the daily

Developer provides details of its proposal to settle legal battle over sale of Gordon Park acreage

Atlantic Realty Partners (ARP) would purchase only three-quarters of an acre of land in Gordon Park from the Park District of La Grange and significantly scale back the density of its redevelopment of the former Rich Port YMCA site under a proposal the developer has offered in hopes of ending litigation that has held up the project, known as La Grange Place, for the past two years.

ARP President Richard Aronson Monday said he was awaiting a response to the proposal from La Grange Friends of the Park (LGFP), a group of park district residents who are opposing the park district’s latest petition asking a Cook County judge to directly approve the sale of 2.82 acres of parkland to the developer.

If ARP and the residents group come to terms on an agreement, Aronson said he will then meet with park district officials “to convince them that [accepting the compromise] is in their best interest.”

Roughly half of the 30-some LGFP members met Saturday morning to review and discuss ARP’s proposal, and reached a consensus on a response, Tom Beyer, one of three attorneys representing the group, said following the meeting.

Beyer declined to provide details but said he would release a written copy of LGFP’s full response later this week, after all its members have had a chance to review it.

The three-quarter parcel ARP would purchase—.78 acres to be precise—would be used to square off the northeastern corner of the former Y parcel, Aronson said. The land currently is occupied partially by maintenance sheds no longer needed by the park district.

ARP would forego its original plans to purchase an additional 2.04-acre parcel, consisting of a grassy slope and picnic grove, which is located north of the .78-acre parcel and Y parcel and is directly east of the La Grange Tower condominiums.

The developer had intended to construct 23 town homes on the 2.04-acre. No town homes are included in the revised development plan offered by ARP, Aronson said.

Also, ARP would reduce from 283 to 236 the number of units in a mid-rise apartment complex it plans to build, and would reduce the amount of commercial space in the project from 33,000 to approximately 18,000 square feet.

Downsizing the scale of the development is not intended to appease LGFP, Aronson said, although some of its members had reservations about the size of the original development plans approved last year by village trustees. The density of the development and the traffic it would generate were among chief concerns expressed by many village residents who attended plan commission hearings on the project.

Even if ARP were able to proceed with purchase of the entire 2.82 acres it originally sought, the project likely would be modifed to address the realities of a currently weak real estate market, Aronson said.

Click here to see a related story and video.

Public to get details of Gordon Park settlement talks this week, says attorney for residents group

An attorney for La Grange Friends of the Park LGFP), a group of residents opposed to the sale of 2.82 acres from Gordon Park to developer Atlantic Realty Partners (ARP), said Saturday that his group this week would issue a written copy of its latest proposal to end litigation that for two years has held up redevelopment of the former Rich Port YMCA site at La Grange Rd and Ogden Ave.

Tom Beyer, one of three attorneys, all La Grange residents, who represent LGFP, said that half of the groups 30-odd members met Saturday morning to consider a settlement scenario put forth by ARP.

Beyer said the group had reached a consensus on a response but wanted to circulate a written copy of their position to all members of the group for input before releasing the document to the public.

Beyer said he hoped to make the proposal available to anyone interested as early as Wednesday.

While he would not discuss details of the negotiations with ARP, Beyer indicated that LGFP and the developer are close to having an agreement in principle, but said that no final settlement was possible without the cooperation of the Park District of La Grange and village officials.

For more details on the negotiations. the legal action and what's at stake, watch the video provided below.

Pawnbroker files lawsuit against village, landlord

A Berwyn man whose plans to open a pawnshop in downtown La Grange were derailed when village officials withdrew their support in response to an outcry from residents and business owners, filed a lawsuit Friday against both the village and his landlord, Chicago Breakings News, an online news service of the Tribune company, reported this evening.

In his lawsuit, filed Friday in Cook County Circuit Court, pawnbroker Andrew Grayson, seeks an amount greater than $50,000 from the village plus legal costs, the news service reported. Grayson also is seeking to recover a security deposit and rent totaling $15,470 from his landlord, Fifth Avenue Properties.

Grayson has not responded to a phone message left this evening by La Grange Today.

The lawsuit should come as no surprise to village officials. Legal action was threatened in two letters they received in late June and early July as the village plan commission and village trustees considered and eventually adopted changes to the downtown zoning ordinance which effectively prevented Grayson from following through on plans to open All-Star Jewelry & Loan at 71 S La Grange Rd, just south of Village Hall.

However, the inclusion of Grayson's landlord as a defendant is surprising because Fifth Avenue owner John Brannen initially was on Grayson's side against the village, co-signing the two letters in which the men proposed the village pay $250,000 or face a "likely lawsuit."

Village trustees July 7 met in a special closed session to discuss a response but made no public statement. A review of disbursements made by the village since that meeting disclosed no payments to either Grayson or Brannen.

Negotiations between attorneys for the parties apparently broke down when a settlement figure could not be agreed upon, Chicago Breaking News reported.

Grayson and Brannen apparently parted ways sometime during the summer. Shawn Temple of Belcaster Realty Group, who initially served as a consultant and representative to both men, last month said that Brannen "decided to move on."

Grayson in June said he felt betrayed by village officials, whom he said initially embraced his idea for the pawnshop. Grayson was issued a business license in May.

But after Village Hall in early June was besieged by dozens of residents and business owners, angered upon learning of Grayson's plans, officials did an about-face, hastily drafting changes to the downtown zoning code that outlawed several previously allowed business uses, including pawnshops. The ban applied to Grayson because he had not yet been issued a building permit.

At hearings held by the village plan commission June 29 several residents expressed concern that that the pawnshop would attract an undesirable clientele and spark a crimewave throughout the village from which stolen goods would conceivably be sold to the pawnshop.

But some residents also expressed sympathy for Grayson and were critical of village officials for the way the matter was handled. Some said they supported the idea of reimbursing Grayson for money he spent related to the store, including hiring an architect and making initial rent payments.

A status hearing for Grayson's lawsuit is scheduled for Feb. 24, 2010 before Judge Ronald F. Bartkowicz.

Park board meets tonight but without Gordon Park settlement terms it wanted from sale objectors

Attorneys for La Grange Friends of the Park (LGFP) this morning said they will not provide the Park District of La Grange with a written settlement proposal on which park commissioners can act at its regular monthly meeting scheduled for tonight.

Park Board President Tim Kelpsas Tuesday told the Suburban Life newspaper he hoped LGFP would provide a document detailing a proposal presented verbally to park district attorneys in a meeting held Sept. 21 in the chambers of Cook County Circuit Court Judge Susan Fox Gillis, who convened the closed session in hopes the parties could reach a settlement and avoid a possibly lengthy trial over the park district's latest petition to sell 2.82 acres of Gordon Park to developer Atlantic Realty Partners (ARP).

Upon hearing this morning that no document was forthcoming, Kelpsas said he was "frustrated" by the news.

Tom Beyer and Mark Wohlberg, attorneys for LGFP, a group of some two dozen residents who filed objections to the parkland sale, this morning said it would serve no purpose to reiterate the group's original proposal in light of a counterproposal it received last week from ARP.

While Beyer would not elaborate on the specifics of the counterproposal, he said it contained "creative thinking" on ARP's part that could significantly alter the scenario initially proposed by the residents group.

Beyer said LGFP was awaiting the outcome of ongoing talks between ARP and village officials regarding the viability of the developer's ideas for reshaping its plans for La Grange Place, a major mixed-use redevelopment of the former Rich Port YMCA parcel.

Now that the settlement talks have expanded to include ARP and the village, "it's like a game of Chinese checkers," Beyer said. "ARP has presented its ideas to the village so, right now, we are waiting on the village to move its ball."

Under plans approved in April 2008 by village trustees, ARP intended to incorporate the 2.82 acres of Gordon Park adjacent to the Y site INTO the project, which as currently designed would comprise 284 mid-rise apartments, 23 townhomes and 30,000 of commercial space.

But ARP President Richard Aronson said Tuesday that his company now was looking to reduce the scope and cost of the project to reflect a retracted real estate market.

In that light, LGFP's original proposal, which would have ARP purchase the development rights to the park acreage rather than the land itself and transfer its density allowance to the Y site, was "not workable," Aronson said.

"Densifying the project doesn't make sense," Aronson said.

ARP's involvement in the settlement discussions was encouraged by Judge Gillis during a second round of talks between the judge and attorneys for both LGFP and the park district held Oct. 5.

Immediately following those talks, LGFP's attorneys gave the park district's attorneys copies of an email Beyer had sent to ARP that he said reflected the specifics of the verbal proposal made in the closed-chamber meeting two weeks earlier.

ARP at that time had not yet responded with its counterproposal. Beyer said he hoped the document would prod park district officials to more actively participate in the negotiations, as no discussions had taken place between the parties outside of court.

Kelpsas this morning said the park district did not respond to the document because it was not specifically directed to the park district and did not structure the proposal in a manner that indicated what specifically was being asked of the park district. Thus, it was not a document on which park commissioners could act, the park board president said.

Kelpsas also said that the Suburban Life story did not accurately quote a statement he made to reporter Joe Sinopoli and gives readers the mistaken impression that he and other park officials are unaware of the general substance of LGFP's proposal.

"One of our very strong board values is that each Park District of La Grange board member is fully aware of our attorney communications and any receipt of information," Kelpsas said.

With no document on which to act at tonight's meeting, Kelpsas said he was not certain if the park board would meet in closed session to discuss the settlement negotiations.

The park board held its last meeting Sept. 17, four days prior to the first round of settlement talks.

Park commissioners at this point may feel as if they are "outside looking in through a window" at the negotiations ongoing between LGFP, ARP and the village, Beyer said.

But that is a choice park officials made on their own, Wohlberg, his co-counsel said. 

Park officials had ample opportunity to present their own alternative to LGFP's proposal in the month that has passed since it was verbally presented to their attorneys in Judge Gillis' chambers, Wohlberg said.

"Our proposal was met then with a brick wall and nothing appears to have changed," Wohlberg said.

At that most recent hearing this past Monday, John Shapiro, an attorney for the park district, told Judge Gillis that a settlement with LGFP was not likely. He urged her instead to proceed with a hearing on the merits of the park district's petition.

Park board looks for details of settlement proposal; Residents' attys say document was given weeks ago

The president of the Park District of La Grange board of commissioners this week said he was still waiting for details of a settlement proposal from La Grange Friends of the Park (LGFP), a residents group that filed an objection in Cook County Circuit Court to the park district's latest petition seeking approval to sell 2.82 acres of Gordon Park to developer Atlantic Realty Partners (ARP).

The news surprised LGFP's attorneys, who said they provided the park district's attorneys more than two weeks ago with a written document that contained details of the settlement proposal.

“The only information we have heard from the objectors is in court," Park Board President Tim Kelpsas told the Suburban Life newspaper in a story published in Tuesday's edition. "We have no idea what the proposal is, and we very much wish they would send it to us before the Thursday (Oct. 22 Park) Board meeting."

Bob Ashby, park board vice president, in a conversation Monday night with La Grange Today said that he, too, was waiting for some communication from LGFP.

"All I know about the proposal is what I read in The Doings," Ashby said, referring to a story published in that newspaper earlier this month.

Tom Beyer, an attorney for the residents group, said that during a court hearing held Oct. 5 in which Judge Susan Fox Gillis directed attorneys for both sides to involve ARP in settlement negotiations, park district attorneys Rob Bush and John Shapiro each were handed copies of a memo Beyer said he emailed to ARP containing details of the settlement proposal.

"It was a written summary of what we had verbally presented to Bush and Shapiro two weeks earlier during our meeting with the judge," Beyer said, referring to a closed-chamber session held Sept. 21 in which all of the attorneys met with Gillis in their initial settlement talk.

Ashby and another park commissioner, Mary Ellen Penicook, were present in the courtroom during the Oct. 5 hearing, along with Dean Bissias, the park district's executive director.

"We expected their attorneys would forward the document to them," Beyer said.

The document, a copy of which was obtained by La Grange Today and can be read by clicking here, proposes that ARP purchase development rights to the acreage from Gordon Park rather than the land itself, and then transfer the density allowance to the adjacent former Rich Port YMCA site, on which ARP has plans approved by the village to build a major mixed residential and commercial development known as La Grange Place.

La Grange Today on Tuesday emailed a copy of the document to both Kelpsas and Ashby, and asked each of them if, given their earlier statements, they had been unaware of the document's existence.

"No, you are not correct," Kelpsas said in an email response. "One of our very strong Board values is that each Park District of La Grange Board member is fully aware of our attorney communications and any receipt of information."

When asked in a subsequent email how that answer reconciled with his statement to Suburban Life, Kelpsas did not respond.

Ashby did not respond at all to the email inquiry, nor to a followup phone call to his home on Tuesday night.

Richard Aronson, president of ARP, Tuesday said that he had received the copy of the document emailed to him by Beyer, and that he had responded with a counterproposal, the details of which Aronson would not discuss other than to say that LGFP's proposal was "not workable" because "densifying the project doesn't make sense" given the currently weak real estate market.

"We are looking to reduce the scope and cost of the project," Aronson said.

Beyer Wednesday confirmed that he had received Aronson's counterproposal in verbal form last week during a phone conversation the two men had. Beyer also would not divulge its details, but said he had received nothing in writing concerning the counterproposal.

Beyer said he informed Shapiro of his conversation with Aronson during a court hearing held this past Monday. Shapiro appeared surprised to learn about the existence of a counterproposal, Beyer said.

At that hearing Monday, Shapiro told Judge Gillis that a settlement with LGFP was not likely. He urged her to proceed with a hearing on the merits of the park district's petition.

Beyer said Aronson made no mention in their conversation of having talked with park commissioners or their attorneys about the counterproposal. But Beyer said that Aronson did say he had been in talks with Village Manager Bob Pilipiszyn and Patrick Benjamin, the village's director of community development.

Beyer also said that ARP's attorney, Brad Block, had contacted him earlier to ask if the developer could discuss the contents of LGFP's proposal with representatives of the YMCA.

Jim Palermo, a village trustee credited by Beyer with suggesting the idea of having ARP purchase the development rights, said Monday he has had no communication with any park district officials regarding settlement talks.

Village President Elizabeth Asperger Monday said she had only an informal conversation regarding the matter with Penicook, whom Asperger said initiated the discussion.

The park board has not met in any formal session since Sept. 17, four days before the initial closed-session settlement talks. Its next scheduled meeting is tonight at 7:30 p.m. at the recreation center, located at 536 East Ave.

ARP offers counterproposal in Gordon Park talks

The president of Atlantic Realty Partners (ARP) today said that his company had offered an alternative scenario to a settlement proposal made by La Grange Friends of the Park (LGFP), a residents group that opposes plans by the park District of La Grange to sell 2.82 acres of Gordon Park to the developer.

Richard Aronson would not reveal the specifics of the counterproposal but said the scenario offered by LGFP, in which ARP would purchase only the development rights to the park acreage, not the land itself, and transfer the density allowance to the adjacent former Rich Port YMCA site is "not workable."

"Densifying the project doesn't make sense," Aronson said. 

Under a plan for the project, known as La Grange Place, approved by village trustees in April 2008, ARP would construct 284 mid-rise apartment units situated mostly on the Y site and partly on the adjoining park acreage. Twenty-three two-story townhomes would be built on parkland north of the Y site. Some 30,000 square feet of commercial space would be built solely on the Y site.

Under a scenario involving purchase and transfer of development rights, the density allowance for both the Y site and parkland conceivably could be combined on the Y site, possibly resulting in an increased number of apartment units. The townhomes would not be built under that scenario.

Increasing the density on the Y site does not appeal to ARP given the downturn in the economy since the project was approved more than two years ago, Aronson said.

"We are looking to reduce the scope and cost of the project," he said, given the currently weak real estate market.

Aronson said that his counterproposal is contingent on a number of issues being resolved between the developer, the park district, the residents group and the village.

Tom Beyer, an attorney for LGFP and Tim Kelpsas, president of the park board, were not immediately available for comment regarding ARP's counterproposal.

LGFP formally objected in Cook County Circuit Court to a petition filed earlier this year by the park district asking judge Susan Fox Gillis to directly approve the sale of the 2.82 acres to ARP. The settlement talks were initiated by Gillis in hopes of avoiding a lengthy and costly trial.

An attorney for the park district Monday told Gillis that a settlement was not likely and asked her schedule a hearing on the merits of the petition.

PDLG attorney asks judge to proceed with hearing on Gordon Park sale without discovery or testimony

Attorneys for the Park District of La Grange Monday told Cook County Circuit Court Judge Susan Fox Gillis they did not believe a settlement likely would be reached with a residents group that opposes the sale of 2.82 acres of Gordon Park and asked the judge to proceed with plans for a hearing on the Park District's petition to the land to developer Atlantic Realty Partners (ARP).

The request surprised attorneys for the residents group, La Grange Friends of the Park LGFP, who said the Park District had not responded to a written settlement proposal they gave to its attorneys two weeks ago.

John Shapiro, an attorney for the Park District, also asked Gillis to deny requests for discovery under which the Park District would have to provide LGPF attorneys with documents and testimony related to the determination made by park commissioners that the parkland it wants to sell is no longer needed or useful for park purposes.

Tom Beyer, an attorney for LGFP, called Shapiro's position absurd. How could Judge Gillis make an informed and competent ruling based on a finding of fact if certain relevant facts could not be obtained and presented, he asked.

Shapiro told the judge he based his argument on an interpretation of a statute in the Park District Code governing a petition sale involving fewer than three acres of parkland, as is the case at hand. He said the language in the statute requires only that the judge consider the petition and listen to objectors before making a ruling in the public interest. Court rules that apply in the case of a standard lawsuit, which allow for discovery and expert testimony, do not apply in such a hearing, Shapiro argued.

Beyer responded that civil procedures should not be waived in any hearing. If the Park District claims that the parkland it wants to sell is a magnet for drug activity, and the objectors claim it is not, expert testimony from the chief of police is necessary to determine the facts, Beyer argued.

Gillis said she wanted to give the matter further consideration and directed attorneys for each side to submit written briefs within two weeks detailing their positions. She said she would hold a hearing specific to the court procedures on Nov. 19.

Pilipiszyn explains the workings of village government in response to invitation from LG Citizens Council

Village Manager Bob Pilipiszyn last week addressed the La Grange Citizens Council at its monthly meeting with a talk on the workings of village government.

Pilipiszyn is the first of several local government officials the council plans to host in coming months.

The response of village officials this summer to citizen concerns about a proposed downtown pawnshop and issues arising from a number of recent  instances where village trustees have approved zoning variances counter to the recommendations of the zoning board of approval were among the examples Pilipiszyn cited in explaining how the village manager and staff work closely with the village board to address the concerns of residents and business owners.

Pilipiszyn also offered some examples of how the economic downturn has impacted the village's finances, but not to the point of alarm.

Click here to view video segments of Pilipiszyn's entire presentation, along with his response to questions and comments from members of the council.

ARP willing to explore 'viable alternatives' to end Gordon Park lawsuit and allow Y site redevelopment

Atlantic Realty Partners President Richard Aronson today said he was willing to explore "viable alternatives" that could end two years of litigation over the proposed sale of acreage from Gordon Park and allow his Georgia-based company to proceed with redevelopment of the former Rich Port YMCA site.

Aronson's willingness to participate complies with a wish expressed Monday by Cook County Circuit Court Judge Susan Fox Gillis, who said she hoped the developer's involvement would help forge a settlement between the Park District of La Grange, which has petitioned the judge to approve the sale to ARP of 2.82 of acres of Gordon Park, and La Grange Friends of the Park, a group of some two dozen residents who oppose the sale.

If progress towards an agreement is not evident by Oct. 19, Gillis said she will schedule the matter for trial.

Gillis' attempt to push the park district and its opponents into negotiations began Sept. 14 when bickering between their respective attorneys prompted her to order them to attend a pre-trial conference in her chambers the following week.

At that closed meeting, held Sept. 21, attorneys for the residents group put forth a proposal that would have ARP purchase only the development rights to the park acreage instead of taking ownership of the land. Conceivably, the developer could then transfer the development rights to the adjacent Y parcel, on which the village has approved plans to build a 284 unit apartment/condominium complex, along with some 30,000 square feet of commercial space. The project would be called La Grange Place.

Under the residents' scenario, ARP would abandon its plans to build 26 townhomes on the park acreage, but it also likely would pay the park district less than the $4.5 million in cash called for in its contract to buy the land outright.

Any plan involving the purchase and transfer of development rights would require approval of the village, which so far has not been formally invited to participate in the settlement negotiations.

Aronson said that he would not comment on the residents' proposal until he had time to fully comprehend it. But he said his company would respond in time for the judge's Oct. 19 hearing.

Attorneys for the park district declined comment following the Sept. 21 pre-trial conference but reportedly were not receptive to the residents' proposal. Instead, they pushed for sale of the land to proceed as contracted. But they also said the park district would create a fund for future purchases of parkland if and when it becomes available.

Following the pre-trial conference, Gillis directed attorneys for both sides to have discussions with their respective clients and report back to her at a hearing held this past Monday, Oct. 5. 

At Monday's hearing, Tom Beyer, an attorney for the residents group, told the judge they had made an initial contact with ARP's local attorney, Brad Block, who told them no response would be forthcoming until the Yom Kippur holiday had passed.

Beyer also reported that he had a discussion with Jim Palermo, a village trustee, whom he said indicated that he and some other trustees might support a scenario involving the purchase and transfer of development rights.

However, John Shapiro, an attorney for the park district, told the judge that he did not believe a settlement was possible and that she should proceed with plans for a trial.

Beyer then told the judge the park district attorneys apparently had ignored her directive to hold further discussions with park commissioners following the Sept. 14 pre-trial conference as such a meeting, even if closed, would require public notice and no such notice had been issued.

Dean Bissias, park district executive director, confirmed that the park board has not met since its regular scheduled session on Sept. 18, three days before the pre-trial conference.

The judge again met with attorneys for both sides separately on Monday and then emerged to express her wish that ARP be involved in the discussions. ARP is not a party to the lawsuit itself.

Tim Kelpsas, president of the park board, in a story published this week by The Doings newspaper, appeared not to be headed in the direction of a settlement, saying that board members felt obligated to sell the park acreage outright to ARP as authorized by voters in a public referendum held last November.

An attempt to reach Kelpsas today for comment following Aronson's announced decision to join the settlement talks was unsuccessful.

A public auction required by the referendum and held last January, at which ARP was the sole and successful bidder, was voided June 22 by another circuit court judge, Leroy Martin Jr, who ruled that favorable treatment granted ARP by the park district and village gave the developer an unfair advantage over other potential bidders.

Judge Gillis is being asked to approve the sale directly in response to a petition filed by the park district under an Illinois statute separate from the one governing the referendum and auction.

Gillis in June of last year dismissed an earlier and similar petition to sell the same 2.82 acres to ARP when she ruled that the land described in the sales contract included additional acreage comprising a vacated portion of Shawmut Ave that would be restored as a roadway to provide a western entrance from La Grange Rd into the development and Gordon Park. Thus, the total acreage was more than the three acres the court could approve for sale under that statute.

That trial lasted nine months and never addressed the actual merits of the sale itself.

Aronson and ARP also were involved in settlement talks regarding that lawsuit. While they successfully reached an agreement with William Dobias, one of two residents who opposed the first petition, an agreement could not be reached with Orlando Coryell, who ultimately prevailed.

Neither Dobias or Coryell is a party in the hearing of the second petition.

The park district says the vacated roadway is no longer an issue because it was given to the village in exchange for a similar-sized strip of land, consisting of a parking lot along Locust Ave, adjacent to the park.

But because the roadway still benefits the development, the residents group contends that the Shawmut Ave land should still be counted as part of the total transaction.

If settlement talks fail and the matter goes to trial, the question of whether or not the court now has jurisdiction to approve the sale likely will be the first battle in what could once again prove to be a long, drawn out contest.

Closed meeting OK says Cook Co. State's Attorney

A closed meeting of the La Grange village board of trustees held on July 7 to discuss “probable or imminent litigation” satisfied the requirements of the Illinois Open Meetings Act (OMA), the Cook County State's Attorney has determined.

In a letter to the village's attorney, Mark Burkland, dated July 22 and received last week by La Grange Today, Assistant State's Attorney Jim Beligratis wrote that village trustees had sufficient reason to believe that a lawsuit was likely if they voted to approve changes to the village zoning code that would prevent a pawnshop from opening in a storefront just south of Village Hall.

Trustees voted unanimously to adopt the zoning amendments on July 13, six days after the closed session. Consequently, the village refused to issue a building permit to pawnbroker Andrew Grayson even though it had in May granted him a business license to operate his pawnshop, All-Star Jewelry & Loan.

According to Beligratis, the minutes of the closed session, which La Grange officials have not made public, reveal that the village received two letters indicating Grayson and his landlord, John Brannen, "were prepared to file a lawsuit against the village in light of the proposed zoning changes."

In those letters, copies of which were obtained from the village by La Grange Today under the Illinois Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), the two men proposed that the village pay them a total of $250,000 to avoid litigation.

The two men believed they were entitled to the money to partially compensate them for expenses incurred and potential income lost in the event the pawnshop was not allowed to open, the letters said.

In testimony May 27 before the village plan commission, Grayson said he had signed a year lease with Brannen and hired an architect to design his store after receiving his business license and being warmly received by Community Development Director Patrick Benjamin.

Nonetheless, the plan commission recommended adoption of the zoning code amendments, which had been hastily prepared after village officials were besieged by outraged citizens and business owners only after they saw storefront window signs posted by Grayson announcing a July opening.

The timing of the trustees' approval of the zoning changes on July 13 and the closed session held six days earlier was relevant to the State's Attorney's investigation, which was undertaken in response to a request made by La Grange Today Publisher Thom Rae.

Rae questioned the validity of the "probable or imminent litigation" exception to the OMA cited by La Grange trustees after reviewing a 1983 opinion written by then-Illinois Attorney General Neil Hartigan which found the City of Springfield to have misused the same exception when its commissioners met in closed session prior to approving a land annexation over which they likely could be sued.

Hartigan determined that the Springfield closed session was premature, and the exception invalid, because the action upon which any litigation could be based had not yet been taken.

The Cook County State's Attorney considered Hartigan's opinion in conducting its investigation, but determined that it did not apply in the La Grange case.

"We believe it significant that the Attorney General's opinion notes that the attorney for the opponents to the annexation [subsequently approved by Springfield city commissioners] declared that litigation was not contemplated at the time and that there was nothing in the information provided to the Attorney General that would contradict this statement," wrote Belgratis in his letter to Burkland.

Belgratis also noted that while La Grange trustees convened the July 7 closed session prior to approving the zoning changes, they "could reasonably have believed plan commission's recommendations regarding pawnshops would be adopted, thus triggering the threatened lawsuit(s) against the village."

Belgratis wrote that the board's belief could be presumed because, as Burkland had stated in a discussion during the investigation, "the recommendations of the plan commission have been approved by the board of trustees in the overwhelming majority of instances."

His letter also said that the closed meeting minutes "indicate that the ensuing discussion concerned potential legal claims that could be brought by the pawnshop owner and his landlord against the village; the village's potential defenses and the respective strengths and weaknesses of each.The minutes do not reveal that any discussion was held on the issue of whether or not to approve the zoning amendments recommended by the plan commission."

A review of disbursements made by the village during the months of July, August and September, also obtained under a FOIA request, do not indicate that any payments have been made to either Grayson or Brannen, nor to Belcaster Realty Group, which has represented the men in their negotiations with village officials.

While the matter is closed as far as the Cook County State's Attorney is concerned, an inquiry by the Illinois Attorney General into the same closed session is still in process.

Heather Kimmons, an assistant state's attorney in the office of the public access counselor, said last Thursday that Burkland responded in August to a letter of inquiry she wrote July 15. However, staff shortages in her office had delayed further action on the matter, she said.