A trial that was scheduled to begin Friday morning in Cook County Circuit Court to determine whether or not the Park District of La Grange can sell 2.82 acres of Gordon Park to developer Atlantic Realty Partners (ARP) today was postponed after attorneys for La Grange Friends of the Park, a group of residents who oppose the sale, filed a motion asking Judge Susan Fox Gillis to clarify what legal standards she will apply in evaluating the Park District's latest sale application.
Gillis said she will consider the motion at a hearing she scheduled for Aug. 4, by which time attorneys for the Park District are expected to have filed a response.
A new trial date then likely will be set, although not before late
August because some of the attorneys on both sides told the judge that they will be
out of town on vacations during the two weeks following the next
hearing.
The 15-page motion presented today does not present arguments in support of the Friends' stance against sale of the parkland, but rather attempts "to objectively provide the relevant law for this matter, state the current posture, and request that the Court give guidance on how [it] intends to proceed," according to the text of the document.
In an unusual display of agreement during this otherwise contentious legal battle over the proposed sale, which has played out for nearly three years, Rob Bush, general counsel for the Park District, told Gillis he supported the Friends' clarification motion.
"They got it right," Bush said, citing specifically a conclusion in the motion that puts the burden on the Friends' attorneys to show that park commissioners have no rational basis for determining that the 2.87 acres was no longer useful or needed as parkland, as required by the Illinois Park District Code.
The proposed shift in the burden of proof is at odds with a stance taken by Judge Gillis at a previous hearing held June 28, in which she said it was incumbent upon the Park District to prove that its determination was neither "arbitrary or capricious."
Tom Beyer, one of three attorneys representing the Friends, welcomed Bush's support of the motion but cautioned against his opponent's enthusiasm.
Beyer noted that the conclusions contained in the motion also expressed belief that the provision of the Park District Code directing the court to determine whether or not the sale of parkland was in the public interest, and further directing the court to set the terms and conditions of the sale, was unconstitutional because courts are expressly prohibited from engaging in what are considered to be legislative duties reserved for municipalities and other local entities such as park districts.
That conclusion also runs counter to a ruling Gillis made, also at the June 28 hearing, rejecting a motion from the Friends specifically asking her to find the statute unconstitutional.
Beyer said he hoped the clarification motion would provide the judge with additional analysis and insight.
"It's the responsibility of every attorney to provide a judge with all the available information needed to render a sound decision," Beyer said. "You can't assume a judge already knows everything."
Comments