Open government can work for good
I was surprised that the "no" vote reversal on the zoning variation to allow the funeral home to be relocated at Waterman and Euclid ended up on your front page (Aug. 11). It's confusing. Is the Herald lobbying to reverse the vote again?
If it deserved the front page space, a better headline would have been, "Village trustees and mayor show commendable response to neighborhood citizen concerns," (or something briefer along the same lines), not, "Why no to funeral home?".
Perhaps the accompanying story should have instead shown that open government meetings can result in a meeting of the minds between constituents and their political representatives. Why fan the flames of a dead proposal (or is it really dead!)?
Also, isn't the attorney for the parent funeral home-cemetery, Stephen Daday, a former 16-year village trustee? If so, do we have a concrete example of cronyism being used to help a corporation run roughshod over local citizenry?
Dave Souders
Arlington Heights