I started Engage Northbrook because I believe more people in our village should feel informed, included, and empowered when it comes to local government. This effort isn’t about promoting a specific slate of candidates or pushing a partisan agenda — it’s about making space for honest questions, civil dialogue, and meaningful participation in a process that affects all of us.
That belief is what led me to donate $1,000 to Northbrook Focused. I haven’t publicly endorsed any candidates, but I supported this group financially because they gave our community something it hasn’t had enough of: a choice.
Since 2009, 64% of our local elections have been uncontested, and every candidate endorsed by the Northbrook Caucus has won. Over the same period, voter turnout has remained consistently low. These trends — limited competition and low engagement — point to a system that doesn’t invite broad participation.
I believe contested elections are healthy for Northbrook. They bring new ideas, challenge assumptions, and help ensure that elected leaders stay connected and accountable to the people they serve.
The candidates from Northbrook Focused stepped up. Three are lifelong Northbrook residents who went to school here and chose to raise their families here. The fourth is a local business owner who’s been actively involved in the community since opening his restaurant in 2009. One of them has since withdrawn, but the willingness to step forward — in this climate — matters.
We have their signs in our yard. They asked. The Caucus didn’t. In fact, one of their candidates avoided our home while canvassing — seemingly unwilling to speak with a resident displaying a sign for the opposing slate. That runs counter to what local democracy should be. We should be able to have conversations with one another — especially when we disagree. And I’d like to think those seeking to lead Northbrook are prepared to represent everyone, not just those who already agree with them.
I’ve also been publicly critical of the current Village Board. That criticism is focused on performance — not personality. I respect anyone who gives their time to public service. They deserve our gratitude. But they also deserve scrutiny. That’s not divisive — it’s democratic.
I also want to acknowledge the long and meaningful history of the Northbrook Caucus. It began with benevolent intent and, for many years, helped shape a strong foundation for our community. But something has shifted in the past 10 to 15 years. While the Caucus emphasizes transparency, key parts of its process — including bylaws, candidate applications, committee membership, and the rationale behind endorsements — are not available on its website.
Dig a little deeper and you can find some information: pages not listed in the site’s menu structure show that eight subcommittee leads were involved and 39 residents served on subcommittees.
Had the Northbrook Focused candidates not stepped up, fewer than 50 people — actually far fewer, since the Village Board is just one of five subcommittees — would have been responsible for selecting the next round of village leadership in yet another uncontested election.
And unfortunately, this year’s campaign has revealed something deeper: a tone that feels more defensive than inclusive, more political than neighborly. If you haven’t seen the attack ad released by the Caucus over the weekend, I encourage you to watch it. Then ask yourself: Does it reflect the kind of community we want to be? Does it make you feel proud to live here — or more likely to step up and get involved?
I worry the answer for many will be no. I worry that this kind of childishness will discourage good people from running in the future.
That’s exactly why Engage Northbrook exists — to create space for more voices, more participation, and a more open process. Not just during election season, but all year long.
As of today, nearly 10% of registered voters in Northbrook have already cast ballots — 2,591 votes. That’s about one-third of the turnout we saw at the peak in 2021. We’ve made progress — but we’re not close to where we need to be. If we’re serious about making participation the norm rather than the exception, we still have a long way to go.
I understand that donating to one side may lead some to question my objectivity. That’s fair. But I’m not here to play it safe. I’m here to push for progress — to keep asking questions, encouraging neighbors to get involved, and doing the work to build a more engaged and informed community.