|
Latest Update -
Posted April 26, 2009
Dear Friends,
Your involvement in
KeepGreenSpaceGreen has helped our community grow one step closer to keeping the
space at Woodridge & Center Drives open space.
Please join me as
KeepGreenSpaceGreen now celebrates our community’s victories to date and
Woodridge’s 50th anniversary of incorporation by having some fun
together and walking peacefully behind our new KeepGreenSpaceGreen banner in the
Memorial Day parade on Monday May 25th from 9 to 11 AM.
The parade will start at
Route 53 & follow Woodridge Dr across Hobson, past the open space land to
memorial park at Janes. Just look for the KGSG banner. We may have a car if we
have elderly participants. The parade theme is “patriotic” –according to each
decade – ours, of course, is Woodridge 2000-2009”. For all the facts (map,
parade rules, fun, etc) check the parade website at:
http://www.vil.woodridge.il.us/living_in_woodridge/anniversary/parade.aspx
Consider signing up on
Woodridge’s email to get updates at:
http://web.vil.woodridge.il.us/cgi-bin/subscribe.htm
It is ok to simply join us
that day but Please return email me if you know for sure you can make it so I
can give the village a confirmed count of participants. I know many of you
are involved in other groups marching-your heart will be with us too.
Many of you know I ran for
the school board in 2007 along side Deb Boyle. She has now won a seat on the
District 99 school board and will be placed in office on May 4th,
2009 at 7:30 PM at the District 99 administrative offices (ASC) at 63rd
and 6301 Springside (at the North end of the football field) Please come join me
in congratulating and welcoming her in her new role as school board member.
An Update on the
land:
As I write this I am happy
to tell you that the land is now in Woodridge’s name as they have paid a court
ordered $14 Million for it. Unfortunately I must also relate that District 99 is
appealing the court’s decision and a new trial is under way in the Appellate
court.
During the North High School
candidate’s forum March 25th, incumbent board member Terry Pavesich
indicated Woodridge paid an additional $6 million over Woodridge’s original $8
million offer for the land and the school District is now “money ahead”.
None the less District 99
lawyers have now apparently gathered 12 other school districts that will be
favored if Woodridge loses the appeal case.
The lawyer’s are now trying
to make this a “Precedent setting case” saying this is the 1st time
one municipality has used eminent domain with another municipality. Why must
they litigate at the expense of our children’s textbooks and computers?
Yours in community
Phil Labak
Update -Posted March 25, 2008
Jury Sets Value at $14,200,000 for
District 99 Property!!
The trial to establish the value of the 45-acre District 99
property in Woodridge that began on Monday, March 17 concluded on March 23. The
jury determined that the property is worth $14,200,000. This valuation is based
on a week's worth of testimony by appraisers and land planners from both sides.
The value that's been established is a fair number that's been
established through multiple appraisals and a jury of our peers. The Village and
Park District are pleased that we are now in a position after three years to
bring the case to a close and appreciates the thoughtfulness of the jury.
Through condemnation, Woodridge was able to protect the property
for public purposes and District 99 received the fair market value for the
property.
Update -
Posted March 24, 2008
District 99 Property Trial
Update
The valuation hearing in the District 99 property
trial is underway. On Tuesday, the jury took a bus trip to visit
the property in the morning. That afternoon the Village put on
two of its witnesses: its land planner and stormwater engineer.
Land Planner Allen Kracower testified regarding the highest and
best use of the property and the reasonable probability of
rezoning the property. Christopher Burke testified as to the
wetland restrictions on the site. The site is encumbered with
approximately eight (8) acres of wetlands and wetland buffers.
Wednesday morning one of the Village's
appraisers, Roger Tibble, testifies as to the highest and best
use of the property and the value of the land. Mr. Tibble
testified that the property's highest and best use of the
property is that is be valued as if it were developed with
single-family detached homes with minimum lot sizes of $2,000
square feet at a value of $10,250,000. The Village's next expert
witness will be Joseph Thouvenell who will also testify as to
the property's value.
The jury was selected on Monday and, once seated,
opening statements were made by both the Village and District
99. The trial is expected to conclude by Monday 03/24/08.
The trial to establish the value of the 45-acre
District 99 property in Woodridge began on Monday, March 17. The
property is a vital part of Town Centre because of its link to
the Park District Community Center, Hawthorne Woods, Lakes
Harriet and Carleton, Village Hall, Library and Post Office. The
property's acquisition is essential in preserving the civic and
open space functions of the Town Centre for future use by the
community. In April 2005, District 99 offered the property for
sale, advertising that it was suited for intensive multi-family
development, a use contrary to the shared forty-year history
between the School District and the Village.
While it was the Village's preference to
negotiate a purchase with District 99, they were unresponsive.
Through condemnation, Woodridge protects the property for public
purposes. The valuation trial ensures that District 99 receives
full value for the property.
The value of the property is being determined based on a legal
concept known as Highest and Best Use. This is not indicative of
how the Village of Woodridge actually thinks the property should
be used or developed. Rather, it reflects how the property might
be developed in a way that is legally permissible, physically
possible, and financially feasible in order to provide the
property owner with the greatest property value.
Early this week the jury was selected and then
toured the site. Since that time, the Village's land planner and
two appraisers testified that the highest and best use of the
property is single family homes on lots no smaller than 12,000
square feet, for a total of approximately 100 homes. The
appraisers valued the property at $10,250,000 and $11,220,000
respectively, or approaching $250,000 per acre. These values
were based on comparable sales of single family home
developments that have occurred in Woodridge.
The Village's stormwater engineer Christopher
Burke and the School District's wetland specialist are in
substantial agreement regarding existing wetlands and required
wetland buffers on the property. The site is encumbered with
approximately eight (8) acres of wetlands and wetland buffers,
reducing the buildable property from 45 acres to 37.
District 99's land planner testified on Thursday
that the highest and best use of the property is a mix of 400
single family homes and townhomes, though he was uncertain as to
how that number of units could practically be built on the
property. The School District's appraiser agreed with the land
planner's assessment of highest and best use and valued the land
at $21,500,000 or nearly $500,000 per acre. In order to achieve
this land value, the appraiser relied mostly on sales
comparisons from high density multi-family developments,
including the apartments at Thornberry Woods, Amli apartments,
and the 12-story condominium complex at Seven Bridges. The
appraiser did not use any single family home sales comparisons
to determine the land value.
Closing arguments will be made on Monday, March
24 and the jury is expected to submit a verdict on the
property's value by the end of the day.
Copied
from the Woodridge E-Newsletter
Below are copies of email updates
from Phil Labak.
Sent September 12, 2006
NEWS UPDATE==> Next court date 10/25/06
Dear Keep
Green Space Green Brainstorming community;
On 9/6/06 Interested citizens attended a very short court session, the judge
granted District 99 the protection order as is common with such court supervised
pretrial negotiations,
No comments on the order were offered by either the judge or either party to the
case.
The next court date is: set for 10-25-06 at 9:30AM
The scheduled action is "to set the traverse"
Our understanding is that a traverse is a general denial of allegations that
have been brought.
We will also be attending District 99's next board meeting set for next Monday
Sept 18th at 7:30PM in the Administrative Services Center at 6301 Springside in
DG.
Yours in community,
Phil Labak, volunteer
www.keepgreenspacegreen.com
Sent September 05, 2006
NEWS
UPDATE==> Join a group to attend 9/6/06 Court - Case Update Below
Dear
Atten District 99 Board Meeting volunteers;
A group of us who have conscientiously followed the court case for well over a
year have collectively decided a group of several citizens should attend court
on Wednesday, September 6th at the DuPage County Courthouse.
Where: 505 N. County Farm Road
Courtroom: 2010 before the honorable Judge Elsner
Time:9:30AM (I suggest you get there at 8:30AM)
PLEASE RETURN EMAIL ME IF YOU CAN ATTEND-We consider this a
serious legal event. We know it will be educational in process and content. We
continue hope for mediation, negotiation and resolution. Our public presence
will be with only the utmost respect for our judicial process.
Recent Chronology
8/22/06 Phil Labak, KGSG volunteer inquires at Woodridge village
administrator's office as to outcome of previous (8/17) Thursday's pretrial
conference and is met with the following response prepared by attorneys:
District 99 has sought a "protection order"-until a ruling on that motion
is entered (on September 6 we have found), there will be no further comment"
KGSG Comment: It is a year and three months since the case was filed and now it
appears D99 has, at this late date, determined it must be protected from
something.
Further, Woodridge attorney's appear to be following D99's modus operandi in
cooperating in keeping it from citizens.
8/23/06 Concerned KGSG volunteers reveal the court file may be reviewed
and copies thereof made. The records are public unless otherwise ordered by the
court.
8/25/06 The courts records are reviewed and noted. A list of all actions
before the court is compiled and reviewed by the concerned KGSG volunteers who
have closely followed the case.
Important Items identified:
-Numerous continuances are on file.
-D99 to file a motion for a protective order to keep Woodridge from
disclosing (the last year and 3 months) settlement discussions and a certain
joint appraisal mentioned as the Polach appraisal that apparently was jointly
obtained by D99 and Woodridge.
-Woodridge to respond to motion by 8/28, D99 to respond to their
response.
-Hearing set for Sept 6, 9:30 AM
-A previous briefing schedule which indicated trial would be set for
5/11/07 is "vacated" (put aside for now?)
8/26 to 8/30/06 Concerned KGSG volunteers discuss and identify need to
review the motion, Woodridge's response to it and D99s response to Woodridges
comments.
8/31/06 A second review of the courts document and a copying of the motion is
done
WR & D99 Responses are not identified in the file.
Important Items identified:
The motion makes it apparent D99 is trying to keep the information and appraisal
from becoming public indicating it will negatively impact the case in trial.
8/31 to 9/4 KGSG concerned citizens discuss whether to attend trial.
Concern is cited at possible negative impact citizen appearance could have. KGSG
concerned citizens decide, hope and pray a group of several concerned citizens
will have no negative impact on their attendance in court
Important issues identified include:
1) Too much money is being wasted on legal* (estimated to be $500,000
shortly for D99 only, not including Woodridge's legal)
2) the apparent arrogance of the Eblen administration in administrative
decisions
3) the failure of the two parties to negotiate a settlement
.
*Additionally, a 9/1 Article in the Woodridge Reporter newspaper indicates D99
is spending more legal dollars. A court ruling determines a board policy
allowing the Superintendent to interpret and determine whether a transfer
between North and South may be made is held to be valid. The article highlights
Superintendent Eblen's decision not to allow a freshman boy to attend North
where the boy's relative is employed. His decision in that case is in direct
conflict with decisions to allow two other students to attend the school where
their relatives currently work in North and South High Schools.
Article indicates only 3 transfers were approved this year. Communications with
concerned citizens indicate more situations are allowed than those noted in the
article. The need for litigation does not appear to be warranted.
Remember, Please return email me if you can attend court with us.
Yours in Community,
Phil Labak, volunteer
www.keepgreenspacegreen.com
Sent August 15, 2006
NEWS
UPDATE==>NEWCASTLE (Proposers of 202 Condo's on the Jubilee site) ATTENDS
WOODRIDGE'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE OPEN HOUSE
Newcastle's President didn't show up at the Monday Aug 14th meeting-he sent one
of his staffers: Marty Jablonski instead.
He attended with Marty Schack, District 99's Building and Grounds (Capital)
staff head. When I noticed his name badge, I couldn't pass the chance to ask a
few questions to get my own first impression. This was this first time Newcastle
has shown their face in over a year.
I asked him if 500,000-$1 Million* is going to get paid to his (Chicago) company
as a result of Newcastle's agreement with District 99 (*$10,000,0000 sales price
x 10% commission=$1M). He flat out told me "no, the district never intended to
have that."
He said the community only got half the story and a lot of misinformation. He
indicated that the District was told to keep quiet ("No Comment") by their
attorneys and the judge. I asked how it was that the community only got half the
story-wasn't Woodridge under the same advise? He said yes but it was information
Woodridge disclosed before the attorney and (eminent domain) judge told
Woodridge and D99 to keep quiet on the matter.
KGSG comment: The reason D99 said nothing is because D99 is slow to move. Ask
Mark Staehlin, district controller-I bet he'd agree D99 is slow to move.
I asked so what is it that didn't get said? He indicated that the District was
only trying to get a valuation for the land to determine if it was enough to
obtain an amount to satisfy their (unspecified) needs. (Alternative sight
purchase?). He indicated D99 NEVER intended to sell the land. And D99's
Marty Schack, listening in, clamored the same thing-D99 NEVER intended to sell
the land. I asked how this could be because it wasn't until August last year
that the District finally passed a resolution indicating they were not selling
the land and bids on the land were being solicited from contractors?
He reassured me they NEVER intended to sell the land. In fact, he indicated that
when D99 realized it wouldn't bring the proceeds to satisfy their (unspecified)
needs, D99 decided to keep the land knowing that the value for undeveloped land
in the area would continue to increase,
KGSG Comment: Click on or type in this Newscastle press release link
currently on their site
www.newcastlelimited.com/april_12_2005.html It is clear D99 and Newcastle
WERE selling this land from the day they were hired April 11th thru the August
resolution (see "History" tab-April 11th.)
He went to say that the District doesn't care at all about the land use. They
care about education. I said that's part of the problem. They are alienating the
1/3 of their constituents (Woodridge) who care very much about how the land is
used.
Of course he said he couldn't comment on the 1978 Superintendent's agreement
that guaranteed the land sale to Woodridge by appraisal if the site wasn't used
for the 3rd school.
I asked "Did you see anything here tonight that you feel might bring resolution
and stop the waste of dollars in legal bills-He told me "it takes two to tango"
I agreed.
KGSG Comment: That is what we told the D99 Board President over a year ago:
"Pick up the phone and call the Mayor of Woodridge" (see 6/10 and 6/17 written
comments presented to the board @
www.keepgreenspacegreen.com in the "History" tab.)
KGSG Final Comment: Newcastle saying they weren't selling the land is as bad as
Mr Jablonski telling me Newcastle doesn't intend to collect $1M on the deal. I
simply don't believe he was at that meeting to do anything except to further his
companies interest in taking $1M from our children's education dollars from D99
and the citizens of Woodridge. Board President Julia Beckman could have
prevented the whole mess if she took Mr Jablonski's advice a year ago and
"tangoed" with Mayor Murphy by picking up the phone and really cared about (our
children's) education by finding a solution.
POINT OF INTEREST:
The lawyers are back in court again in pretrial Motions this Thursday. Pray for
something definitive. Perhaps the judge has learned D99's SLOW modus operandi
and will (finally) go to a trial & that finally moves things along toward
resolution.
==================================================================================================================================
Sent August 15, 2006
NEWS UPDATE:
D99 board
moves toward supporting an IASB (Illinois association of School Board's)
resolution to vote themselves a 1% sales tax increase to give them more money
because they can't get referendums passed.
KGSG Comment: I told the board Monday, "I only have one wallet, when I open it
and take out another dollar, it leaves me with less choices". I said "Maybe the
nature of Education is you just have to keep asking for money but a couple
months ago I pointed out that D99 citizens paid $1.6 million more dollars (when
we paid our real estate bills) than they did the previous year-If the district
is breaking even on the budget, why not take the new money and use it instead?."
Yours in community
Phil Labak, volunteer,
www.keepgreenspacegreen.com
Sent June 17, 2006
Hello
Capital Projects, Associated cost community leaders;
Tonite the board will move to spend $168,000 on pool covers for North and South.
They are indicating $48,000 a year will be saved in energy costs to fund the
purchase and Eblen's staff will be proposing a taking $177k in refinancing
savings from the debt service fund to pay for it. We want the math on the
$48,000.
This project WAS NOT included in the $24,063,000 project list given to us in
November and Eblen's staff goes on to give 2 excuses why it wasn't listed 1) it
has "no net budget impact" (after 3.5 yr payback-if 48,000 is true) 2) They
didn't know the payback and couldn't tell if it would justify the project so
they left it off the list.
Both seem like reasons to put it on the list to me.
On 9/19/05 D99 disclosed expected major capital outlay budget for 05-06
$560,000
Here's the boards performance (priorities) since the 11/16 disclosure of the
$24M list:
#1) 11/21/05 Board awards bid to Vortex for new carpeting in D99 offices $39,995
#2) 2/27/06 Board awards bid for Ball field groomer $14,550
#3) 3/20/06 Board awards bid for new North band uniforms $104,737. This is not
considered capital even though it wasn't budgeted-to be paid for with new music
fees.
4/17/06 Board consents to $660/mo to CPA Eric Wagner to continue for
"maintaining separate set of records"&Appt him treasurer (Mr Wagner retained
since 1997)
#4) 5/15/06 Board awards bid for copier paper $75,533 (not capital)
#5) 5/15/06 Board awards bid for Life Study(required maintenance) $270,089
#6) 5/15/06 & 6/19/06 Board awards bid for Asbestos abatement $55,300
#7) 5/15/06 Board awards bid for Asphalt maintenance $28,600
#8) 5/15/06 Board awards bid for closed circuit TV security $39,896
#9) 6/19/06 Board awards bid for swimming pool covers $152,419
#10)6/19/06 Board awards bid for Convection Steamer $17,835
Total $694,217 vs budget of $560,000 -24% overbudget.
None of these items add to quality of the math, science reading and arithmetic
(core) curriculum. After clamoring for money for textbooks and computers and
science labs in the Nov 2004 referendum, This board hasn't given "the kids" a
nickel in capital to improve curriculum since they disclosed the project list.
The lack of any evidence of their planned prioritization gives me the impression
these decisions are made "by the seat of the superintendents pants" & "on the
fly."
Join me Monday night in asking how the $48,000 was arrived at and what bank
account the money will be kept in to show it was recovered. We could do the same
with the band uniforms.
What do you guys think?
See you Monday night.
Yours in community,
Phil Labak, volunteer
Capital Projects, Associated Costs Team
Sent May 11, 2006
Hello
Attend DIstrict 99 Board meeting leaders;
Another month has passed. D99 continues the waste of legal dollars and has
commited NO new dollars to capital projects.
We as taxpayers gave them a $1.6 milllion raise in revenue. (see Real Estate tax
installments-1st lines of their D99 Revenue budget online
www.csd99.org ).
Not only did we not get a thank you- their PR release complains of enrollment
rising and limited revenue growth due to Tax Caps.
Quote:"Another factor is enrollment, which is expected to rise again next year,
resulting in larger teacher costs."
When I saw them present Kasarda's enrollment projection a month or two ago they
projected like 12 new students (on enrollment of 5000+) and then declines for
years to follow. Eblen's message sent out to the community that enrollment
increases next year is absurd and downright misleading.
He obviously has trained his brain "always ask for more money if enrollment goes
up"
Join me if you can Monday but we're telling people its ok to sit this one out-it
will be long with little or no discussion on land or capital improvements. There
will be a lot of recognition (graduation is coming up) before the business
meeting.
The meeting is AT Downers Grove North!
Yours in community,
Phil Labak
www.keepgreenspacegreen.com
|
