La Grange Today

Possible ruling in Coryell lawsuit at April 6 hearing

A Cook County circuit court judge this morning might said he will hear arguments April 6 on a motion for summary judgment filed by the Park District of La Grange in its effort to overcome a lawsuit filed by resident Orlando Coryell that so far has prevented the sale of 2.82 acres of Gordon Park to developer Atlantic Realty Company.

As a result, the developer and park district likely will amend their sale contracts, which call for closing on the two-parcel deal by March 31.

Judge Leroy Martin Jr said he had received the park district's motion and a subsequent response from Coryell's attorneys. Late yesterday, the park district filed its own follow-up response. The judge today gave Coryell's attorneys seven days to submit their final reply.

If the motion is successful, the judge likely would give the park district a green light to proceed to closing on the sale. However, if Martin believes that there are material facts in the case still in dispute, he could instead order prolonged arguments from both parties before making a ruling. A motion for summary judgment assumes that both sides agree on all material facts at issue.

There also is the possibility that the judge could rule in Coryell's favor. Although his attorneys did not formally make a cross-motion for summary judgment, they said their written response could serve in that capacity if the judge would allow it.

On Monday of this week, Martin set April 3 as the date for further consideration of an application filed by the park district asking the judge to directly approve the sale under a separate but related statute that allows park district land to be sold.

Judge hearing park sale request raises questions of jurisdiction, related lawsuit & dismissal of earlier app

Circuit Court Judge Leroy Martin Jr appeared to listen intently, his hand on his chin, as attorney Robert Bush presented on behalf of the Park District of La Grange Monday morning a litany of reasons that the judge should directly approve the sale of 2.82 acres of Gordon Park to developer Atlantic Realty Partners (ARP).

But the judge's first question to Bush was not about the public benefits of the proposed sale, or the backing it received last November from district voters in a public referendum, or the resolutions of support it recently garnered from the village and school district boards.

Instead, Martin wanted to know why he was hearing the application at all.

“Why is this matter here and not in the county division?” the judge wanted to know. “Sounds like this should be heard by county.”

“It's a hybrid kind of action,” Bush replied, noting that he had filed the application in the chancery division where the judge presides only because the it dealt with the sale of the same two parcels of parkland at issue in a “separate but related” case also being heard by Martin.

The latter case, a lawsuit filed in December by La Grange resident Orlando Coryell, challenges the park district's authority to sell the parcels following a November referendum in which district voters approved the sale. A public auction in which ARP was the sole bidder subsequently was held Jan. 8, but the park district has agreed not to close on that sale until the issues in the lawsuit are resolved.

Getting the new application before Martin was not easy. When it was filed earlier this month, a computer randomly assigned it to another chancery judge. In a hearing March 9, Bush had to persuade the division's chief judge, Dorothy Kirie Kinnaird, to reassign the case to Martin over the objections of Coryell's attorneys, who argued that the application should be remanded to the county division where the park district had filed an earlier, almost identical application in Oct. 2007. That application eventually was dismissed by Judge Susan Fox Gillis in June 2008, who ruled that the land to be sold was 3.51 acres not 2.82.

Martin, who did not seem to be aware of Gillis' ruling, expressed discomfort with crossing over jurisdictions. “I don't hear criminal cases [in chancery court] even though I have the ability to do so,” he said.

“The judge [Kinnaird] sent us to you,” Bush responded.

“Answer me this if you can,” Martin said. “Why should any court hear this application ... if the sale [of these park parcels also] is the ultimate issue in [Coryell's] lawsuit?”

Bush explained that Illinois law allows a park district to dispose of land under two different scenarios: It can always hold a referendum seeking approval from voters to sell the land at a public auction or, if the amount of land is less than three acres, it can ask a circuit court judge to directly approve the sale.

The two paths to a common sale are related but governed by “separate and distinct” statutes, Bush said.

While acknowledging that the application hearing and Coryell's lawsuit structurally were too different to be consolidated, Bush suggested that the application would help resolve the lawsuit because “it takes away two of its counts.”

The first count of Coryell's lawsuit charges the park district with failing to properly follow a timeline of events required by statute in preparing for the referendum. The sale application on the other hand requires no referendum, so the question of compliance is moot, Bush said. However, the referendum still can be used as evidence of community support for the sale, he said.

The third count of Coryell's lawsuit contends that the park district extended favorable treatment to ARP dating back almost two years, which made it impossible to create a level playing field for all potential bidders in the January public auction. The fact that ARP was the sole bidder is culminated proof of a “private sale” to the developer in violation of the statute, Coryell's attorneys argued.

Presenting the application before the court Monday, Bush said, acknowledged, “This is a private sale.”

At that point, Judge Martin called for a short recess, and withdrew to his chambers. Upon returning to the bench, Martin said he had used the time to consult with Judge Kinnaird, who clarified for him that she had forwarded the application to Martin so that he could decide whether to hear it, remand it to the county division, or even dismiss it.

Kinnaird in fact, Martin told Bush, made him aware of Judge Gillis' dismissal last summer of the earlier application. He waved a copy of the order in his hand.

What is the difference between the current application and the earlier, dismissed one? the judge asked Bush.

Bush explained that Gillis dismissed the first application on the basis that the legal description and other documents described the amount of parkland to be sold as 3.51 acres, although it was always the park district's stated intent to sell just 2.82 acres to ARP.

Bush said the legal description and documents in the new application had been amended to “demonstrate conclusively” that the amount of land to be sold was only 2.82 acres.

“Everyone admits it is under three acres,” Bush said, pointing out that even Coryell, who had been the opponent of record in the dismissal of the first application, had made six references in the documents of his current lawsuit confirming the park parcels to be 2.82 acres.

Therefore, Bush told Martin, “what Judge Gillis did has no bearing on what you have in front of you.”

Bush argued for an immediate approval of the sale.

“We have demonstrated more than enough evidence to you,” Bush told Martin. He added that there was “no evidence being presented today” to counter the park district's case.

Indeed, neither Coryell nor either of his two attorneys were present in the courtroom Monday morning. Coryell said earlier that his resources were being fully directed towards his lawsuit. Other residents would have to decide for themselves whether to mount a legal challenge to the new application, he said.

When Judge Martin asked if there were any objectors present in the courtroom, six hands went up among persons seated in the gallery.

“Do you all have the same objections?” asked the judge. Heads nodded. Martin then asked if one of the group would address the court as its representative.

Kevin Shields approached the bench. A former park commissioner who served from 1990-2002, Shields has been a vocal opponent of the Gordon Park sale since it was first publicly announced in July 2007. He campaigned against passage of the November referendum. But he had not been a party to any legal action against the sale until Monday.

Shields said that a group of residents opposing the sale had been formed. He held in his hand a list with the names and addresses of 17 residents. He told Martin he had spoken with more than one attorney about representing the group, but yet to retain one. Shields asked the judge for time for the group to prepare their case.

Bush protested, pointing out that the public had been properly notified of the hearing via a legal notice published March 11 in the Suburban Life newspaper. There had been adequate time “to allow objectors to get their ducks in a row,” he told the court. “There needs to be more than [them simply saying today], 'We object.'”

Bush argued that the objections of a handful of residents should not outweigh “an overwhelming amount of support” for the sale. But then he backed off, perhaps sensing the judge's response. “I'm not trying to strong-arm the court,” Bush said.

Martin acknowledged the evidence of community support in Bush's presentation of the application. “But that is not the standard [the court applies in evaluating the application],” Martin told him.

“Let's put this [hearing] off until March 30,” Bush said, striking a tone of accommodation. “We don't want to hurry this along.”

Shields asked the judge for even more time. The attorney who likely would represent the objectors, a woman whose name he did not give the court, was out of town this week, he said.

Judge Martin then set a hearing for April 3 at 11:15 a.m.

Brad Block, an attorney representing ARP who earlier had introduced himself to Martin as “an observer” of the morning's proceedings, approached the bench.

“Do we anticipate that on April 3 we will have a ruling?” he asked Martin.

“I don't know,” the judge replied.

---

An earlier version of this post incorrectly reported the date of the next scheduled hearing as April 6. We apologize for the error.

New action seeking court approval for park sale draws new opposers and likely a new attorney

The latest effort by the Park District of La Grange to obtain approval to sell a portion of Gordon Park to developer Atlantic Realty Partners was challenged in Cook County circuit court this morning by a new group of objectors who say they likely will be represented by an attorney who also is new to a legal battle that has been going on for nearly a year and a half.

Robert Bush, attorney for the park district, asked Judge Leroy Martin Jr to approve an application filed under an Illinois statute that allows the circuit court to directly approve the sale of parkland if the amount is less than three acres.

Kevin Shields, a former park commissioner, told Judge Martin he spoke for himself and 16 other La Grange residents in opposing the sale. Five of those residents joined Shields in the courtroom today.

Shields has actively opposed the parkland sale since it was first made public in July 2007, but this is the first time he has been a party to legal action against the park district.

Shields told the judge that the group needed time to retain an attorney with whom they had spoken but who was out of town this week. Shields did not identify the attorney, nor did the judge request him to do so.

Also not in the courtroom today was Orlando Coryell, who said he was looking to Shields and other residents to fight the new application.  Coryell said his resources were focused at this time on a separate lawsuit in which he seeks to block the park district from selling the same parcels of parkland under a different Illinois law. Judge Martin also is hearing that case.

Martin set a hearing on the new application for April 6 at 11:15 a.m. at which time the objector's counsel should be present. A status hearing on Coryell's lawsuit is scheduled for Thursday, March 26 at 9:30 a.m. Both hearings will be held in Rm. 2008 of the Daley Center.

Read a related story on issues discussed at the hearing.

Park District is mum on investigation of charges that Gordon Park storage shed housed personal vehicles

The president of the Park District of La Grange Thursday night said its executive director and attorney did the right thing in not making public details of an internal investigation into allegations that a mostly empty maintenance shed in Gordon Park had been used illegally to store personal vehicles owned by employees and possibly other individuals.

"I am fully aware of the situation, I am fully aware of the investigation, and I am fully confident that the response has been handled appropriately," Tim Kelpsas said at the board's regular meeting.

Kelpsas made his remarks to La Grange Today publisher Thom Rae, who told park commissioners at the meeting that a response he received from park district attorney Robert Bush was "unsatisfactory" in explaining how the park district dealt with a possibly criminal situation.

"The unauthorized use of a public garage to store personal vehicles is equivalent to taking money out of the petty cash drawer or taking home a car full of athletic equipment that belongs to the park district," Rae said. "A theft of service is the same as a theft of goods. So I hope you would agree with me that this is not a situation to be taken lightly."

In his remarks to park commissioners, Rae referred to a Jan. 23 letter he sent to executive director Dean Bissias, in which he wrote:

"I am asking for a detailed explanation as to how any personal items came to be stored in that facility, how long that situation existed, and why criminal charges were not sought against the person(s) responsible, as the unauthorized use of public funds and/or resources for personal benefit is, frankly, a theft."

In a written response dated Feb. 16, attorney Bush wrote:

"The allegations have been investigated by the Park District and handled appropriately. It is not the Park District's policy to report on the substance or result of such internal investigations."

Rae said he began his own investigation of the matter even before Kevin Shields, a former park commissioner, first made public the allegations Oct. 27 during a town meeting of the village board of trustees held at Ogden Ave elementary school.

Rae said that Shields already had told him that he had observed two watercraft—a pontoon boat and a motorboat—and a sports car protected by a canvas cover being stored inside the building during a visit to the Gordon Park maintenance shed some weeks earlier. Shields told him that two park district maintenance workers were present but that they would not answer his questions regarding the vehicles.

Before approaching park district officials regarding the allegations, Rae said he wanted to confirm the existence of the vehicles for himself. He said he did so a week before the Odgen Ave school meeting when he and Shields sat in a van truck in the parking lot in front of the shed and watched as park district employees opened one of the shed's large overhead doors when returning a tractor to the shed. Rae said he could readily see what appeared to be a pontoon boat against the shed's rear wall. However, park employees quickly shut the door and left before Rae could approach them, he said.

Kelpsas on Tuesday said that he also attended the Ogden Ave school meeting and heard Shields' allegations.

"I made sure that Dean was fully aware of it right away, immediately following that board meeting that Kevin first mentioned it at," Kelpsas said. "From that point forward I am confident that it was dealt with appropriately."

However, Rae said that when he asked Bissias about the allegations on Oct. 31, four days after the meeting at the Ogden Ave school, Bissias said he was unaware of them, but that he would personally "drive over and have a look" to see what was in the shed.

The following day, according to Rae, both men were at Gordon Park for an "informational walk-around" that the park district was holding in advance of its Nov. 4 referendum, in which the district's voters authorized the sale of 2.82 acres of the park.

Following the walk-around, Rae said he asked Bissias if he had checked the shed. Bissias said that he had not. Rae said he then suggested they look inside the shed together, as they were standing right in front of it. Bissias responded that he did not have keys to the building with him, Rae said.

Rae said he spoke with Bissias about the allegations on a third occasion, some time after the Nov. 4 referendum. This time he met with Bissias and the park district's superintendent of finance, Leynette Kuniej, at their invitation to discuss the district's financial health.

As that meeting was ending, Rae said he once again asked Bissias, while still in the presence of Kuniej, if he had conducted an investigation. This time, Rae said, Bissias confirmed that at least one personal vehicle had been stored in the shed.

In his letter to Bissias, Rae recalled the conversation:

"You replied in the affirmative, saying that you had confirmed that an employee of the district had been storing a watercraft in the shed without authorization, and that the employee had been reprimanded.You declined to identify the employee or divulge the extent of the reprimand, citing privacy in personnel matters."

Rae said that when he asked Bissias if he had found more than one watercraft or an automobile in the shed, Bissias said he did not find any other personal vehicles.

Rae said that the details of his conversations with Bissias as described in the Jan. 23 letter were not challenged or denied in Bush's written response.

Rae said he eventually discussed the matter with an assistant state's attorney for Cook County whom he had contacted regarding another issue. Rae said she advised him to approach the park board of commissioners directly, and to contact her if the board's response was unsatisfactory.

Rae said he subsequently discussed the matter with Kelpsas, who directed him back to Bissias, to whom Rae then sent his Jan. 23 letter.

"I find the response [to that letter] unsatisfactory, and want to request your direct involvement in getting a response that is satisfactory, not just to myself but to the public because I believe what we are dealing with here is not a simple personnel matter but essentially allegations of criminal activity," Rae told park commissioners.

Rae said it was hard for him to believe that the executive director could be unaware that one or more vehicles was being stored for period of at least several weeks in a maintenance shed that was accessed by park employees on almost a daily basis between the time of Shields' initial observation during the summer and his own observation in mid-October.

Also, Rae said it would be quite unusual to put watercraft into storage during summer months, so "there is the possibility that this situation existed for a long time," he said. Rae added that he understood a boat owner could expect to pay about $1,200 just for winter storage.

"It also raises the possibility that they were in there with [Bissias'] consent," he said. "There is also the possibility that they were in fact his vehicles. I think that those possibilities are troubling enough that they deserve a resolution beyond what I have received here."

Kelpsas told Rae that he should continue to direct his inquiries to Bissias. "Please continue to speak with Dean and he will share with you what we can share," Kelpsas said.

Rae pointed out that Bissias "is talking to me through his attorney now, or your attorney. I'm not certain who he represents."

"Whether it is Dean or attorney Bush, it is still the park district speaking," Kelpsas said.

Chris Walsh, one of two other commissioners present at the meeting said he had questions to ask about the investigation but would reserve them for a closed session of the board.

"I take it that this matter is considered internal in the sense that it deals, at least in part, with personnel," he said. "Since personnel-related matters are appropriate for discussion within executive session, if we go into executive session tonight I will be asking a few questions about this particular matter."

The board did go into executive session at the close of the regular session. Rae later said he is waiting to hear if park officials will have anything new to offer as a result.

Rae also said that Bush's letter did contain an invitation to accompany Bissias on a belated inspection of the shed in order to prove that no personal vehicles were being stored there now. Rae said he already had confirmed on his own that the vehicles had been removed.

The shed has been little used for park district purposes since a new maintenance facility on East Ave was built a few years ago. In fact, the shed sits on a portion of Gordon Park that the park district hopes to sell to Atlantic Realty Partners for inclusion in its planned redevelopment of the adjacent former Rich Port YMCA property. The mixed residential and commercial project would be called La Grange Place.

Monday's village board meeting is canceled

The regular meeting of the La Grange village board of trustees scheduled for Monday, March 23, has been canceled.

The next regular meeting is scheduled for Monday, April 13, at 7:30 p.m. in the Village Hall auditorium.

Feds approve $3.2 million to pay off parking structure

The Federal Highway Administration has authorized $3.2 million in federal transportation funds to retire the outstanding debt financing on the municipal parking structure behind Village Hall, La Grange officials said today.

The monies will be processed through the Illinois Department of Transportation in the form of reimbursements of construction costs. Receipt of the funds is expected in three to four months.

Village officials offered special thanks to retired U.S. Representative William O. Lipinski, who they said "solicited infrastructure projects from the Village and supported the inclusion of the parking structure in the final transportation bill."

They also recognized Lipinski's son, Daniel, the district current Congressman, "for his continued legislative support of the Village's parking structure project, and his efforts to facilitate the reimbursement process."

Library trustees debated politics of park resolution

Three trustees who Tuesday night voted against a motion that equally split the La Grange Public Library board said they believed drafting and adopting a resolution in support of efforts by the Park District of La Grange to sell a portion of Gordon Park was inappropriate because it would inject the library into a "political situation" that has divided the community also nearly in half.

On the other side, three trustees supported the idea of a resolution backing the park district, in part because it would affirm the decision of the district's voters, who in November approved the sale by a margin of 55 to 45 percent. But as no resolution had been drafted prior to Tuesday's meeting, it was unclear exactly how their support would be expressed.

Trustee Caroline Coryell, who attended Tuesday's meeting via telephone from her bed at the Manor Care nursing home, where she is recuperating from back surgery, opposed taking any stance on the park sale because she believed it would be construed as "a political statement."

If any of her fellow trustees had concerns about a conflict of interest resulting from the fact that Coryell's husband, Orlando, has stymied the sale of the park land with a lawsuit he filed in December, it was not mentioned. No one suggested Mrs. Coryell recuse herself from voting.

While the lawsuit was referenced obliquely by Tim Kelpsas, president of the park district, in his personal appeal for the library board's support, he said a resolution would be useful primarily in a separate court action undertaken earlier this month by attorneys for the park district: an application asking the circuit court to directly approve sale of the parkland under a statute different than the one at issue in the lawsuit.

Kelpsas also noted that resolutions supporting the sale already have been adopted by village trustees and the District 102 school board.

"I don't know that it is appropriate for us, regardless of the fact that the village board, which is more political, and the schools, which could care less, may have passed resolutions," Coryell said.

Trustee Mary Nelson agreed with Coryell. "We have constituents here in the library who may not be in favor of this resolution and we do represent all members of the public, so I personally feel that we should not make this resolution," she said. 

Trustee Steve Wolf also opposed taking a position on the sale. "The public's vote should stand [on its own]," Wolf said. "We are a library board. We should be making decisions based upon our patrons who come here. It's not our mission to make resolutions for other boards."

On the other side, board vice president Jane Byczek voiced support for a resolution, saying it would affirm the November referendum.

"What [the park district is] asking us to say is that we support what the people of La Grange have already voted for," Byczek said. "I think we have gotten to the point in this community that what is going on with the park district is affecting all of our tax dollars. So we can say it's political or it's not political—it's all semantics."

Trustee Bill Coffee agreed with Byczek. "I do not see it as a political decision or a political issue," he said. "I think it is an issue that has already been resolved by the public. They voted on the referendum and there is no reason this should be held up. I think we as a library board should support it."

After consulting the board's bylaws to confirm that her eligibility, president Becky Spratford cast her vote for a resolution, resulting in the 3-to-3 deadlock.

Spratford explained her support in visceral terms. She compared the park district's difficulties in getting approval for its sale to the challenges faced by her board a few years ago when seeking approval for construction of the new library.

"We had similar things happen to us," she said. "I'm feeling it again. Remember when we went before the Plan Commission and [those who opposed them] tried to take away everything that we had done and worked so hard for? It made me so angry. We could have been derailed very easily from building this library—we almost were—and I am feeling it very much."

Because of the vote was deadlocked, Spratford said the board would reconsider a resolution at its next regular meeting on April 16, when she hopes all seven trustees will be in attendance. That would make Rose Taylor, who was absent Tuesday night, a potential tiebreaker.

Tom Beyer, a village resident and one of two attorneys representing Orlando Coryell in his lawsuit, addressed the board following Tuesday's vote. He cautioned the trustees about "imposing yourself into a court proceeding where at least three counts [allege] that the park district didn't follow the law" in conducting its referendum and a subsequent public auction in which developer Atlantic Realty Partners was the sole bidder for the parkland.

"Without making any determination on whether they followed the law, you're going to support them anyway," Beyer said to those trustees who favored a resolution.

If the library board violated the law during its efforts to build the new facility, Beyer said, it too "should have been derailed." He was quick however to point out that he was making no such allegation.

Library board split on request to back parkland sale

Trustees of the La Grange Public Library Tuesday night split 3-to-3 in voting whether to draft and adopt a resolution supporting the sale of a portion of Gordon Park to developer Atlantic Realty Partners (ARP).

The vote was taken at the request of the Park District of La Grange, which has filed an application asking a Cook County circuit court judge to directly approve the sale of two parcels totaling 2.82 acres that adjoin the former Rich Port YMCA site at La Grange Rd and Ogden Ave. If the sale is approved, ARP would combine all three parcels in a major mixed-use development known as La Grange Place.

The boards of both the Village of La Grange and Elementary School District 102 already have adopted similar resolutions.

Library trustees Jane Byczek, William Coffee and Becky Stratford voted in favor a resolution; trustees Caroline Coryell, Mary Nelson and Steve Wolf opposed it. A seventh trustee, Rose Taylor, was not in attendance at Tuesday night's regular board meeting.

There was no actual resolution for trustees to consider, so the vote was little more than a straw poll to judge support for drafting the document.

Tim Kelpsas, president of the park district board, made a personal appeal for the library board's support of a resolution. Tom Beyer, a La Grange resident, offered a counter-argument in opposition.

Beyer also is one of two attorneys representing resident Orlando Coryell in a lawsuit challenging the park district's effort to sell the 2.82 acres following a public auction Jan. 8 in which ARP was the sole bidder. The lawsuit is separate from the sale application filed earlier this month by attorneys for the park district, although Judge Leroy Martin Jr is hearing both cases.

Orlando and Caroline Coryell are husband and wife. There was no discussion Tuesday night as to whether Mrs. Coryell should recuse herself from voting in light of her husband's lawsuit.

Because of the tie vote, another vote on the resolution will be scheduled for the library board's next regular meeting April 16, Stratford, who also serves as the board's president, said.

Details of trustees' discussion regarding the proposed resolution can be accessed here.

Township seminars to focus on assessment appeals

The Cook County Board of Review will conduct two assessment appeal seminars for Lyons Township residents.

The first seminar will be held on Saturday, April 4, 2009 beginning at 10:00 a.m. The second seminar will be held on Thursday, April 9, 2009 at 10:00 a.m. and again at 7:00 p.m.

Both seminars will be conducted at the Lyons Township Hall, 6404 Joliet Rd., Countryside.

Village board formally supports Gordon Park sale

The La Grange village board of trustees Monday night approved a resolution supporting the sale by the Park District of La Grange of a portion of Gordon Park to developer Atlantic Realty Partners (ARP).

The resolution was affirmed by the three trustees in attendance—Mike Horvath, Mark Kuchler and Jim Palermo—as well as village president Elizabeth Asperger. Trustees Mark Langan, Tom Livingston and Barb Wolf were not present, but Asperger read two letters in support of the resolution that she said were from Langan and Livingston.

A memo from village manager Bob Pilipiszyn that accompanied the resolution said that the board's support had been formally requested by the park district, which he wrote "intends to offer our resolution to the trial court in support of its defense against claims raised in the lawsuit" filed by La Grange resident Orlando Coryell, who is seeking to block the sale of two parcels from Gordon Park totaling 2.82 acres. The sale was authorized by voters in a Nov. 4 referendum. ARP subsequently was the sole bidder in a public auction of the parcels held Jan. 8.

Tim Kelpsas, president of the park district board of commissioners, was present Monday night and publicly asked the board for its support. He confirmed the park district's intent to use present the resolution in court, but the Illinois statute he cited—70 ILCS 1253/1—is not the one at issue in Coryell's lawsuit. Instead, it is the statute under which the park district last week launched a new, parallel legal effort to gain court approval of the sale.

Kelpsas said the park district would be asking other local taxing bodies, including the library board and school districts to adopt similar resolutions.

Two La Grange residents, William Dobias and Kevin Shields, also addressed board members, asking them not to support the resolution. Both men have actively opposed the sale of parkland to ARP since it was first proposed in July 2007.

"A political quagmire has developed around the park district sale that the village board would do well to avoid," Dobias said, reading from prepared remarks.

"What you are doing is making a political statement to be used in a court of law, and I don't think village trustees were elected to do items of that kind," Shields said.

Trustee Palermo said he shared Shields concern and asked village attorney Mark Burkland to explain what value a "political declaration" would have to a trial court.

"Only the trial judge can determine what weight or substance to give a resolution like this," Burkland said. But having picked up earlier on Kelpsas' oblique reference to the statute at issue in the park district's newest legal effort, Burkland said, "The president of the park district did mention that they are attempting to show that the sale of this property is in the public's best interest, which is a statutory standard."

Trustee Palermo proposed three "modest" amendments to the resolution, one of which was adopted. The word "strongly" was stricken from a sentence that said the village "strongly supports the sale".

"I think that strongly is too strong a word," Palermo said. He noted that voters split 55 to 45 percent in November's referendum.

"In recognition of the charged issue that this remains, I think we need to temper [our support] somewhat," Palermo said.

Trustee Horvath agreed. "I'm strongly in favor of this [resolution] the way it is from my personal point of view, but I can understand that your intent is to represent the community," he said.

Trustee Kuchler also had no problem reducing the strength of support indicated, but balked when Palermo suggested mentioning the actual voter results in the text of the resolution.

"That paragraph isn't talking about the residents strongly supporting the sale of the parkland, it is talking about the village—meaning, I assume, the village board," Kuchler said.

For Asperger, her decision to place the resolution on the agenda represents a departure from her long-held public position of keeping the village board out of the park sale controversy.

On Aug. 27, 2007, when the audience of village board meeting was packed with a number of residents angered over the park district's initial announcement of its contract with ARP, she stifled public comment on the sale, reminding those in attendance:

"The park district is a separate governmental entity [...] with its own elected board of commissioners. The decision to sell parkland is solely within their responsibility.

"With specific requests or concerns with respect to the land sale itself, I encourage you to talk to your park district commissioners at a park district meeting."

Langan's written support of the parkland sale and ARP's redevelopment of the former Rich Port YMCA site, expressed in his capacity as a village trustee, also is a departure from the stance he took throughout the village's hearings on and, in April 2008, approval of the developer's application. Langan routinely recused himself from those discussions and votes out of concern that his employment by the YMCA of Metropolitan Chicago would constitute a conflict of interest.