This week, of course, I find myself in an election campaign for trustee from the Central Section, with my challenger using the recent parkland resolution as the main focus of his campaign. He, as well as the two trustees from the Estates section, have publicly condemned the resolution. Most disturbing is the manner in which they have distorted the facts, hastily written to their constituents and drawn conclusions about the implications of the parkland designation. They sought to inflame and polarize the residents based on misleading statements and false claims. This does a disservice to the people of our village. Please allow me this opportunity to set the record straight:

The parkland resolution does not turn control of St. Paul's over to the state any more than the court's "public trust" designation did. It is unquestioned that the village owns the property. The parkland designation protects the residents and ensures they receive fair compensation for any commercial use and continues to protect the residential integrity of this village and its property values. Remember that we had a mayor not too long ago who publicly stated he would have approved turning village hall into a supermarket if there had been a tie vote. The residents would have been powerless to stop it.

At this time no legal basis has been advanced to me to support my opponent's allegation that we cannot now use St. Paul's for things such as a community or senior center or other civic uses. Common sense dictates, and we only need to look to the uses put to Eisenhower or Central Parks, that no restriction exists on any recreational, social or civic uses for parkland. I am confident that the residents remember that it wasn't too long ago that Mayor Lewis investigated, per the Mayor's Report on St. Paul's of March 2002, moving village hall to the St. Paul's Historic Main Building and there was no support. Then it was proposed that the library be moved to the Main Building with a community center. Again this resolution was prevented from being brought out to the public for a bond referendum vote. So what would make anyone think the village wanted those uses now? And, if it wanted some village use that was supposedly allowed under parkland then home rule would be sought. I have been advised that no law currently exists on this matter. We have used St. Paul's as a social, civic and recreational site since the land was purchased. We can continue to do that, and add any similar functions, without limitation.

There is no basis to conclude that we could not, if the village decided it was necessary, use some of the property for private development or municipal (non-recreational) uses. Just as with the court-imposed declaration of "public trust," which is in effect, we would need to request a home rule law from our legislators. If we had a good reason, with public support, it is assumed they would support such legislation.

The parkland designation does not impose any extra costs on the residents, certainly not now and not in the future without the residents' consent. Any commercial use of the property would not be permitted unless the village receives "fair compensation" for the giving up or selling of the property. This requirement benefits us, the residents, and protects every taxpayer against subsidizing land deals that only benefit commercial developers. Not long ago Care-Matrix would have been granted a multiple decade long-term lease on the St. Paul's building and surrounding 10-acres for a single $2 million up-front payment. Consider that in light of the fact that the approximate 24-acre Social Services site off Eleventh Street reportedly just sold for an estimated $56 million, or more than $2 million per acre! If commercial development of St. Paul's is to occur, the parkland designation makes that the benchmark that developers must attain, not the tax subsidy that recent discussions with them indicated.

A proper "needs assessment" must be undertaken and the needs of all the residents, in particular the seniors and teens, understood before we move ahead with any RFP for public/private development. That's just common sense. How can you develop plans for any building before you have at least a basic sense of what needs to go in it? Not completely, but in general. That's why I supported the revised resolution introduced by Trustee Segerdahl calling for a Citizens' Committee on Public Needs. I appointed former trustee Eileen Collins, a highly respected member of our community with years of public service, to head that committee. Yet we are hearing criticism again, from the same quarter, about the fact that this resolution disrupts the process of an earlier compromise resolution. Well, the compromise and the process failed, and we were told that all the public needs could be addressed in part of the west wing and in the basement of St. Paul's.

The timing of the parkland resolution was dictated by the actions of the commercial developers who are eagerly waiting for my term of office to expire and the inability to move forward on a true public/private compromise RFP. This need was recognized by myself and supported by three other trustees who have voted consistently, and worked tirelessly, to find public solutions to the St. Paul's problem. The parkland resolution was a proactive measure that was needed to ensure the public's right to fair compensation if ever the site is used for only private development in the future. Sadly, some see process as more important than a successful outcome or they see process as a means to further their own agenda, rather than as a means to finally achieve a reasonable solution to the St. Paul's issue.

We have major issues facing this board and our community in the near future that will affect the direction of our village and quality of life we leave for our children and those who follow us. The protection of greenspace, and the protection of the interests of our residents, has been paramount in my actions. Any zoning changes required for private development, whether it be at St. Paul's, 550 Stewart Avenue or the Cathedral House, deserve the same time and attention by the board of trustees as was done with the "P"- Zone site - with a focus on the big picture - maintaining the residential integrity of our village. The parkland designation is an act that benefits the residents, not commercial interests. If one understands that, it is clear who really stands to gain if it is somehow reversed. That would not be the right result for this village.

The American Heart Association is launching a new campaign, Go Red For Women, to encourage women to pay attention to their hearts and help them live longer, stronger lives by reducing their risk for cardiovascular disease. The American Heart Association has asked me to share the following facts with you:

Diseases of the heart are the nation's leading cause of death and stroke and is the third leading cause of death. Cardiovascular diseases are the leading cause of death among women. Heart attack, stroke and other cardiovascular diseases claim the lives of more than half a million women each year - more than the next seven causes of death combined and nearly twice as many as all forms of cancer including breast cancer.

The cost of cardiovascular disease and stroke in the United States is estimated at $352 billion. One in five females in the United States have some form of cardiovascular disease. Sixty-three percent of women who died suddenly of coronary heart disease had no previous symptoms of this disease. February is designated as American Heart Month. The American Heart Association is launching a new campaign, Go Red For Women, to encourage women to pay attention to their hearts

I have been asked to urge all citizens to wear red Feb. 4 in recognition of family, friends and neighbors who have suffered from heart disease and as a show of support to fight it. By increasing awareness of the risk factors for this devastating disease and taking actions to reduce them, we can save thousands of lives each year.

Mindful that last year a sanitation employee required 45 stitches to close a deep cut in his leg that was the result of broken glass being inadvertently placed in an unmarked trash bag, and in an effort to prevent further accidents, I urge residents to observe the following guidelines:

Rubbish should be placed at the curb Tuesday evening or early Wednesday morning. Sharp objects, such as broken glass, sharp pieces of metal and knives should not be placed loosely in plastic or paper bags. Proper precaution should be taken, such as placing them in cardboard boxes tied with string or tape and marked "broken glass" etc.

All hypodermic needles should be bent and the point blunted. Dust from vacuum cleaners, barbecue pits and sandings from wooden floors should not be placed loosely in a trash barrel. They should be placed in a paper bag or plastic container for disposal. Dangerous objects, such as acid, gasoline and explosives, should not be placed in garbage or rubbish. If you have any questions concerning the disposal of dangerous items, please call the Sanitation Department. Do not overload containers. The maximum weight per container is 40 lbs. Overloading containers with heavy objects, such as broken concrete, has resulted in back injuries to our personnel.

If you have misplaced your "Sanitation Collection Guidelines" card, call the Department of Public Works at 465-4003 for a replacement.