Forest Park’s safety and traffic commission presented its work plan for this year at the start of the April 28 village council meeting. The group advised the village on policy, public engagement and potential processes.
The commission’s policy guidance included the suggestion of reviewing off-street parking policies and the village’s permit parking program. In the second quarter of this year, the commission pitched that it review current policies, then have a question-and-answer session with village staff.
“What are some suggestions that we can take from the commission, as well as from out in the village, and really hear people and give some guidance on what would make this better for everybody?” said Drew DePriest, who has been on the safety and traffic commission for two years and was picked by Commissioner Michelle Melin-Rogovin as its chair six months ago.
After the commission’s presentation, Commissioner Maria Maxham said she had “a bunch of questions” and thanked the commission for being proactive in its suggestions. Her first question was about the safety and traffic commission’s role.
“In some ways, I feel like the permit parking program doesn’t really fall under the purview as described of this commission,” Maxham said, adding that the program has been previously discussed by Village Administrator Rachell Entler.
According to the village code, the commission can submit to the village council any recommendations including “public input on traffic conditions on village streets and promoting educational activities related to traffic, pedestrian, and bike safety.”
Maxham asked for other commissioners to share what they thought about expanding the purview of the safety and traffic commission, which she said is “doing a great job, but are sort of touching on things that maybe don’t necessarily fall under the definition as written.”
Before commissioners responded or Maxham asked another question, Mayor Rory Hoskins said to Maxham, “If you have a question specific to their presentation, go ahead and ask that please. The discussion about the larger role of the commission – that is outside the scope of Drew’s presentation.”
Maxham responded, “I agree with you, but I’m going to respectfully say that – since we’re going to be asked to vote on [the commission’s plan] next month or the next meeting, I’m not sure when it is – I think having an answer on whether this is something that we want to instruct the group to move forward with or not is pertinent and relevant.”
After Hoskins leaned over to ask Village Attorney Nick Peppers a question, Peppers said it was up to the village council whether they wanted to discuss the safety and traffic commission’s purview then and there.
“Why don’t we all have one comment, but we have some other stuff to take care of tonight,” Hoskins said. “We’re not here to discuss the wider role of all the commissions and whether to expand their scope.”
Commissioner Jessica Voogd responded first.
“I do agree that, if we’re approving the plan in the next meeting or two, it’s worth having a little bit of a discussion about this and maybe we can think about that and have it at the next meeting,” Voogd said.
Commissioner Ryan Nero suggested commissioners share their questions with Entler.
“If there’s an issue with some of the items in the presentation, maybe we kick those comments to Rachell [Entler] so they don’t even find their way to an agenda,” Nero said. “Otherwise, we’re going to sit here and waste the commission’s time trying to come up with a plan.”
Maxham spoke next: “I’m frustrated because, at the last meeting, I called you out for not wanting to have a public discussion about the Altenheim, and I feel like you’re doing it again, and you’re shutting me down right now,” she said to Hoskins. “I’m trying to have a discussion with the council about an issue that we’re going to have to vote on soon, and I think it’s very important that we talk about those things, like Commissioner Nero said, so we don’t waste anybody’s time, so we give them some guidance, which they’re here asking for as part of their presentation.”
Melin-Rogovin responded by saying that she will follow up with commissioners individually for feedback “and synthesize those to get that ready for an upcoming review where we would, in consideration of a vote, have a discussion and decide where to go from there.”
During her commissioner’s comment at the end of the council meeting, Maxham shared a few more words.
“I’m offended and appalled, Rory, that I was not allowed to ask more questions or that this council is not allowed to have a discussion. I have never been shut down during a presentation. The group specifically asked if we had questions,” Maxham said. She said council meetings are one of the only opportunities elected officials have to discuss together. “It’s a dereliction of duty for you to shut down a public conversation.”
Hoskins did not respond to Maxham in his commissioner’s report. He later told the Review that the meeting’s agenda item was regarding the safety and traffic commission’s presentation, not its role.
“If the question is for the presenter, that’s one thing. If the question is for other council members, that’s another thing,” Hoskins told the Review. He added that the village council will likely vote on the commission’s 2025 plan at its next meeting, but he isn’t sure there will be a discussion about the commission’s purview before that. “I don’t know that the whole council wants to amend their work plan.”
The safety and traffic commission’s plan
Other policy recommendations that the safety and traffic commission suggested during its presentation were collaborating with the village’s environmental control commission in creating an ordinance that would manage the large number of shopping carts at the Forest Park Blue Line CTA station and surrounding areas, plus address the need for a dedicated bike path in town. If their plan is approved by the council, they intend to address both in the third quarter of this year.
“We want to get a broader coalition and really make a concerted effort on guidance for policy,” DePriest said of the bike path.
DePriest also pitched launching a survey to explore whether residents want to reduce speed limits throughout the village. This would also be addressed in this year’s third quarter and come at a limited cost to the village, whereas the previous policy guidance items would be free.
On the public engagement front, the commission wants to continue its bike safety fair, which is on May 31 this year. Melin-Rogovin asked for volunteers during her commissioner’s comment at the April 28 village council meeting.
By the end of this year, DePriest also suggested holding a town hall to educate residents about safety and traffic issues in the village and local guardrails. For example, DePriest said the town hall would be a good place to discuss how to address the concern of Forest Park resident Marilyn Jancewicz, who spoke at that council meeting’s public comment.
Jancewicz said the road by The Residences at the Grove is pretty beat up, but that the village can’t do anything about it because the road is Cook County’s jurisdiction. And she doesn’t know who to contact to get the road fixed.
The safety and traffic commission also advocated for focusing local messaging around Pedestrian Safety Month in October. To do so, they hope to use national marketing materials to increase awareness about pedestrian safety.
Finally, DePriest asked the village council to consider responsive processes, standardizing the way the village intakes and executes requests from residents.
DePriest said the commission has been “looking at how neighboring villages make it somewhat easier and more automated for anyone in the village to submit ‘People are driving too fast on my street’ or ‘we should get a stop sign at this intersection.’” He added, “How do we more proactively enable folks to share their concerns throughout the village?”