Smoking Ban

It is somewhat surprising to me that this issue has more-or-less “flown under the radar.” The decision on whether to impose (or allow the county’s ordinance to impose) smoking restrictions at bar and restaurants will be a delicate balancing act, weighing the obvious health & safety risks to patrons and employees against the rights of patrons to smoke and bar/restaurant owners to run their business as they see fit. Additionally, the potential revenue loss (if any) to bar owners and the village has to be considered to some extent.

What makes this more difficult for me personally is the fact that I am a nonsmoker. My first reaction is to say “yes, ban smoking anywhere that I may go,” because I hate coming home smelling like smoke. As a matter of fact, I think one of the reasons (though probably not the top reason) I don’t go to bars very often any more is because it is irritating to come home and have all my clothes and outerwear smell like an ashtray. That being said, I have to ask myself if it is right to impose my preferences on everyone else?

I have previously pledged to ask myself the following question before voting on any major issues if elected commissioner: “What is best for the Village of Forest Park?”

I believe what would be best would be to hold open meetings regarding the issue prior to voting on a new ordinance to ban or allow smoking. I would imagine that some of the bar and/or restaurant owners would be willing to participate in a panel. Presuming that most of the bar/restaurant owners are against the ban, we may be able to find an expert or activist in favor of smoking bans in order to balance the discussion.

As previously stated, I think that if I were not a candidate for commissioner, I would be in favor of a smoking ban. In the end, however, our elected officials need to be a voice for the people. This would be a topic in which my ultimate vote would be particularly influenced by public comment and research.

So, what do you think about this topic. As someone who believes that the campaign season should be dialog, I am very interested in your thoughts and views.

Madison Street Parking / Eminent Domain

It seems that the issue on top of everyone’s mind right now is Madison Street parking. Accordingly, I have decided to make this the first topic. Feel free to comment with your own views. Depending on the comments that I receive, I will post remarks, clarifications, or responses to you comments. As I have stated before, I believe that good government includes dialog, so please feel free to send along your own comments:

The use of eminent domain is a very powerful and necessary tool that municipalities are granted as part of their “police powers.” Its purpose is to allow the village the ability to change land uses in such a way that the greater good of the community is served. Further, just as I have described it as a necessary power, it is also one that should be exercised in a deliberate manner, with great caution. In short, I believe that it should be used as a last resort, when all other options have been fully explored and evaluated.

Based on what I have heard and read regarding the Madison Street parking situation, this is not the case. The two main options that I believe were discarded to easily are the use of the former Mobil Station site at Madison and Des Plaines, and the broader subject of using surface parking rather than parking decks.

My recommendations regarding the situation would include contacting the owners of BOTH the Mobil Station (owned by Exxon Mobil Corp.) and the McDonald’s restaurant located directly adjacent to the south (presumably owned by the franchisee). If we were to assemble (combine) those two parcels, it would probably be large enough to do a mixed-use project that includes both retail/restaurant and a parking structure. As part of the deal, McDonalds could be moved closer to Madison Street (a move that I am sure they would be very interested in), additional retail could be added to Madison and/or Des Plaines, and significant parking could be added.

Further, the village could facilitate the development, but sell the land to a developer to build it. Assuming we want to control the parking, we could lease back the parking structure portion of the development on a long-term lease and allow the developer to sell the retail unit(s). In this scenario, the village’s upfront expense is minimized to some degree, the McDonald’s franchisee gets a better location, and the developer makes a profit. Also, parking at Des Plains Avenue would bring more foot traffic to that portion of Madison Street, which does not appear to be as busy as the area closer to Circle Avenue. It is really a win/win if it can happen.

Now don’t get me wrong. A deal like this is difficult to put together, and will have several stumbling blocks. However, it is worth looking into this kind of creative solution before imposing eminent domain.

Secondly, I would approach the homeowners of the previously identified parcels to see if any of them are interested in selling, without the threat of eminent domain. You may find that none of them do. However, what if there are two or three located right next to each other that were already thinking of moving? The whole project is much more accepted if the land was purchased from willing sellers, rather than forcing several families from their homes. It should be noted that this has reportedly taken place already, and that at least one owner has indicated that he/she may be willing to sell depending on the price.

Lastly is a word about structure vs. surface parking. It has been said that surface parking is preferred to a structure due to many factors, but mostly because of safety concerns. I agree with this assessment. Many people, including my wife, will almost never use a parking garage because they just don’t feel safe in them. That is why I agree with the general idea of not converting existing lots to garages. However, with the shortage of parking in the area, I think that any additional land acquired should be purchased with multi-level parking in mind. This would give a mix of open parking for those who are unwilling to use a garage, but increase the number of spaces that we can bring to the downtown area. We may also work with the business community to ask them to encourage their employees to use the garage spaces, so there are more surface spaces available to customers and residents.

Well, there you have it. What do you think? Are there better ideas out there that I am not thinking of? Does my plan seem to difficult to implement? Please, share your thoughts. If you don’t feel comfortable posting where anyone can read your message, email me at: Plepel2007@hotmail.com .