Q: What are the broad outlines of the deal?

A: The Park District signed a contract on December 1, 2006 with the Latin School of Chicago to build an artificial turf soccer field with stadium seating, a scoreboard and lights. We do not have a full drawing of the contemplated facility. The Latin School is committed to pay for the bulk of the construction – about $2 million, with the Park District responsible for the lighting – perhaps as much as $300,000. We are not sure who is responsible for securing and maintaining the field – most likely it will be the Park District. In return for paying this sum the Latin School is granted exclusive use of the field for 810 hours annually for ten years with an option to renew for another ten years. These 810 hours are what we call “prime time” kid-friendly hours.

Q: Where exactly is this project taking place?

Q: Why do you call the Latin School deal an example of “privatization”?

A: According to the website www.privatization.org, privatization “refers to the shifting of the production of a good or the provision of a service from the government to the private sector, often by selling government-owned assets.” The people of Chicago own the park land, or rather, the land is held in trust for all Chicagoans for all time. The Park District may enter into contracts with various vendors to provide services – including sports, harbor services, food and performances. But it is another matter entirely to carve out four acres of the park and make it essentially unavailable to the general public because of a private deal. The only dates where there are no restrictions on the publics use of this facility are from June 1 to June 14, Saturdays and Sundays from June 15 to July 31, August 1 to Ugust 14 and from November 1 to February 28. To restrict the publics access to public land in return for cash consideration from a private entity looks like privatization to us. Schedule of usage shows the Latin School is THE exclusive user for kid-friendly time. Listen to an August 1, 2008 interview with Chicago Reader reporter Ben Joravsky discussing the way the Park District does business.

Q; But doesn’t Lincoln Park need a field like this?

A: If there is a need for new facilities, great. Let the Park District make its case in public and let all parties discuss the pros and cons of building something permanent in Lincoln Park.

Q: If the Latin School pays for the project, some scheduling consideration is “only fair”

A: We are opposed to the wealthy being able to peel off parts of the public commons for private use – no matter how much is paid. What do you think that land is REALLY worth? Furthermore, the Park District (meaning, the rest of Chicago’s tax payers) will be paying for part of the construction and the ongoing upkeep. Also, the Latin School has been expanding in this community for decades knowing full well the space limitations. It easily could’ve purchased private property for any of its facility needs.

Q Are you planning to protest other vendors in the park?

A: Where public land is not available to the public – absolutely. In the case of the Soldier Field renovation, many groups, such as Friends of Parks, vigorously opposed the use of public funds there. Vendors who use temporary huts or even operate concessions inside park facilities in no way compares to taking acres of park land “off line” for the use of a private institution.

Q: But the Latin School doesn’t have a playing field.

A: True, but the school has located and expanded in this community knowing full well the space limitations. They just spent millions on a new building and could’ve installed a roof-top facility. For that matter, they could’ve purchased private property in the area to build anything they wanted. Latin has two gymnasiums, a fitness center (with trained instructor), and indoor swimming pool. And they already use Lincoln Park EXTENSIVELY for their sports programs. They have far more facilities for practice and drills during inclement weather than any school imaginable.

Q: You keep talking about this a “secret deal” – what do you mean?

A: First, this entire project is very similar to a proposed facility for the same place in 2002. The community strongly protested the project and it was shelved. Four years later the Park District apparently approached the Latin School with a revised plan. Two representatives of the Park District spoke to the Lincoln Park Advisory Council on Sept. 13, 2006. From the minutes: “The evening began with a presentation by Gia Biagi and Jim Cronis. They spoke of demand for multi-purpose fields – especially for soccer. The fields don’t have enough time to regenerate. Five fields using artificial turf in high-demand areas would be multipurpose. In Lincoln park it would installed at South Field.” There is no mention of the Latin School or restricted hours for the general public. The people at that meeting have no recollection of the Latin School being mentioned. Nevertheless, 11 weeks later the contract with the school was signed.

The story was revealed to the general public in a Crain’s Chicago story on May 28, 2007 which stated, “Alderman Vi Daley (43rd) says she heard gossip, but ‘no one ever came to me. I never saw the plan.’ Lincoln Park Advisory Council President Jil Niland says her group was told only that the district wanted to AstroTurf a field, not that Latin wanted what ‘does seem like awfully exclusive use.’ Steve Zelner, executive director of the Lincoln Park Conservancy, says his group was briefed but never told details. The final contract ‘is a little different from what I’d imagined,’ he says.” So we think the Park District deliberately mis-lead citizen’s groups charged with protecting and serving the park and, at best, froze out the Alderman, even though her chief-of-staff serves on the board of the Lincoln Park Advisory Council. The meeting of the Park District Commissioners where the contract was signed was dutifully advertised in local paper’s classified ad section. Also, we’ve heard from Latin School parents who had no idea this deal was being done in their name and are as mortified as we are.

Q: Aren’t you just a small group of rich people who are trying to stop a smart partnership from going forward?

A: Well, there are nine people at the core of the committee, but nearly 1,000 people have signed our petitions, and reporters for Crain’s Chicago Business, the Tribune, the Chicago Reader, Pioneer Press, Inside have all covered this issue with quite a bit of sympathy for our cause. If you read the comments on our online petition, you’ll see that this deal has struck a nerve and people are quite angry. Furthermore, we are an extremely economically diverse group of community leaders, with not one millionaire in the bunch!

Q: What did Alderman Daley know about this deal?

A: She has stated repeatedly that she had no knowledge of this deal before the fact. In her email newsletter dated February 26, 2008 she states: “The park groups and I believe that this is a legitimate recreational use and an improvement for this area of Lincoln Park. I have requested that in the future, the Park District notify me and the park groups in writing of any proposed projects. I hope that notifying us in writing will help avoid this confusion in the future.” However, at a community meeting at the Latin School on February 13, 2008 school employees Katie O’Dea (Director of Communications) and Peter Brown (Director of Facilities and Operations) claimed that both Alderman Daley and Natarus knew about the deal well in advance of the contract being signed in October 2006. So either Alderman Daly is lying bold face to the community or the Latin School employees are lying. We would like to know the truth. We may have to sue to find out..

Q: Various officials say they did call for public meetings and held public meetings.

A: In one statement, Alderman Daley stated she “introduced a resolution in the City Council to bring all parties together to discuss the soccer field proposal.” But this was done a year after the contract was secretly signed, and only after the public browbeat her. Not only that, the resolution was never voted on, and even if it had been, it has absolutely no teeth! Likewise, Latin, the Park District, and the alderman all make news bites asserting that meetings with stakeholders were held and compromises reached—but, again, these were held many months after the public raised Cain, and they were dog-and-pony shows that resulted in no meaningful change to the deal.

Q: Is it true that advertising will be allowed on this facility?

A: Yes! Incredibly, the secret deal gives the Latin School the right to sell all sorts of sponsorships, including display of corporate logos. It’s possible that the school could make a profit over the life of this deal! Here’s the clause from the contract:

Q: If this is such a bad idea, why aren’t other groups fighting with you?

A: A very good question. The Friends of the Parks had this statement posted on its website in November 2007:

“Public Policy at Issue with Latin School Soccer Field Plan— On Friday, November 2nd the contractor hired by the Latin School to construct an artificial turf soccer field in Lincoln Park began work to build the field despite strong opposition from local community groups, Friends of the Parks and nearby residents. The action to actually start the construction is an end-run around recent action taken by Aldermen Vi Daley, Brendan Reilly and Tom Tunney’s to introduce a resolution to have public review of the Latin School soccer field at the next City Council’s Parks and Recreation Committee.

With no public hearings or notice to the neighborhood or to the broader community, the Chicago Park District on October 25, 2006 approved a contract for the Latin School to construct an artificial turf soccer field at the south end of Lincoln Park. No plan or presentation was made to Lincoln Park community organizations or to Friends of the Parks. Crain’s Chicago Business later reported on the contract agreement with the Latin School. Crain’s reporter, Greg Hinz, analyzed the contract and wrote an article with the headline “Prestigious Prep School Lands Sweet Deal for New Lincoln Park Field”. Additional newspaper articles brought the issue to light and community groups voiced their opposition to the use of public land for a private school. In September, after months of community activism, Alderman Vi Daley and Alderman Brendan Reilly held a public meeting at the Latin School where hundreds of citizens voiced their opposition to the Latin School proposal. This was followed by a City Council resolution on the matter.

After the construction started, Alderman Vi Daley called together representatives from community groups including the Lincoln Park Advisory Council, the Lincoln Park Conservancy, Gold Coast Neighbors and Friends of the Parks to meet with the Park District and Latin School officials to review the construction and usage plans. While Friends of the Parks made it clear that it does not support the policy of leasing public parkland to a private institution for their priority use, the Park District reiterated that the contract had been approved and the soccer field project is moving ahead.

Alderman Daley and the park groups insisted on changes to the signed agreement which include a reduction of Latin’s use time by 10%, a complete landscaping plan, a significant number of new trees, retaining the configuration of the running path and the addition of a drinking fountain to the south of the soccer field.

Looking forward, Friends of the Parks’ encourages the Park District to develop a policy and plan that calls for the Park District to construct public soccer fields that are open for permitted use by the general public.“

Our members have been in contact with Friends of the Parks, Openlands Chicago and the Chicago Sierra Club and officials for those organizations have expressed outrage over the deal.

Q: OK, I see this is bad policy, but construction has already begun. Why keep fighting?

A: The question really is: Can we REALLY fight city hall? We feel we must. We see too many back room deals in this city and we’re taking a stand that when it comes to our precious park land, we simply will not approve of any give-aways, no matter how they are dressed up. Recently in New York City, a similar project was stopped by citizen action and litigation. Here’s part of the story, from the Feb. 1, 2008 New York Times: “A Manhattan judge voided an agreement between the Bloomberg administration and 20 private schools on Thursday, ruling that the city had improperly given the schools priority in using athletic fields on Randalls Island in exchange for $45 million. The deal, struck last year among the schools, the city’s Parks Department and the Randalls Island Sports Foundation, which operates the parkland on the island, was opposed by a coalition of public school parents and students, youth league teams, residents of East Harlem and the South Bronx, and parks advocates. Opponents maintained that the deal was tantamount to privatizing public park land and had been approved by the city without having gone through the proper competitive bidding and public review processes. In the ruling on Thursday in State Supreme Court in Manhattan, the judge, Shirley Kornreich, agreeing that the project had been improperly approved, annulled the agreement…The Randalls Island Sports Foundation reported on its Web site on Thursday that 15 percent of the project had been completed as of December. But with the deal with the private schools now in question, it was unclear whether the Parks Department would continue that work.”

Mayor Bloomberg is no push-over. So, yes, you CAN fight city hall and win!