Terry Flanagan: The Impending Fire Fight

Another salvo has been fired in the quest to approve/ban fire pits in Geneva. I don’t know how this became such a burning issue or why we can’t seem to resist using fire-related metaphors when discussing it. But it’s probably the most polarized debate we’ve had since the smoking ban came before City Council. Luckily, the state Legislature stepped in there and imposed a statewide ban that resolved a number of problems that local bans would have caused.

However, we seem to keep running into these sorts of problems and we need to address them in a responsible manner. First we need to isolate the problem from the hype and the hysteria and deal with the facts. It seems that everyone has their own set of “facts” these days. They back up these facts with information they find on the Internet when they go looking for research and opinions that reinforce their thinking. They wind up defining the problem in terms of the solution they want. Ideally, we should approach problem-solving with a desire to learn the facts, even if they conflict with our pre-conceived notions, and a willingness to change our minds if the facts do not support our beliefs.

I don’t know about anyone else, but I’m tired of looking at what other communities have done as an alternative to really digging in and addressing a problem. It’s not that we can’t learn from others have done, but this approach seems guaranteed to stifle any new or creative thinking on the subject and ensures that we will arrive at a “safe” solution that seems to work for someone else, a solution which they probably copied from some other town. The upside, of course, is that we can blame any fallout on the fact that we were just following some other town’s lead. So I hope that the city does its homework on this and just doesn’t serve up St. Charles or Hinsdale leftovers warmed over.

The fire pit issue will probably boil down to health concerns versus individual liberties. Most issues usually polarize around restricting individual choice for whatever the perceived greater good is at the time. So the debate is likely to be emotionally charged. The council members will have to sift through the arguments and separate fact from fantasy and decide on a solution that promotes the general welfare while securing the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity as the preamble of the Constitution declares. Everything goes back to our fundamental principles.

Sometimes these goals conflict, which makes decisions all the more difficult. And people tend to forget that what seems to be a simple decision to them is complicated by these considerations. Unfortunately, these things are never cut and dried no matter how much either side sees it that way. Both sides need to respect the legitimacy of each other’s concerns and to respect each other in the debate. Mutual respect goes a long way in resolving problems satisfactorily for all concerned.

There’s already been a lot of debate on the issue, some of it right here on the pages of Patch. It’s time for all of us to go and do our homework. See what the experts have to say. Make sure you check to see who’s financing the research and take that into account. Read what the other side has to say and try to see their point of view. Try to avoid special interest groups. And check out governmental agencies and partnerships like the EPA, NARSTO, and the Department of Energy’s Environmental Management.

You might even try talking to a neighbor who sees the issue differently than you do and take a look at the issue from their perspective. Maybe if we all did a little more talking to our neighbors we wouldn’t need an ordinance to settle every dispute.

Editor's note: Terry Flanagan is the spouse of Fourth Ward Alderman Dorothy Flanagan.