BLMH - Annual Meeting 2013

Last week our association held the annual meeting. Those owners who attended were given concise and candid "state of the association" presentations by our president, treasurer, welcoming director, landscaping director, rules & regulations director and architecture & maintenance director. Management of course did a presentation. After the presentations unit owners were given the opportunity of a "question and answers" exchange with the board and management.

The meeting required less than two hours. We moved quickly through the business at hand and owners were attentive and courteous. The presentations and discussions were candid, honest and forthright.

My report as A&M and vice-president was exactly what I promised via our September newsletter. It took about 20 minutes and topics included:

• Expanded use of maintenance cycles and programmed maintenance. Why?
• What are the priorities? (and how are they determined?)
• Water main failures, a pre-emptive approach to dealing with this.
• IDNR-OWR (Illinois Department of Natural Resources) has declared Lake 4 to be a dam. “Briarcliffe Lake Dam is a Class I (high) hazard potential structure and requires a dam safety permit.” What does this mean for the association?
• Flood of April 2013 and aftermath including Wheaton's "Briarcliffe Watershed" Study.
• Lakecliffe Blvd paving failure; why, how, and financial consequences. Repaving and repair decisions.
• Status of Fireplaces and my position.
• Status of Roofing Project including drainage improvements.
• Status of Driveway Repaving Project.
• Status of Garage Floor Replacement Project. 
• Status of Financial Reserves for projects. (Very long term planning - some projects have scheduled completion dates of 2032!).
• Delinquencies, foreclosures and the negative impact on association finances.
• Status of Thames waterfall decking and paths project. 
• Status of Plymouth waterfall and pond. 
• Miscellaneous (limestone sills, sidewalk scraping, storage on the property, etc.). 
• Rules, Regulations and Maintenance (discussed by R&R director). 
• The future of the Newsletter.

The president made the statement that I had put in, by his calculations and review of my emails, etc. about 650 hours doing association business in the past year. I appreciated the acknowledgement from the entire group. I've made it no secret that this has been a very difficult year. I have found myself with competing, mutually exclusive time commitments. In fact, I've put in more time than estimated and I do have a business to run, clients with specific needs (I was in a production facility yesterday) and of course there is this blog and the research, etc. that it takes to produce it. In such a situation setting priorities becomes "difficult to impossible."

I have concluded I could work 24/7 if I chose, but I have no intention of doing so.

I also had to make a difficult decision this year to forego another volunteer position, in which I probably could have made a larger difference.

However, my current volunteer commitment at BLMH will end in September 2014. I have made no decision and no promises for the future.

COD - Pond 9 and Pond 7 - Storm Sewer Connection Hoddinott Wildlife Area

This post will include a video taken on April 26, 2013 shortly after the recent flooding and overtopping of COD's Pond #7 and Wheaton's Lake #4.

There is an underground storm sewer connection from Pond #9 into the Hoddinott Wildlife Area and water of Pond #9 flows into the marsh and Pond #7 via that connection. This was installed by the college in 2012, and the video shows some of the details of that storm sewer.

When overtopping of Pond #9 occurs that water flows above ground and downhill into Pond #7. When this overtopping occurs there is water flowing into Pond #7 from two discharge points on COD's retention pond #9. These discharge points are shown in the video.

Pond #7 is separated from Lake #4 by a berm which includes a weir. There is normally water flow from Pond #7 to Lake #4. However, during rain the level of Pond 7 rises and Lake #7 and the pond become one large body of water.

The area of the video is in the lower left hand corner of this site plan. Pond #9, the CMC building and parking occupy former low lying soccer practice fields which did retain water in the past. The area on this site plan which is tagged "Wetland 2" is the Hoddinott sanctuary and Pond #7.

Here's a photo of the same area in September 2008 after the severe storms. It shows the standing water and the same area now occupied by parking, the CMC building, Pond #9 and the berms on the west side of that pond:

Here's a photo of the area to the south of Pond #9 during construction and prior to the CMC building. The view is facing toward the east. This shows the area that I walked into the Hoddinott Wildlife Area in the video. It also shows the new storm sewer connection constructed by the college and ending in the marsh. In the video link included in this post I walk the route of the storm sewer installed in 2011-12 and shown in the photo below. (It runs from north to south, which in this photo is from left to right, and discharges  at the tip of pond 7 in the photo of the marsh).

The area above and in the video is a "freshwater emergent wetland" according to the "National Wetlands Inventory." Additional information on wetlands, the codes shown on the diagram and the Illinois Wetlands Act of 1989 can be found in my post of May 10, 2013. Here's the wetland diagram for the western portion of the COD campus and BLMH:

And finally, here is the video. Pond #9 and the CMC building are incomplete and are under construction:

Notes:

1. This is another in a series on the flooding of April 18 and the contributing factors. 

2. Clicking on the photos will enlarge them. 

COD, Hoddinott, Marshes and Prairies

An aerial photo of the college campus as it is purported to have existed in 1974; this is the year that construction of BLMH began and was substantially complete in 1976. In the photo Fawell (22nd) is the curving road in the foreground. Lambert road is in the distance and beneath the "1974." You can see the green space and bodies of standing water that existed on the campus.

According to the COD website, the community college today  “maintains three natural areas on the Glen Ellyn campus: the Russell R. Kirt Prairie, the Ecological Study Area, and the B.J. Hoddinott Wildlife Sanctuary. These areas are open to the public for nonconsumptive recreational use. Removal of plants and seeds from these areas is prohibited.”

The B. J. Hoddinott Wildlife Sanctuary includes "Pond #7" which recently overtopped and flooded areas to the south.

This post will provide information on the Hoddinott Wildlife Sanctuary with additional information on the natural areas of the campus in 1974 and to the present.  In that time the college has had extensive building projects throughout the campus. According to Russell Kirt it has also worked on restoring or reconstructing about 30 acres of prairies in the period 1974 to 2003. The largest single tract was about 12-13 acres and in a 2012 video Kirt described it as a "deciduous swamp" filled with farm debris. (Note 5).

How did the B. J. Hoddinott Wildlife Sanctuary come to be?
Bertram (Bert) J. Hoddinott was a Briarcliffe resident who was both a conservationist and a hunter. He was “an avid fan of the marsh behind Building M” and in 1983 the marsh was “an outdoor classroom for College of DuPage students and a home for families of ducks and geese.” As for the ducks he said “I love them.” Hoddinott told the story that he had two geese friends, which he named George and Harry. They would come to him when he called from across the lake. Here's a photo of the manicured remains of that marsh behind Bulding M, as it exists today:

Hoddinott was concerned about the marsh in the southwest corner of the campus and which needed considerable work. He was aware that the college operates with limited funds and so he met with H.D. McAninch, the college president and “offered to fund the development of the marsh for the encouragement and preservation of wildlife.”

Hoddinott had big plans for that marsh, and initially provided $16,000 for the purpose of improving and fortifying the marsh; a multi-year project that began in the summer of 1983. Hoddinott simply said that he “was glad that somebody gave me the opportunity to put back some of what I’ve taken over the years."  Hoddinott continued to fund the project and the day after his 84th birthday Hoddinott “appeared in McAninch’s office and placed the $266 he had collected for the marsh [from friends and relatives] on McAninch’s desk.”

“Hoddinott has not only given College of DuPage the funds for perpetual care of the marsh, but he has also established an endowment scholarship for a student interested in wildlife ecology.” The college honored Hoddinott with a framed photograph of the “B.J. Hoddinott marsh” and a birthday cake in a ceremony for his 84th birthday.

In a 1983 article in the college newsletter, Hoddinott was quoted: “I just hope the Lord keeps me around to see this finished…At least partially finished.” Mr. Hoddinott died on June 27, 1986 at the age of 84.

What was the original plan for Hoddinott Wildlife Sanctuary?
A goal of the project was to push the marsh eastward during the rainy season “eventually surrounding the radio tower.” It was anticipated to add small islands in the marsh so water fowl could lay their eggs. Hoddinott hoped to eventually see trees planted for song birds and “we’ll plant sunflowers back there to give them something to eat.” The plans included a concrete berm to keep the level of the marsh constant. I assume that berm included the weir that connects the marsh “Pond #7” to Lake #4.

“These areas do not exist merely by chance.”
Marshes have had a rocky co-existence with the Village of Glen Ellyn and COD. There has been a tension between individuals, the college and the Village. In a 1983 COD article it was stated that the marsh on Lambert Road was disrupted as "city crews widened [Lambert Road] right up against the marsh, tearing out small willows, cattails and cottonwoods and installing a cement sidewalk." Glen Ellyn's efforts "were completely out of hands....but we knew this (damage) would happen" according to Alpha Instructor Hal Cohen.

In the mid 1970's the college administration gave instructor Russ Kirt the "go-ahead" for a prairie restoration project. The 1.4 acre tract on Fawell-22nd street was painstakingly seeded and transplanted. "More than 70 species of plants that reigned over the prairies 150 years ago can be found in Kirt's prairie, including many that are difficult to propagate in larger prairie restorations." said a 1983 article. Kirt explained "I'm interested in species preservation...And, before prairie restoration became popular, it was a way of doing something popular and not complaining. And, it's great for students to learn about prairies. They really get into it. They love it."

Somewhat presciently, in 1983 COD biology instructor Bob Satterfield said "Square ponds, straight roads and things that are rigid are boring and frustrating.... They don't elicit the response we expect from students. Our aesthetic environment is enhanced by natural areas." However, in that same year the college hired a landscaping architect "to help plan the campus grounds."

30 years later, it could be argued that the manicurists are winning. The college today has sculpted waterfalls, tailored ponds, fountains, a "fine dining" restaurant and hotel with "luxury accommodations." The hotel and restaurant are adjacent to an "Ecological Study Area" according to the published "Facilities Master Plan" of 2004.

A Historical Perspective
There have been marshes in the area for 150 years, but the marsh which was once bisected by Lambert Road was created in 1965 or so. "That marsh would not have existed at all had not construction crews dug out truckloads of earth to form a berm for Building A. The resulting depression filled with water, acquired marsh loving plants and animals, and, later, a growing fan club."

In the November 1980 issue of the college newsletter an article entitled “Will the Marsh Get Bogged Down” described changes to the area which today includes the Russell R. Kirt Prairie. To provide some idea of the sentiment at the time, the article began with “College of DuPage’s marsh has been called by some an eyesore of a bog.” Yet, there was concern that widening Lambert Road would destroy the natural beauty as it cut through a portion of the marsh. However, at the time Don Carlson, director of Campus Services stated that provisions had been made to “move” the marsh from it’s original spot to an area farther east. This would coincide with construction of the new Student Resources Building.

The plan in 1980 was to “scrape away an area adjacent to the easternmost bank of the marsh, and the water will then be allowed to swell into that area. At the same time, the westernmost edge will be filled in to allow for the widening of Lambert.” The attitude of the college in 1980 was expressed by Alpha instructor Harold Cohen. “We've created an environment for a lot of plants and animals in God’s image so we have to preserve it.” The article went on to say “While marshes are disappearing all over Illinois, the college’s marsh is growing and changing”. “I’ve recorded as many as 63 species of birds alone,” Cohen was quoted.

However, by 1983 a college article stated “Some people look at a marsh and think only of mosquitoes breeding there. Others think of prairies as weed patches. But to College of DuPage instructors and their students, the on-campus marshes and prairie are very special outdoor classrooms for biology, botany, art and photography.” The article went on to state that “These areas, rare for a community college, do not exist merely by chance. They are the result of ongoing vigilance of a troupe of faculty and staff members who spent hours preparing proposals, working in the field and meeting with campus architects, Campus Services Director Don Calson and President H. D. McAninch to safeguard and develop the natural areas. They have saved one marsh from being squeezed into oblivion between the new SRC road and the newly widened Lanbert Road. They found another marsh a generous guardian angel [B. J. Hoddinott]...”

“Protecting natural areas is difficult in the midst of a growing college campus”
So stated a college article entitled “The Ecology of DuPage” in October 1983. The college’s “original master plan called for seven buildings that would have stretched all along the grasslands and marshy areas east of Lambert."

Today the college master plan has relegated the Hoddinott Wildlife Sanctuary to the recently declared (2012) "service area" of the college and it is no longer identified on the official master plans. During an on site meeting on May 23rd, a representative of the college actually stated that the area was not a part of the college; it's unclear if he mis-spoke or was stating the current attitude.

It's sad to see Mr. Hoddinott's vision trashed. It's sad to see big money and big interests win in this community college. But I suppose the sanctuary is an anachronism. Hoddinott's vision is no longer consistent with the perceived needs of the college and its vision as a cultural center. In "culture" there may be little need for nature, unless it is mowed or supports a wonderful public relations image. Let's be honest. How much has been spent on the Waterleaf Restaurant and the Inn at the Water's Edge on the campus? What's the annual operating budget for these facilities? Let's compare to the annual expenditures to maintain and improve the three "natural areas" on the campus. Enough said!

A Challenge
Today, in 2013, Mr. Hoddinott's vision is languishing. Perhaps it's time for the neighbors, including those to the south to take up the challenge and restore that vision.

 Notes

1. This post includes quotes from several issues of the College of DuPage newsletter including those dated November 1980, October 1983 and Spring 1986
2. According to COD documents, a pipe draining water out of the Lake #4 was capped as part of the marsh preservation project.
3. According to www.Scholarshiplibrary.com, the “B.J. Hoddinott Wildlife Ecology Scholarship” of the College of DuPage is “for students interested in pursuing a field of study in wildlife biology or wildlife ecology in Natural Sciences. Applicants must be a full-time student taking 12 hours per quarter, have accumulated 48 credit hours by Fall Quarter, at least 50 percent of credits from C.O.D., maintain a minimum 2.5 GPA to receive funds, demonstrate financial need and submit Financial Need Statement and complete a five-hour independent study during scholarship year, approved by Hoddinott Project supervisor or Natural Sciences dean.”
4. Thanks to those who provided the documentation to support this article. 
5. Here's a video presentation by Russell Kirt, after whom the prairie on the campus is named:

Flood - Meeting of May 23rd - COD Continues Its Approach

On May 14th our association contacted Mr. Clayton Heffter, Stormwater Permitting Manager, DuPage County Dept. of Economic Development and Planning and requested an onsite meeting to review the recent flooding, the lakes and walk the property line of the college and discuss the situation at the south end of COD's Pond #7 and Wheaton's Lake #4. A series of correspondences ensued and the meeting grew in scope.

On May 23rd a meeting occurred which included representatives of the County of DuPage, City of  Wheaton, Community College of DuPage, Briarcliffe Lakes Manor Homes, the Foxcroft Association and neighbors on Brentwood Lane and to the south.

The meeting was coordinated by the County. In response to my request to clarify the purpose of the expanded meeting, Clayton Heffter stated "My involvement is to help facilitate a meeting with all the different interested parties and offer the County’s expertise and guidance. Additionally, I’ll be able to address some of your questions related to COD development over the years and how they’ve met the requirements of the Stormwater Ordinance, and help answer general stormwater and flood related questions."

A number of individuals were present. Here is a partial list. Clayton Heffter for the County, George Schober of V3 of Illinois an engineering consultant for COD, Bruce Schmeidl for COD, Paul Redman Wheaton's Director of Engineering, Dave Grill property manager for BLMH, the president of the Foxcroft association, a neighbor who has volunteered to coordinate communications with those living on Brentwood Lane and to the south, several others from the college and from the City of Wheaton and myself. I apologize because not everyone is listed.

The meeting commenced on BLMH property at the southernmost end of Wheaton's Lake #3, walked the length of the college property line and the berm erected by the college as part of its new Pond #9, walked part of the berm separating the College's Pond #7 from Lake #4, inspected the weir on that berm, and then walked or drove to the southern shore of Lake #4 and Pond #7.

Core Issue - Overtopping of Lakes #3, #4, Pond 7 and Flooding
The meeting began with a brief description of the overtopping of Lake #3 and flow from COD's campus which joined at BLMH's property line and then formed a fast flowing stream to the south and Pond #7/ Lake #4.

I made a brief statement that everyone who is present is aware that the issue involves the 1.5 square mile watershed which included portions of Wheaton, Glen Ellyn and the Community College of DuPage. We would tour the bottom of that watershed, which is where the runoff of these storms has to go.

I made the appeal to all present that each of the parties agree to actively participate and cooperate in a larger study that will include Wheaton, the Community College of DuPage and Glen Ellyn. I stated that we were dismayed by the recent flooding and that for the first time in the 35 year history of BLMH we experienced a situation in which about 48 residents were threatened by the largest flood stream ever to occur on our property.  Our association discussed sandbagging contingencies at our most recent association meeting and we have NEVER had to do that before.

What has changed for BLMH? In the past, overtopping of Lake #3 would naturally flow south and southeast, fill the 5 acres of soccer fields and then continue on to Pond #7. Today, because of changes in the topography of the campus and recent construction including parking lots, the CMC building and the regrading as part of the Pond #9 flood water now flows westerly from the campus and onto our property. That is a change and this never occurred before.

During the April 23rd meeting I presented a 5-page document with photos of the flood situation on the college campus in September 2008 and the retention/detention of the soccer fields north of the "B.J. Hoddinott Wildlife Sanctuary" which includes Pond #7. Photos of the sandbagging of the south berm of Pond 7 were included.

The document included comparison photos of the same areas taken on [April] 18, 2013. I asked if everyone had seen the videos, in particular the 4-1/2 minute composite. I had a laptop with me if that were necessary. Mr. Schmeidl suggested everyone had and wanted to move this along.

Mr. Schober stated again that most of the water was "bypass flow" and would not answer my question about how it is that the college constructed a berm that was to "shield" our association and which now traps outflow from the college on our property? That question was not answered. Schmeidl stated that the college is a "good neighbor" and expressed that for part of the morning of the 18th a portion of the campus was closed and that some equipment rooms had experienced flooding.

We continued south and viewed pond #9. I asked where and how much water was being conveyed from other portions of the campus and into the pond. There was no reply to that question.

We continued south to Pond #7 and Lake #4. It was suggested that we see the weir and walk the berm and then continue to the south shore. Schmeidl objected but we persisted and did so.

After walking to the weir separating Pond #7 from Lake #4 we then continued around the lake and re-convened on the south shore. We continued to discuss the situation, describe the events depicted in the photos given to Schmeidl and others, and then continued to the south shore of Pond #7 and college property. This is where the initial overtopping began, and flooding occurred with the overtopping of Pond #7 and Lake #4 south berms.

The discussions included proper berm maintenance, discussions of berm conditions, and so on.

Wheaton Will Proceed Alone With Step 1 of a Study
Redman stated that Wheaton has agreed to begin the process of a study. The College of DuPage has not, to my knowledge, agreed to cooperate or actively participate. There was no statement of acceptance of participation or a willingness to participate and cooperate in a joint study by Schmeidl or Schober. In other words, Wheaton for the present will have to go it alone, as it did in 1997.

Redman stated that Lakes #3 and #4 are part of a "City Managed System."

Step 1 is to lay the ground work for the study. It will take time and money. The Wheaton City Council will have to approve the funding for a study and has not yet done so. The numbers are not yet in.

To be successful a study will have to include the larger areas. At present, part of the water collected in the college flows into pond #9. It is joined by other water flow from other areas of the college. It all collects in Pond #7 and then flows into Wheaton's lake #4 and from there it will flow via Wheaton's storm sewers into larger depositories to the south.

There is no outflow from the south western portion of the college campus except via overtopping the berms of CODs pond #7 or into Wheaton's Lake #4.

What Would a Good Neighbor Do?
Schmeidl, the representative of COD stated that the college is a "good neighbor."

Good neighbors don't push the problems downhill. During the meeting, Schober said that the pond #7 area was not part of the College. It was quickly pointed out that to our knowledge that is untrue and in fact, his firm had engineered in 2012 a storm sewer from the area of Pond #9 to the wetlands and into Pond #7.

Good neighbors recognize their involvement and responsibilities and do something to help others.

Telling us that the problem was "bypass flows" which in other words is attempting to state that "the water is from upstream and is simply flowing around the college" ignores the fact that there is significant rainfall on the campus and most of it must flow from the campus to elsewhere. A significant amount does flow into Pond #7 and Lake #4.

It was stated at the opening of the meeting that we, the neighbors, are concerned with the apparent inadequacy of Lake #3, Lake #4 and Pond #7. In addition, there is simply insufficient storm sewer capacity to properly drain these large bodies of water. It all seems to flow into Lake #4 and that's what causes the flooding.

Schober made the observation that there is a 36 inch connection from Lake #3 into the campus and to a detention pond to the east. No one present could confirm that. Schober stated that this connection probably allowed water to flow from Lake #3 and into COD's pond during events such as occurred in 2013. However, it is also possible that connection allows water to flow from the campus and into Wheaton's Lake #3. Or, if water flows from Lake #3 to one of COD's ponds, it is also possible for it to continue from that pond only to be returned to Pond #9 and from there to Pond #7.

What is the Position of the Community College of DuPage?
Reading between the lines of the statements and explanations provided by Schober, it is apparent that the college has taken the position that the problem is due to "bypass flows" and the unusual circumstances of the 18th were a consequences of peak rainfalls and saturated soils. However, that doesn't explain the destination of the water that falls on COD's 273 acres, nor does it explain how much of COD runoff does reach Pond #7 and Lake #4.  We do know it travels off of their campus and continues downstream. We also know that on April 18th Lake #3 overtopped first, followed by Pond #7 and finally by Lake #4, because this was observed and documented by neighbors on Brentwood and by me. We also know that the capacity of the system is inadequate, and that the discharge of Pond #7 and Lake #4 is via a single, restricted storm sewer. When the system capacity is reached, flooding is inevitable. Finally, we also know that runoff from COD has to go somewhere and this includes Pond #7 and Lake #4. Schober raised a question when he stated that there is a large underground connection between Lake #3 and one of COD's ponds. What else don't we know?

Schober stated that the college had to deal with significant runoff from upstream Glen Ellyn, but later contradicted that by stating that GE contributes only about 20 acres of runoff.

The position of the college appears to be this; because flow originates upstream, they are not a part of the problem and so they don't need to be involved in an area wide solution. The college has met the stormwater requirements of the county and so the problem is someone else's. In his May 6th email to me about the flooding, Robert Breuder, the president of the college summed it up this way. "It goes without saying that if ever COD causes a valid problem for its neighbors, we will address the same quickly and responsibly."

The college apparently does not see that it is involved in a valid problem for its neighbors!

Is that the proper position for a body supported by public funds which is a member of the "community"?" It may not be an accident that the "Community College of DuPage" has installed signage and deleted the word "Community" not only in word, but apparently in deed.

Unless there is an area study and flows from the contributors including Wheaton's Lakes upstream as well the COD campus, we won't know how to solve this problem. For example, until we know how much water really enters Pond #7 and Lake #4 during these 2% and 1% rainfall events, it isn't possible to determine what improvements should be made to the underground discharge of Lake #4. Nor is it possible to determine exactly how much retention and detention is prudent for Lakes #3, #4, Pond #7 and the areas adjacent on college property.

Of course, expanding any retention/detention areas will cost money and will also absorb real estate. The college has plans for its campus and that real estate is finite and valuable. That is probably the real reason the college has not volunteered to participate. As a consequence any solution will have to occur off of the campus.

Thanks to All
Thanks to everyone who attended the meeting, to Wheaton for stepping up to the plate, to the College of DuPage for listening and to the County for assisting and getting this initial step to happen.  I realize that not everyone who attended was empowered to make any promises, and we don't know the instructions that were given to Messrs Schober and Schmeidl by the college. One positive development was that everyone did agree that a larger involvement is necessary. However, the college continues to disappoint as it feels that it is "not a part of the problem" and therefore does not need to be involved, to paraphrase Robert Breuder's comments in his May 6 email to me.

Notes: 

Oops! First posted with April 23 meeting date. Not correct. Actual meeting occurred on May 23rd and that has been corrected in the post.

1. The above is a summary and is not all inclusive. The duration of the walk and meeting was about two hours.
2. What's Changed since 2004? In 2004 COD began a series of construction programs to expand parking and adjust detention ponds and water storage. Detention Pond 3 (DP3) was eliminated by rerouting of storm water from Detention Pond 3 to Detention Pond 2. Parking Lot K was built over the vacated pond.
3. Construction has continued since 2004. Here's a graphic of the master plan of the college as it existed in 2004. It shows some of the ponds and detention areas which existed then.

A Pragmatic Approach

The flooding in Briarcliffe, its causes and solutions are currently under review. There are a number of  different positions and a range of stakeholders. Some are merely observers. Some will be expected to put something on the table to solve this. Some will expect someone else to pay to solve this. Some will expect to do little or nothing. 

I prefer to think of those who are involved as being in two groups. One is "the problem solvers" and the other is the "observers." However, it is possible to have both roles and switch from one to another. This happens frequently when observers realize that they are to be left behind or the outcome will be unacceptable. At that time they may switch roles. However, there is a dilemma. Becoming motivated at the end of the decision making process is usually far too late to have any real impact on the process. Arriving late is at best an attempt to exert influence on a decision that has already been made.

Arriving late is an approach that is being advocated by a few. 

A range of possibilities

There are a range of possible outcomes for the flooding problem. They include "no change" and various degrees of "improvement."

If you experienced the recent flooding, or if you were very, very close and did not simply because the waters receded, then you have one perspective. If you are one of those who is expected to pay for a solution, then you have another perspective.

What's the most likely outcome and what is a viable solution? Are they the same or are they different, and what are they? I do have an answer to the question. However, I am not revealing it at this time and this post serves to explain. 

Pragmatism
When approaching a problem and creating a solution, there are differing perspectives. Some problems invoke an emotional response. Flooding which is assumed to be preventable is one of those.

Individuals may prefer pessimism or optimism. A pragmatic approach recognizes a range of possible outcomes and includes pessimism and optimism. A pragmatic approach recognized the complexities and the differing positions of those involved. It also goes beneath the obvious to the motivations or possible motivations of the problem solvers.

Observers also have motivations and expectations. They can influence the problem solvers. In a situation of re-occurring flooding, it's essential that the observers become participants and make their expectations known to all of the problem solvers. It should be done openly and consistently. Coordination is useful. In this case of the flooding, I advocated a petition. That however, has been nixed and so yesterday I formally retracted that request. (Note 2).

People do have the right to choose their destiny and to take the actions to accomplish that future.

A range of outcomes
In complex problems which involve multiple players and money there are a range of possible outcomes. So too with the causes or possible causes of the flooding in this area. The outcomes include "no change," varying degrees of "reduced flooding" and "no future flooding."

Reality dictates that the actual solution that is implemented will be somewhere in that range. The likelihood of "no change" is small. The possibility of "no future flooding" is most likely unattainable. A reasonable solution will be somewhere between.

The outcome will vary from address to address because the flooding was not universal or consistent.

The success of the outcome will be subjectively assessed because of the impact on individual addresses. In the past, there was no problem a few blocks away. Whatever was in place prior to 2008 was completely successful for those who never previously experienced flooding. That changed in 2013 when some of the neighbors suddenly became aware of the existence of a "flood control district" in Wheaton and COD's pond #7. It wasn't hidden although Lake #4 is shielded behind a berm. Anyone who accesses Google maps would see the COD campus and several bodies of water. Some of the neighbors enjoy fishing on someone else's private property. No, it isn't a secret.

This is a complex problem
Coming to the conclusion that this really is a difficult problem is essential to having a solution. Let's see, we have COD to the north and east of the flood zone, which is Glen Ellyn only in name; a better descriptor would be "rogue college." Then to the north and west we have the City of Wheaton. The Village of Glen Ellyn is largely invisible when it comes to dealing with the problem, and the County of DuPage are the accomplices or enablers who say "All necessary code requirements have been met."

Now, none of these are the 'bad guys.' They are simply the players, and it is because of the interaction of these entities over decades that we have arrived where we are today. Or, to phrase it more accurately, where we were on April 18.

It's going to take the involvement and cooperation of each of these entities to come to a realistic and reasonable solution.

It hasn't happened before and so why should we expect that it can and will happen today?

Now you know why it's my opinion that this is a complex problem.

Negotiations
The first step in solving complex problems is to get those who have the authority and have a role in determining a solution to come together. They are the individuals who can cause a solution and should include those who may be required to give something at the table. They are those who are accountable and can make the decisions that are necessary. If they are unwilling to participate voluntarily, then it is necessary to enroll someone who can exert sufficient pressure to get everyone together. These individuals are sometimes called stakeholders.

Complex problems include complex, multi-part negotiations. For each problem that is identified there is a solution or solutions discussed. In each step it is decided what is to be done by whom, by when and who will pay for this. Or, what type of burden sharing is this to include?

In any negotiation there are three possible responses. Each of the following are acceptable if one takes the position that in a negotiation a request is made and there is then a response. Negotiations can be complex or simple. Here are the possible responses to each request :

• accept
• counteroffer
• decline

Each of the above is a perfectly valid response. There are consequences for each response and a decline can stop the action.

Here's a clarification. In the above, I said that "The first step...is to get those who have the authority and ...can cause a solution...They are those who are accountable and can make the decisions" In other words, these are the decision makers who are empowered to make those decisions. I consider this to be a very important distinction. It's easy to state opinions to spend someone else's money or to declare that "so and so" should do this or that. Such opinions seldom get the job done. It's essential to get "buy in" from the various decision makers. 

Halting negotiations

For negotiations to succeed there must be good faith among all of the problem solvers. Negotiations can halt and solutions can become impossible if any one of the problem solvers repeatedly says "No!" To further the action requires a process of accepting and counter-offering. As this continues, the problem solvers will discuss many differing solutions and the objections and obstacles will be revealed. Burden sharing can be a show stopper!

As any party can say "No" at any time, and as it is possible for one party to be intransigent, it's necessary to have someone at the table who can exert influence. Call it "pressure."

In the case of the flooding, this is absolutely necessary. Of course, we're unawares of the behind the scene discussions that have occurred in the past between the Village of Glen Ellyn, the City of Wheaton, the Community College of DuPage, and the County of DuPage.

For this round to succeed, a more open discussion is essential. 

Agendas, Beliefs and Expected Outcomes
Each individual participating in defining and developing has a different commitment. That commitment is their personal expectation and a desired outcome.

Some will base this on their personal belief system. "We'll negotiate honorably" is one example. It's not prudent to assume that anyone else is going to adhere to that or to any other personal belief or position, declared or otherwise.

Everyone who is involved to solve a problem which includes differing positions has a personal agenda. One of the aspects of that agenda is to "look good."

Unreasonable Expectations
Some expect that a solution can be achieved if only a few of the stakeholders take an active, committed role.  That's an unreasonable expectation.

Some of the observers expect that the outcome will assure that there will never again be flooding.  Some have the position that a good solution will spare them in the future and have little concern for anyone else. Some expect that a "class action" legal action will solve this.

It's useful for individuals to honestly appraise their expectations and openly declare them. That does not always occur.

Revealing and Unconcealing
To succeed in arriving at an acceptable solutions, it's essential to unconceal the motivations, agendas and commitments of the different problem solvers who are involved.

That is because human beings don't always operate in accordance with their stated intentions. Lawyers are experts at obfuscation and diversion. That's something to keep in mind. Each of us, to varying degrees has the same capability and will and do use them to accomplish our personal objectives. There are a lot of intelligent and educated people in this area. It would be unreasonable to expect that they haven't learned how to play the game and play it well.

Operating at cross purposes
If we recognize that each of the problem solvers has a personal agenda, an expected outcome, and a desired involvement, then it is easier to understand why there is unworkability present in communities and organizations.

The solution to the flooding will include dealing with such cross purposes. Everyone will immediately state that flooding is undesirable  However, when we ask "what will you do to solve this problem" is when these impediments will occur.

For example, the Community College of DuPage has steadfastly taken the position that they meet all codes. Their primary and overwhelming interest is in utilizing every yard of their 273 acres in a manner that benefits their goals. If flooding is a natural consequence and there are no codes to prevent it, well, then too bad for the neighbors!

Looking good is hardly likely when flooding is involved. However, everyone wants to look good. That can be used from time to time.

Holding the rope
That's an expression that is used in very dangerous situations involving mountain climbing. The person who is called upon to "hold the rope" is the one who has the life of the climber literally in his or her hands. If a mistake occurs or if under duress and pain should the rope be released, there can be serious consequences. It requires real commitment and integrity to agree to "hold the rope" and then do so. (Note 1).

In problem solving there will be times when the entire outcome is dependent upon one person. That will require literally "holding the rope." In the process of solving complex problems, there are at times multiple rope holders, and that task gets passed. If any "rope holder" should let go, there can be large setbacks or failure.

In successful negotiation each individual at the table is completely aware that they do in fact, "hold the rope." However, there is a willingness to compromise. There is also a shared commitment  If everyone wants some sort of successful conclusion, then the negotiations will succeed.

It is sometimes necessary to determine and reveal what that shared commitment is. If that does not occur, then negotiations may fail, particularly if there are intransigent parties at the table.

In the flooding situation which occurs south of the COD campus and in Briarcliffe from time to time, there appears to be no shared commitment. That is another reason I view this as a difficult problem.

I've found it interesting that if asked, many in our society will say "Oh, yes, you can count on me to "hold the rope."" A few years ago I got a a rude awaking when in an exercise. It was necessary to hold the rope and the guy who was holding the rope I was tethered to looked me in the eyes and said "I've got you." I could see he was physically struggling. A few seconds later, he let me go and I fell.

What I learned from that exercise is simply that what people say, and what they do, may not be aligned. Some people will say it this way "the road to hell is paved with good intentions." This is true even with the best of intentions and with lives in the balance.

I really don't know why he let go. Why don't I know? Shortly thereafter he told me why. But here's a question. If there was a lack of integrity involved, then how is it possible to believe what that individual told me? Perhaps he was being honest and straightforward and perhaps he wasn't.. Suffice it to say that he did let go. He professed a reason for doing so.

In the game of life, we either get results or we get reasons.

Conclusion
I'm a professional problem solver. Some are easy, some are very difficult, and a few have been declared to be impossible. Nevertheless, I approach all problems with the same dedication, passion and commitment. My success rate is extra-ordinary.

My "role" here is primarily that of a committed observer. However, I've been operating in accordance with what I have posted here.  I'm using my skills to direct and exert some pressure both publicly and behind the scenes. My association will be involved, like it or not. However, we too are at the bottom of that 1.5 square mile watershed. We have no control over the operation and maintenance of Wheaton's flood control district or project. To the Community College of DuPage, we exist in a cursory manner. So my personal involvement will be limited. It will take a much bigger crow bar to move this.

This problem is solvable. It's too early to say how it will be solved or if it will be.  Recognizing the agendas of some of the participants, those who will have the roles of "problem solvers" indicates this could be very difficult. When I say "very difficult" I literally mean that it will be far easier to fail than to succeed.

The observers also have an agenda. One owner has stated that the reason for the flood was because the berm on Lake #4 "was not properly maintained." Some are angling for a class action suit. Even the Chicago Tribune in a recent article stated that the leaking pipe on Lake #4 caused the flooding. That was apparently because others told the reporter that the pipe was the cause. I find that to be interesting!

In this situation everyone serves a purpose. Its interesting to unconceal that purpose or to have the individuals reveal it. We all serve a purpose and we can be used to accomplish and serve a larger purpose.

Notes:

1. In real world, modern climbing, mechanical contrivances are used to reduce the necessity to rely upon any one person to "hold the rope." The dangers are well recognized and steps are taken to avoid these situations. In training exercises, perceived danger is as useful for revealing actions and outcomes as would be real danger. To those participating in the training, perception is what matters. 
2. On May 21 I sent an email to the neighbors group, retracting my request for a petition. In that email I said this: "You can consider that request to be retracted. The May 19th email has served one of its purposes..."
3. How will this turn out? My crystal ball doesn't work at all. I can anticipate events, predict actions and likely outcomes. However, that is not the same as predicting the future. Politicians insist they can do that. I'm no politician. Nor do I think taking a "wait and see" attitude will be beneficial to the outcome. 
4. In situations of this type, it's possible to be used by others to accomplish their personal agenda. That's not necessarily a terrible thing. However, personal agendas which have nothing to do with the larger problem or the greater good are problematic. For example, I'm sure there are a few neighbors who see "job one" as protecting their personal property. That's a problem if such an achievement is their one and only goal and compromises the achievement of a larger solution. This is another example of individuals operating at cross purposes. 
5. The flood of April 18, 2013 occurred one month ago. In this age of sound bites and tweets, that's a lifetime ago! There are 400 million tweets in one single day!  My point? The flood of April 18 is so "ancient." We did discuss the necessity to keep this in momentum. One day was 400 million tweets ago. Oh well!

Flood - A Call to the Committed

Here is the question. Do YOU want to see this problem solved, or do you want to pass it to someone else to solve some day, or one day, in the future? Are you willing to take a stand or not? If you want to solve this, then continue reading.

Believe me, there are a lot of people who have no interest in solving this. For the stakeholders, who are those who will have to make the decision to expend hard cash to solve this, there are a lot of other things pulling at those dollars. So what would the popular decision be? Solve this problem, or avoid it and promote something with glitter, like a new statue on the COD campus, or downtown activities in Glen Ellyn and Wheaton?

If you were a politician, or an administrator or member of the board of the trustees of the "Community" College of DuPage, what would you do?  Frankly, the answer to that question is easy. Simply continue doing what has worked in the recent past, and avoid the difficult decision.

That is exactly the outcome to be expected after the flood of 2013. Why should you expect anything different? Left to their own devices, the decision makers will make exactly the same decision they have made in the past.

On April 19 4:49pm I made the formal request that this message be sent to everyone in the neighborhood network.  Here is that message:

A Personal Request
Hello, I’m the guy who filmed the flood, has the personal blog, and is advocating a solution.

The flood occurred four weeks ago. Most recently, including 1996, 2008 and 2013 this type of flooding has been experienced south of COD’s Glen Ellyn Pond 7 and Wheaton’s Lake 4, which is a part of that City’s “Special Flood Control” project.

Four weeks after the most recent flooding, a lot of us are returning to normal and the attention of the College, Glen Ellyn, Wheaton and the neighborhood is looking toward the end of the current school semester, summer and the Memorial Day Holiday.

However, it is up to each of us to keep this problem in front of the officials and decision makers who can do something about this. This is vitally important if we want to accomplish any positive change. In the past, there has been public concern but as some of the neighbors have said “nothing came of it.” The City of Wheaton did, in fact, do some things in 1997 to alleviate this problem but it was insufficient and they acted alone. That’s not going to get the job done. The watershed which flows into this neighborhood covers about 1-1/2 square miles and includes portions of the COD campus, Glen Ellyn and Wheaton.

Do you want this to be another one of those situations in which this difficult problem gets passed over to deal with more attractive, colorful and easier problems? If not, then we need your help. We need to keep this problem visible and we need to press a variety of officials at the college, nearby communities, the county and the state in order to assist them in making the difficult and expensive decisions required to reduce the flooding in our neighborhood.

To provide some insight, I’ll relate a statement that was made on May 8 during a neighborhood meeting at the College of DuPage. Robert Breuder, the president said to one of the neighbors that “The flooding is obviously not a serious situation; otherwise there would have been more people here tonight.” That’s the perspective and unless we each press this, I am convinced this is the position the politicians and administrators will take. Some mean well, some have more pressing concerns. We need this to be an important issue and we need to keep it in the forefront if it is to get the funding and attention it requires.

This is a legal, technical, financial and political problem. Legally, COD may be complying with all codes and ordinances. Legally, it may be proper to allow the “natural drainage pattern” to continue and these floods to continue. Technically, there are solutions which can reduce flooding. Financially, someone or someone’s must come up with the funds to fix this. Politically, sufficient exertion must be placed on Wheaton, Glen Ellyn and COD to work together to solve this problem, make the difficult decisions to do what will be necessary and come up with the funds to do so. If we expect the City of Wheaton can do this on their own, we are mistaken.

The decision makers include:

•  Anthony J. Charlton, P.E – Director and Jim Zay - Chairman, Stormwater Management Planning Committee
• Dan Cronin - County Board Chairman
• Clayton Heffter, Stormwater Permitting Manager, DuPage County Dept. of Economic Development and Planning
• JR McBride – District 4 Board Member
• Michael Gresk - Mayor of Wheaton
• Mark Franz – Village Manager, Glen Ellyn
• Robert L. Breuder – President, College of DuPage
• The Board of Trustees, College of DuPage
• Sandy Pihos, Illinois State Representative

You can send a letter to each of these, and the names of the board of trustees of the College of DuPage is on their website. In the past, I've sent individual letters to each of the individuals on the above list and to each and every member of the Board of Trustees of the College. I suggest you do likewise. You may also add your Village or City councilman or councilwoman.

I also suggest that [the communications leader for the neighborhood group] prepare a petition. I request that each of us provide our names and addresses and sign that petition. I suggest a copy be sent to all of the individuals on the above list.

This situation is being monitored by a reporter at the Chicago Tribune, who has been helpful in focusing attention on this problem. I’ll send a copy of any and all letters or emails I receive, as well as the petitions to that reporter, as I have agreed to stay in communications about this problem.

Here is a possible text for the petition:
“We, the residents of unincorporated Glen Ellyn and of Wheaton, who live at the southernmost extreme of the College of DuPage’s Pond 7 in Glen Ellyn and Wheaton’s Flood Control Lake #4 hereby petition the State, the County, the College, the Village of Glen Ellyn and the City of Wheaton to take coordinated steps to end the flooding of these neighborhoods in 50 year and 100 year flood events, which are sometimes called 1% and 2% rainfall events.

This is an unacceptable situation in these affluent communities, and in neighborhoods which are adjacent to a Community College which boasts “luxury hotel accommodations” and a “fine dining” restaurant. In recent years, alterations to the neighborhood has exacerbated flooding. Our neighborhood is now the repository of runoff during severe storms. It has been stated that this is the “natural pattern of drainage” and implied that flooding is to be expected and is acceptable.

We think that repetitive and reoccurring flooding of our homes and neighborhood is not to be expected or tolerated, and via this petition we are communicating our expectation that the County of DuPage, Community College of DuPage, City of Wheaton and Village of Glen Ellyn come together to do something about this. Each of you are an entity which is supported by tax dollars. You are public institutions and part of your role is to promote well-being.

We encourage you to solve this problem. We encourage you to cooperate and take the difficult steps to alleviate flooding in this area. We do understand that under extreme conditions flooding is unavoidable. However, the definition of “extreme” is subjective. The flood of April 18, 2013 occurred with 6.91 inches of rainfall in a 24 hour period. A ["100 year" or 1% event] will have between 7.35 and 8.68 inches of rainfall in 24 hours. On April 18 the rainfall was in the range for a “50 year event” which is between 6.66 and 7.24 inches.

Something has changed to contribute to the flooding. On September 12-13, 2008 the area received 5.27" rainfall according to DuPage County. At that time, with minor sandbagging behind COD’s Pond 7, neighbors were able to contain the overtopping of that pond and avoid flooding. In 2013 flooding was unavoidable and the interconnected pond #7 and Lake #4 overtopped. Several blocks of homes were flooded. Water was 3 feet deep behind and in front of homes on Brentwood, some homes had 8 feet of water and it ran for blocks down Briarcliffe Blvd. The recommendation for personal flood proofing may be futile in this situation.

We encourage action and expect accountability.“

To my neighbors, thank you for taking the time to read this and thank you for contacting the decision makers. It will make a difference. I've written about this situation in my personal blog http://briarcliffelakes.blogspot.com/ and I am convinced it will take each and every one of us to shift this.

Norman Retzke
LetMeThinkAboutThisBlog@gmail.com”



Notes:

1. "We are either a part of the solution or we are a part of the problem." That paraphrases the comment I made to Robert Breuder, the president of the College of DuPage in my email dated May 6. 
2. So where do you stand? Are you a part of the solution or a part of the problem? It's time to choose sides and there is no middle ground here.