Minus its green necklace of forest preserves, Chicagoland would be a relentlessly dense metropolis jammed against a magnificent lake. The preserves are our buffer zones, the quieter places that paradoxically let us escape without leaving. But as this region expands, with employment and population centers emerging to the north, west and south, its forest preserve land holdings need to do the same.
Come Election Day, voters in Lake County will decide whether to take advantage of several lucky breaks and grow their current 27,000 acres of preserves by roughly 10 percent. The Tribune strongly urges a yes vote on a Lake County Forest Preserve District referendum question that should be a model for other counties: In addition to paying for land purchases, it also would improve the preserves’ trail system, restore habitats for endangered wildlife and plants, and burnish educational, historical and cultural facilities.
All while driving the tax rate slightly lower. How can that be?
The Lake County district is asking voters to approve the issuance of $185 million in new bonds to replace bonds it will retire in the coming year. Without new bonds, the district will have to halt acquisitions that, in the last eight years, have added 6,000 acres of land to its holdings. A fortunate alignment of depressed real estate values, low interest rates and willing sellers makes this an ideal time for county forest districts to be growing their footprints.
The only question here is why all Chicagoland counties aren’t taking advantage of the same economic trends — talk about a buyer’s market — to increase their holdings too.
The Cook County Forest Preserve District, for example, has about 68,000 acres, short of its long-intended goal of 75,000 acres. The Cook County Board’s stewardship of the district’s property is improving after years of near-criminal neglect. Some commissioners have pushed for acquisitions that amount to low-hanging fruit — surplus land, often adjacent to the district’s most pristine preserves.
But without its own referendum, Cook County isn’t likely to reach that 75,000-acre goal. In 10 or 20 years, when real estate values rise and development covers the limited open land that remains, the question of expanding Cook forest preserves will be moot.
Citizens tend to like forest preserve referendums — Lake County voters approved the requests in 1993, 1999 and 2000 — because they see the tangible results: Just since the ’99 referendum question, Lake has added 16 new preserves (for a total of 56) plus 50 miles of new trails and numerous access points for special-needs visitors. This is one instance in which the phrase “Your tax dollars at work!” isn’t a joke.
How about the other counties of northeastern Illinois? Why aren’t they taking aggressive advantage of rock-bottom interest rates and tanking real estate prices?
Eight years ago, in advocating approval of Lake County’s 2000 proposal, we quoted Joyce O’Keefe, then and now an official of Openlands, a regional conservation group. “We need to put our open lands system in place,” she told us, “so development can occur around the green infrastructure.”
Around the green infrastructure. For anybody who enjoys parks or golf courses or forest preserves or even kid-trampled lawns, the phrase needs no translation.
On Tuesday, Lake County voters can enhance their green infrastructure.
