ie one Ue Ue BtO UNS Bel elLek TT N 11 
project and certain aspects of the sewer proposal was growing. New water 
rates were initiated to repay the bond issue and this rate increase added 
to the general dissension. Many residents were paying more than $10 
a month for water and sewer services, and these new rates represented 
a real hardship for those with lower incomes. 
The various dissenting groups formed an organization named the 
Independent Citizens Committee to counter the Chamber of Commerce 
which favored the lake. This new group challenged the label, “Noisy 
Minority,” given them by demanding that construction of the lake be 
decided by a public referendum. This proposal was rejected by the city 
council on the grounds that local approval was not required. The Indepen- 
dent Citizens Committee also suggested that a pipeline to the Embarrass 
River would keep the present two lakes at full capacity and be more 
practical than the proposed lake. (An earlier report by the engineering 
firm contracted by the city to study the problem stated that this was 
feasible and the most economical means of securing water for future needs.) 
This recommendation was also rejected. 
The sewer improvement program was voted on and defeated. The 
opposition apparently felt that the program submitted went far beyond 
need for expanded sewage treatment, and the rates were too favorable 
to industrial users at the expense of residents. The negative vote was 
generally regarded as a protest against the city’s plans and lack of con- 
fidence in the city council’s leadership. 
Several meetings between the Independent Citizens Committee and the 
city council were held in an attempt to reconcile the diverse views. The 
main point of contention was whether the proposal to build the lake should 
be determined by a public referendum. The idea of submitting the 
question to an arbitration board was also suggested. The city council 
refused to submit the lake proposal to a referendum and also rejected the 
arbitration board proposal. Conversation was discontinued when the council 
announced that bonds would be sold and work on the sewer and lake 
programs would begin immediately regardless of the opinions of those 
who opposed this action. 
The Independent Citizens Committee—in view of the City Council’s 
refusal to discuss the matter further—felt the only course open was to 
attempt a recall election of the mayor and city council. Petitions for recall 
were circulated. Sufficient signatures with a comfortable margin were 
easily obtained in a brief time. Certain legal aspects of the petition were 
challenged by the council. Circuit Court Judge Jones ruled the documents 
legal, but his decision was appealed to a higher court where the issue 
now is pending. 
There are few precedents for recall actions in Illinois. Local techni- 
calities will be time-consuming and costly. The Independent Citizens 
Committee has the will and determination, but lacks the finances to 
overcome the legal delaying tactics blocking the recall election. Mean- 
time, the bonds have been sold, the money is available, bids have been 
submitted, and work is progressing. 
The National Park Service has recognized Bird Haven as a national 
landmark. If and when the University of Chicago completes the application 
required, a handsome bronze plaque will be created to give public recogni- 
tion to this status. The State Highway Department has prepared a large 
historical sign for erection on U. S. Highway 50. This sign gives a brief 
biography of Robert Ridgway and Bird Haven. The city agreed to surface 
