play.

A good joke is a high-speed collision between what we know and what we think we know. By giving us space to be confused primates high on our own delusions, a good joke lets us stop pretending we’ve got it all figured out, take ourselves a little less seriously and confront, often against our will, the stupidity of it all. That’s why comedy has always been more than entertainment. It’s a socially sanctioned way of pointing out incongruities that don’t make sense and acknowledging the screws that stay loose without getting exiled for noticing them.

This is why comedians once occupied a special place in American culture. In an anxious society that turns political narratives into sacred beliefs, comedians were among the last people allowed to say what everyone else was thinking. Their job was to notice everyone marching in lockstep and break the spell.

But in a nation where partisan politics consume everything in their path, ideological conformity has started to affect Americans’ sense of humor.

You can feel the tension as the audience nervously checks whether a comedic bit is safe, whether it has been preapproved by the joke police or whether the comic is on the right team. Norm Macdonald called it a crisis of “clapter”: a humorless age in which jokes are rewarded with polite applause instead of genuine laughter.

Politics can kill comedy by turning jokes into identity tests and loyalty signals. Politics moralize and set certain beliefs apart as inviolable, while humor thrives in the gray areas between the sacred and the profane. When Dave Chappelle mocks untouchable cultural totems, such as gender identity etiquette, he’s doing something extraordinary. When he’s lecturing his audience about racial justice, he’s just another self-righteous scold doing something anyone can do.

And when late night collapses into “Donald Trump sucks,” it stops being comedy and turns into propaganda.

Comedians used to be contrarians. They bristled at authority and mocked mawkish sentimentality. They were Patton Oswalt’s brother, Matt, at the Hollywood Bowl on Christmas Eve, screaming “F— you!” at the screen in the middle of Jerry Maguire’s “cynical world” speech. Their target wasn’t left or right; it was whoever was doing the policing or pretending. When the Moral Majority was telling everyone what to say, comedians went after them. When the liberal scolds did it, they mocked them too. They embodied Groucho Marx’s motto: “Whatever it is, I’m against it,” and their goal was to expose the hypocrisies of whoever was in charge.

American humor was anti-elite. Its mission was to upset hierarchies, not reinforce them, and few things were more offensive to comedians than bootlicking.

One of my favorite moments from the special “The Greatest Roast of All Time: Tom Brady” was when the host, Kevin Hart, caught Jeff Ross quietly apologizing to Brady for jokes he’d just told. Hart ripped into him: “Wow. Stop being a b—, Jeff. Just sit down. Stop kissing his ass. You OK?” Hart was reprimanding Ross for doing what is the most offensive thing a comedian can do — suck up to the most important person in the room — and enforcing an old ethic in comedy, which is not apologizing for your jokes. It was a throwback to when comedy clubs were places where people were allowed to stress-test the culture without being hauled before human resources.

Audiences stopped asking, “Is this funny?” They started asking, “Is this allowed?”

Tribalism gets the headlines, but the deeper threat is what it produces — within-group conformity and a shrinking tolerance for dissent. And although both sides celebrate their free-thinking iconoclasm, loyalty is strictly enforced. On the right, it’s “don’t tread on me” policed by a culture where one criticism of Trump can end your career. On the left, nobody’s in charge, but everyone is policing everyone else — so many rules about who can say what about whom that you need to consult a moral spreadsheet before you can make a joke.

On both sides, Americans have lost the ability to think beyond their own performance. The whole charade bears the mark of arrested development: the nervous conformity of a society stuck in adolescence. The old danger was a comic bombing. The new one is being cast as a bad person.

Never before has every half-drunk joke, every stumble of language, been so on the record; never before has the moral climate been so skittish — so quick to litigate tone, ignore intent and presume motive.

America was once the funniest place on earth. But as our culture turned life into a branding exercise and started treating discomfort as danger, we lost our tolerance for risky play. And as audiences are increasingly confused what a comedian thinks, with what he thinks is funny, the incentives shifted from surprise to safety. American humor has always been a tool for questioning orthodoxy, challenging certainty and keeping people from mistaking their sacred stories for reality. When that function collapses and every joke is screened for loyalty, society loses one of its best safeguards against tribal conformity.

Real laughter belongs to a culture willing to admit it might be wrong. A society that can’t tolerate being offended forfeits one of the clearest ways it has to signal that it hasn’t turned its beliefs into idols. When we can’t laugh at ourselves and comedians are no longer willing to risk offending us, there’s nobody left to break the spell.

Robert Lynch is a biological anthropologist at Penn State who has published peer-reviewed research on humor’s evolutionary function.

Source

Read Full Post »

To the Editor,

As Barrington 220 considers additional tax levies and future capital commitments, the community deserves a clear, accessible understanding of how recent voter-approved funds have actually been spent. Over the past several months, I have reviewed hundreds of pages of publicly available contracts, FOIA disclosures, construction work orders, and financial ledgers related to the Build 220 program. Several findings stand out and merit broader public awareness.

First, district records show that construction management overhead for Build 220 projects significantly exceeds common industry benchmarks. For K–12 CM-at-Risk projects, management overhead and fees typically fall in the 10–15% range. However, Barrington 220’s own Project Work Orders (PWOs) show overhead levels ranging from approximately 23% to as high as 28%, with some smaller project segments exceeding 30% (See: Build 220 — Construction vs. Overhead).

Key takeaway: On approximately $33 million of PWOs, overhead and soft costs account for an estimated $7–9 million. These percentages are nearly double typical industry norms and warrant closer public review

On just four major PWOs totaling roughly $33 million, this translates to an estimated $7–9 million spent on management reimbursables, contingency stacking, insurance loadings, fees, and pre-loaded allowances rather than direct construction labor or materials. A visual summary of this comparison is attached for readers.

Second, architectural and engineering fees have exceeded the district’s own contractual cap. The master agreement with the district’s architect set a limit of 7.4% of the construction budget, which equates to approximately $9.5 million based on the district’s budget reconciliation. Yet the district’s accounts receivable ledger shows approximately $11.7 million paid to date — an overage of more than $2.2 million (See: Build 220 — Architectural & Engineering Fees).

Drivers of the overage include: duplicated planning across firms, over-scoped civil engineering bundles later credited back, optional enhancements not included in referendum language, and avoidable redesigns

This increase appears tied to duplicated planning work across multiple firms, over-scoped civil engineering packages later reduced through credits, optional enhancements not included in referendum messaging, and avoidable redesign costs. At no point has the community been presented with a cumulative report showing how or why the 7.4% cap was exceeded.

Third, many costs that function like change orders were embedded directly into base contracts as lump-sum allowances — including webcams, temporary occupancy setups, traffic control, and other vaguely described “reimbursables.” Without a publicly released change-order ledger, taxpayers cannot easily determine which allowances were actually used, which were not, or how final project costs compare to what voters approved.

These findings do not allege wrongdoing. They do, however, raise legitimate questions about financial discipline, cost control, and transparency — especially when the district is asking the community to support additional levies.

Before requesting more taxpayer dollars, Barrington 220 should provide the public with:

  1. A complete Build 220 change-order ledger for each Project Work Order;
  2. A clear breakdown of construction dollars versus management and overhead costs;
  3. A reconciliation of architectural and engineering fees against the 7.4% contractual limit; and
  4. Plain-language summaries that allow residents to understand where their money actually went.

Barrington residents have consistently shown they are willing to invest in their schools. That willingness depends on trust, and trust depends on transparency. Clear financial reporting is not an obstacle to progress — it is the foundation of it.

Sincerely,

Sam Mehic
South Barrington

Related:The Real Issue in Barrington 220 Isn’t Parking or Levies — It’s Leadership Culture

Read Full Post »

Courtesy Google Maps (Click on image to enlarge)

By Steve Zalusky | Daily Herald

The Barrington Area Unit District 220 school board voted 4-3 Tuesday to reverse its August decision to purchase four properties for parking expansion at Barrington High School.

School board members had unanimously approved buying lots at 502, 506 and 510 W. Main St. and 112 N. Hager Ave. to meet parking needs resulting from a 2024 referendum for school improvements, including a new auditorium.

However, residents from the Walnut Grove neighborhood located next to the high school organized opposition after learning of the purchase.

The residents expressed concern about preserving the scale and character of a neighborhood containing homes dating back to the Great Depression. They said they were also worried about the impact of demolishing three homes, including the elimination of affordable housing.

In addition, they were concerned about property values and being vulnerable to future expansion by the district, suggesting the district reconfigure portions of its buildable land.

Board President Sandra Ficke-Bradford and members Leah Collister-Lazzari and Barry Altshuler opposed reconsidering.

Altshuler worried about precedent, saying, “If we sign a contract and then we don’t go through with it as an organization, that’s not a good thing.”

He added that the properties would have improved safety and security for students and warned that the high school would lose parking during auditorium construction.

Read the full story here.

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

Read Full Post »

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 »

Older Posts »