Thanks for keeping Brookfield beautiful
‘Tis the season to reflect upon the past year and to thank those who have made a difference in our lives. With that in mind, the Brookfield Beautification Commission would like to thank every community member who volunteered their efforts this year in the many activities that commission has sponsored.
Without you, the spring Project NICE could not have drawn the record-setting attendance that it did. Without you, the village’s Adopt-a-Spot program would not be beautifying Brookfield one spot at a time. Without you, the first-ever fall Project NICE could never have begun. Without you, Brookfield would not be the proud recipient of the Governor’s Hometown Award.
Special thanks go to all of the groups that aided us this year in making these events so successful, including Riverside-Brookfield High School, S.E. Gross Middle School, the Brookfield Jaycees, the Brookfield Garden Club, the Brookfield Women’s Club, the Brookfield Conservation Commission, Brookfield Department of Public Works, C.E.P Youth Leadership, and all of the different scouting organizations.
We at the Brookfield Beautification Commission look forward to working with all Brookfield residents and community groups in the year to come on all our annual projects and many new ones, as well.
Thank you, and keep making a difference in Brookfield.
Ryan Evans
Brookfield
Ryan Evans is a member of the Brookfield
Beautification Commission.
Healthcare, trade bills a travesty
After reading Craig Goldwyn’s letter “Healthcare letter riddled with falsehoods” (Opinion, Dec. 9) and such statements as “It is rare that that a bill makes it through without being deemed constitutional by scores of lawyers,” I wonder if Mr. Goldwyn views life through La Vie en rose (French for “Life through rose-colored glasses”)?
While we can all agree that our healthcare system needs an overhaul, the current Democratic healthcare and cap-and-trade proposals are a travesty being perpetrated against the American public. Most of the Democrats legislators have not read the bills, won’t read the bill and, some would not understand it if they did read the bills.
Importantly, we cannot afford it. It is a sham filled with political manipulation, nepotism and secrecy and the current healthcare and cap-and-trade proposals should be shelved.
While President Obama may have had a plurality of public support at the time of election, he does not have one now. Importantly, too, the people in Copenhagen are not interested in the health of the world, they’re interested in “What’s in it for me.”
God Bless the U.S.A. and the Constitution of the United States.
Lawrence M. Bakalich
Riverside
Can’t afford healthcare reform
I felt it was a bit out of line to berate the Landmark for not “fact checking” opinion letters (“Healthcare letter riddled with falsehoods,” Opinion, Dec. 9). Isn’t it up to the reader to research and come to their own conclusions when reading an “opinion” letter?
Mr. Goldwyn states that it is “laughable” to label the latest healthcare bill unconstitutional because it mandates purchasing coverage. I don’t honestly know the answer to that. Some argue that mandating coverage might be a necessary evil in order to negotiate insurance companies to do away with pre-existing condition clauses. What I do find laughable, however, is the notion that a $750 fine from the government would suddenly convince people who don’t want to pay their $600 per month (or what have you) for coverage to do so.
There is no doubt that healthcare has become very expensive, and that reform is needed to bring down the cost of insurance. Unfortunately, the current bill will do just the opposite for the majority of Americans. The congressional budget office has admitted that any premium reductions to healthcare with this reform will come through taxpayer-funded subsidies, not through this reform’s magical shrinking effect on premiums.
Another absurd idea is that “savings” within the medicare program will help to fund this monstrosity of a bill. If there are savings to be found in Medicare, then shouldn’t we be using that money to rescue this very program that is predicted to be bankrupt by 2017?
I would like to believe that a huge government expansion program would be efficient, free from corruption, and successful, but frankly I cannot find a single one that is currently meeting those objectives.
That brings me to cap-and-trade. I agree with Mr. Goldwyn that pollution is a very important issue. Thanks to efforts over the past 50 years, air quality has vastly improved. We should continue to be vigilant, and also focus on our growing landfills and recycling efforts.
However, the idea that carbon dioxide emissions are creating global warming is highly debatable. I would encourage everyone to read Heaven and Earth: Global Warming, the Missing Science by Ian Plimer, which is laden with historical data about the heating and cooling patterns of the earth over hundreds of years, far before the industrial revolution.
Why support a bill that places heavy taxes on our industry and energy based solely on science that is highly debatable? This cap-and-trade bill is yet another expansion in government that will drain our businesses, and put the United States at an economic disadvantage.
Our corporate tax rate is the highest in the world. Our national deficit is unfathomable. The $300 billion we will spend on interest alone in one year could be spent on so many other things (healthcare perhaps?).
I agree with Mr. Goldwyn that all citizens should be informed, so go to www.opencongress.org to review the current bills. Whatever opinions you have on these changes underway, please call and write your representatives now.
Elaine Leonard
Riverside
Don’t cut crossing guard budget
While I know this may seem to be a rather small issue in the context of running an entire town, I do hope Riverside trustees a moment to think about the message you are sending to the community and our children if you decide the village can no longer pay for crossing guards.
That said, in a public context, fiscal stewardship needs to be tempered by concepts of citizenship and commitment. In this case, I am certain that the costs of the crossing guards can be covered by District 96 budget. This may be a model other municipalities use. If this is the case, it is not a model the village of Riverside should follow.
We each bear primary responsibility for the education, safety and care of our children. And, in a healthy and dynamic community such as Riverside, I have personally witnessed parents, educators and village employees of all kinds take a personal interest in helping parents meet and manage these responsibilities.
This spirit of help, and the willingness to make the extra effort, is often times inconvenient, cumbersome and time consuming for all concerned. Yet, I see this “we are all in it together” mentality played out in a variety of ways. It is this spirit that I hope will one day be reflected in our country as whole.
So what does the proposed transition of the costs associated with the crossing guards represent? From a very bottom line perspective, this will be an additional financial responsibility for District 96. I am certain that the Board of Education will find a way to cover these costs and continue to keep our children as safe as possible on their way to and from school.
A subtler, and more disturbing, issue is the “transfer” of responsibility that this represents. We all need to share in helping keep our children safe. My concern is that the village of Riverside, without realizing it, is saying to the schools and the parents “you are on your own” to keep the children safe while en route to and from school. I personally don’t think this is what the village is trying to say. Yet this is a palpable feeling I get from this possible outcome.
Should this happen, will our children know the village is no longer helping them get across our tricky streets safely? Not likely, assuming the Board of Education hires its own crossing guards. Would they care if they did know the village was no longer paying for the crossing guards? Probably not. Yet we as parents will know this. And, by extension, we will see our village modeling behaviors and reflecting an attitude that are not in alignment with the values that brought many of us here in the first place.
Will we as parents leave our children to the mercy of the blind corners, or our town’s odd corner intersections? No. Nor, I hope, will the Board of Education. We will take care of the students and make sure they can still get to class safely. I do fear we are seeing a little of our town’s civic commitment eroded here, a little of that which makes Riverside so special dimmed a bit and, to some degree, our children’s safety is being challenged.
Murray M. Coffey
Riverside
Brookfield board can’t restrain spending
I was very glad to hear at the Dec. 14 Brookfield board meeting that the board has finally admitted that they have no restraint when it comes to spending the taxpayers’ money.
A suggestion was offered to the board by our assistant village manager, Keith Sbiral, that the village should open a new and separate account from the general operating account to create a reserve fund.
Mr. Sbiral suggested that since there is no money in reserve, the village should set aside money, not to be commingled with general operating money. A $200,000 deposit is budgeted to be placed in this fund in 2010 with the hope of setting aside $3 million within the next five to six years.
A condition for using these funds would be to get approval at two separate board meetings, as suggested by Mr. Sbiral. President Garvey agreed that this is a good idea and stated that “this should have been done years ago.”
I agree with President Garvey. If they had done this years ago, then the village would not be in the financial mess that it is currently in. During the comments and questions section of the meeting, I asked the administration if the village, ever in its history, has had such a separate fund, to which Mr. Sbiral and Mr. Ginex stated, “No.”
No previous administration was so spend-foolish as to have a need to create such an account, since they always managed to restrain themselves from spending every dollar in the general fund.
When this one-party board took control in 2005, the general fund had a surplus of approximately $2.5 million dollars, not to mention significant surpluses in both the water and garbage funds.
I find it telling that this is the first time in the village’s history where the board needs to create a resolution to control their own actions. Let’s keep in mind that several years ago, the village board increased our sales tax by 1 percent, making Brookfield one of the highest taxed villages in the country.
This fall, the board will try to pass a referendum to increase our property taxes, while also having reduced our public services. How can we trust this board with any additional money, if they admittedly cannot stop themselves from spending what they currently have.
Rasa O. Plioplys
Brookfield
Mural carries hopes for bright future
Thanks to your efforts, creativity, and passion …we did it!
Without you, without countless others, without generous donors, without all of our student artists, this 2,000square-foot project would have collapsed of its own massive weight.
The Arcade mural – “This Place Matters: Riverside and its Historic Arcade Building” – is a tribute to what can be accomplished when people and organizations pull together. Visit Riverside and see the Arcade mural in person.
The Arcade Building is a grand symbol of Riverside. It is a reminder of our historic roots. But most important, the Arcade mural carries our hopes for a bright and prosperous future. Happy Holidays to all.
Michael C. Gorman, president
Village of Riverside