Diane Wamberg: Candidate Profile

Note: Answers provided have not been edited for grammar, misspellings or typos. In some instances, candidate claims that could not be immediately verified have been omitted. Jump to:BioKey IssuesQA Bio City: Barrington HillsWebsite: http://RestoreCommonSense2011.comOffice sought: Barrington Hills Village boardAge: 60Family: Divorced, seven children, 5 grandchildrenOccupation: Homemaker and Community ActivistEducation: Associate Degree, Marketing/Advertising, Cleveland School of Advertising 1978Civic involvement: District 220 Schools, District 220 Educational Foundation, Northwest Community Hospital Foundation, Foglia YMCA, WINGS, Hands of Hope, We Do Care, Hospice, Barrington Junior Women's Club, The Barrington Area Arts CouncilElected offices held: Community Unit School District 220 Board 1993-1997Have you ever been arrested for or convicted of a crime? If yes, please explain: NoCandidate's Key Issues Key Issue 1 The recent passage of the new Lighting Standards Ordinance, formerly the Exterior Lighting Ordinance, is 16 pages long, filled with useless definitions and makes lighting your tennis court, bocce court, riding ring or skating rink legal. It also gives those wanting to build a new home in our village a second class status. They would have to abide by the new lighting restrictions that all other current residents don't have to conform to when submitting their building plans. This ordinance needs to be repealed.Key Issue 2 The village needs to identify potential problem tracts on the periphery of our village and shore them up with appropriate zoning protection. I believe that we can work smarter with land use if reasonable perimeters are established. There also needs to exist a willingness to listen and negotiate instead of taking a straight backed stance that it is ""our way or no way."" The village has lacked in using knowledge of current state laws that will favor a potential developer. A hardened stance will encourage costly de-annexation law suits, the loss of taxes and the control of village property. The village Board and Administration have shown an absence of common sense and our peripheral borders have already eroded with the loss of over 600 acres.Key Issue 3 Like many municipal governments, our village has a budget problem but one that has not been honestly explained to the residents. Our cash reserves are inadequate, our legal fees (past, present and in this year's budget) are outrageous and the Board has lost control of the spending approval process.Questions Answers Describe your personal position on the outdoor lighting ordinance.As a co-founder of HALO (Homeowners Against Lighting Ordinances) I am dismayed that this issue took over 1 1/2 years to finish and demonstrated a case of troubling overreach by a municipal government. I have more than 3 years of minutes from the Board of Trustees, the Plan Commission and the ZBA which clearly show that the creation of this ELO would allow the village to be ""the first Dark Sky community east of the Mississippi."" The adamant denial of all those that wrote, sponsored and defended this ordinance is disingenuous. The creation of HALO and the Common Sense Party had the effect of watering down the ordinance as the proponents cried that it was for the Comprehensive Plan and to save 5-acre zoning. Lighting ordinances cannot save 5-acre zoning. The lack of trust in our elected Trustees and President is the issue. They refused to put the ordinance to a referendum twice and the final vote was a forced Super Majority, caused by the petitions holding signatures of 40% of village landowners. The strife, vitriol and contention that this issue created was needless and could have been avoided. Other ordinance issues that are not needed are currently at the ZBA level and are causing the same consequences.Generally speaking, do you see the village of Barrington Hills as the product of strong regulation or as a bastion of individual property rights? Should the practices of the past be changed or maintained?Laws, rules and ordinances should be created to fix problems, not create them. I see the village as not a bastion of individual property rights but of citizens who choose to live here because they like to be left alone and enjoy their property investment. The best practices of the past should be maintained but there is a need to change the direction of the current board. In many of our surrounding villages, government organizational charts put the residents first. The chart used by our current President makes no mention of the citizens. Our current board and Administration see our community in need of strong regulation with which we, The Common Sense Party, disagree with.Should the village's requirement of minimum 5-acre lot sizes be maintained or should land owners have the right to divide their property as they see fit?If a property owner has the opportunity to develop a tract of land within the heart of the village, 5-acre zoning is required. We have no sewer or water systems and denser development is not possible unless the parcels are 2-acres or larger. The building to lot ratio in our village also makes the construction of large homes on smaller lots an impossibility unless a zoning variance is sought. There are pockets of lesser zoned lots in our village but none have been created in the last 20 years. This is why it is imperative that our peripheral tracts of open fields need to be handled with care and common sense. This can be accomplished by using best land-use practices which includes transitional zoning.Would the village benefit from a modest amount of commercial development? Where, if anywhere, should a commercial area of the village be established?There currently existed commercial zoning on an eleven acre lot on Hart Road. Once again, this is on the edge of the village. Another site is the Berndtsen 100-acre tract at the corner of Rte 62 and County Line Road. I would support a modest amount of commercial development at this corner because the site faces a gas station and dense development in Algonquin. If we could hold this parcel within the village without the threat of de-annexation, our village could control the zoning of the remainder of the property using transitional zoning. This means, denser homes near the commercial development and 5-acre zoning as the development headed into the heart of the village. What is gained in this approach is commercial and sales taxes plus the protection of a peripheral border.Should equestrian uses of land within the village be further regulated?No, I don't think there is a need for any further ordinances regarding equestrian land use. Our village already has a Home Occupational Ordinance that allows the boarding of horses. There are currently large boarding establishments that have been in existence for 20+ years. The Home Occupation Ordinance is quite clear about the neighbor nuisance protection clause. All homes used for the owner's occupation cannot be advertised, visible from the street and become a nuisance to one's neighbor. Our problem is that some rules are bent and not enforced by the current Board and Administration. This fact has then caused this perceived need for regulation.