KimJ, thanks for acknowleging my post.
I don't think you implied that I said anything about FLOS, but I do want to emphasize that I didn't. When the name Olmsted makes the newspapers, it is about something like colorful flowers or cultivar Elms. I don't know whether the society is behind it or not, but the Society should be aware that for many taxpayers around here, the name Olmsted is synomous with "no change".
When I watched the village board meeting on the trees, just by accident, I never got the impression that prudence was not being exercised. In fact, we pay a forester to do just that. I don't know that the LAC commissioners acted imprudently in their recommendation.
I can mention by name though, the trustees and LAC member at the board meeting who were unable to convey accurate information when asked, implied things that were not accurate or complete about the NHL status, did not seem to understand that cultivars did not propogate through seed. And worst of all, expressed contempt for donors and funders of parkway plantings who actually want to spend money on things they like.
It is appropriate that the FLOS discuss the principles of landscaping employed by a famous landscaper over 100 years ago. Riverside is not a museum though and all taxpayers pay to live here and enjoy the common areas. If the FLOS has not dedicated itself to working with taxpayers who want elms, colorful flowers, or recreation in the parks, then perhaps they deserve to be thought of as an academic group of historians who are neither forward looking or realistic and who have limited usefullness in helping solve village problems.
I like living here, but I did not know it was Brigadoon and I had stepped permanently into the 19th century.