Commercial horse boarding was once again on the Board of Trustee’s agenda at the April 30, 2014 meeting. With deliberately short notice, Trustee Joseph Messer made a failed attempt to propose that the Village Board by consensus vote to direct the ZBA to prepare a “text amendment” to modify the existing Home Occupation Ordinance (HOO).
Two Illinois Appellate Court decisions have now made clear that one particular large scale commercial horse boarding operation is unlawful under the Village’s zoning laws and not permitted under the Village’s HOO. So Trustee Messer wants to change our laws—and apparently in a hurry, for reasons which only he knows. Now, horse boarding is again on the Zoning Board agenda for the next meeting on Monday, May 19, 2014.
These pages have long chronicled the drama of commercial horse boarding, including one notorious facility, in our Village, beginning with the first appellate court “win” for the Village – Veni, Vidi … Vici (we hope); followed by the former village president’s squandering of that win and failure to enforce the law as written – Is Bob Abboud a Liar? You Decide; and capped off by the startling revelations that then candidates (and now Trustees!) Messer, Selman, and Meroni accepted and tried to hide campaign contributions from the operator of one of the largest boarding businesses in town – Errors were made; others were blamed.
Unfortunately, with Trustee Messer’s recent actions, this drama is returning to our Village and now all residents must suffer through this matter again.
The Riding Club of Barrington Hills is doing its best to whip up fear among the horse riding community by advertising that one of the recent Appellate Court decisions threatens even private backyard “boarding of one or two horses for neighbors.” Not so! But their erroneous last minute email message, sent the day of the May 14 Village Board meeting to a select group of members, can be viewed here.
It is now beyond clear, after two Appellate Court decisions, that a large scale commercial boarding business, where the business and not the residence is the primary use of the land, is unlawful and not permitted under the HOO. There is no more room to debate that issue.
The HOO was intended to permit small, quiet businesses operating in homes, where the primary purpose of the land is residential—think piano teacher and even “backyard” boarding. But it does not allow massive horse boarding businesses (or any large, obvious businesses) with their attendant noise, pollution, traffic and unbridled and untaxed use of Village resources. All of that is now clear.
But what should be equally clear is that our current Village Board and ZBA cannot and should not be trusted to address the issue of horse boarding businesses in our Village. The Board includes three Trustees (Messer, Selman, and Meroni) who are hopelessly conflicted from making any unbiased decisions.
That’s because they accepted and tried to disguise campaign contributions from a large commercial horse boarding business owner. We shouldn’t forget that offense, which tells us something about their motivations. (The State Board of Elections ruled that they had violated campaign disclosure laws and imposed a two-year probation in 2011.)
Riding Club members, whose recent scare-tactics email demonstrates they cannot be trusted to be rational and objective, dominate our ZBA. The ZBA also includes many appointments from the former administration—an administration that behaved irresponsibly in handling horse boarding issues for years.
Instead, if the Village is going to take up again the issue of commercial horse boarding, it must do so in a responsible, transparent, and unbiased manner. It must be done with public involvement and without the conflict, or even the appearance of conflict, that prevents both the Board and the ZBA from handling the matter properly.
The solution, we submit, is for the Village President to appoint a special “blue ribbon” committee to study this issue, take public comment, and then provide an objective recommendation back to the Village Board for consideration and possible inclusion as a referendum, to be voted on by residents.
We have expressed in these pages an economic proposal to regulate horse boarding businesses that do not violate zoning codes – An economic proposal to control horse boarding businesses. That is one solution, recognizing that we have big businesses operating in our Village that do not pay commercial taxes to the Village (which would reduce our residential tax burden, as in the Village of Oak Brook).
Some have suggested a ban on the business of horse boarding altogether, which would surely preserve the quiet, residential character of our Village. But that is not likely a viable solution. We all must recognize that horses and equestrian pursuits are part of our character.
So something must be done, and what cannot be done (as Trustee Messer is suggesting) is to stretch and pull and twist and turn the HOO to accommodate a commercial operation. We have written about this wrongheaded approach before – The peg is still square, the hole is still round.
What is not part of our character, at least it should not be part of our character, is to allow bias and conflicts of interest to prevent a responsible resolution of this long playing drama. For that reason, the Village Board and the ZBA should and must refrain from attempting to deal with commercial boarding, and certainly should pause while litigation involving one of those businesses is ongoing.
Once again, the most rational and fair solution for our community as a whole is for the President to appoint an impartial, special committee to address the issue, leading to a referendum for action by all residents at the ballot box.
– The Observer
Last Wednesday night during the village board meeting I and dozens others heard Trustee Mike Harrington ask two highly qualified applicants to the ZBA “Are you aware of any potential conflicts of interest” as it related to their objectivity in serving on the board.
I would like Mr. Harrington or any other Save 5 Acres trustee to ask the very same question of the current zoning board members AFTER they swear an oath to tell the truth Monday night. It won’t happen of course and we all know where this charade is headed.
Who was it that said “My horse for one honest man” certainly didn’t have to worry about giving it away In the mighty town of Barrington Hills? We are little more than a copy of Chicago politics but we have bigger houses.
How can ‘some’ of our trustees get up in the morning, knowing that all they think about is deceiving the village? The next election will be most telling.
WHY IS IT THAT THE WIFE OF A SLAIN AMERICAN HERO MUST FIGHT TO PRESERVE THE QUALITY OF LIFE THAT WE ARE ALL ENTITLED TO?
I am amazed that the “G” hasn’t been summoned to look into the rampant corruption that is a way of life in this, our little city!
@Beth: whuuuuut? There isn’t one coherent thought in your post.
Tex – I think we all know the wife referred to in Beth’s comment is me (my husband kia Afghanistan 2012) and yes her post does make perfect sense. I believe it is a cut and paste of a post made some time ago.
Think about it because I do every day. Why is it I have had to endure the disdain, lies and character assassination from local politicos (albeit our bot and committees), BHRC members, and other small minded residents and church members as well as repeated intentional flooding and fecal (human and equine) contamination of my property from neighboring properties. Where was our code enforcement then and now?
For seven years I have been put through literal hell here in Barrington Hills. And if you think things will be different if any of the proposed text amendments are voted affirmatively let me tell you they will. It will be a million times worse but this time worse for every resident – not only me. Think about it…
And I think the ‘g’ referred to is slang for federal authorities as in FBI. They would be the oversight for public corruption allegations and investigations. And if you believe there is not the slightest hint of – shall we call it mismanagement of funds – you have been blind to what is really happening here in BH.
If there is anything else you do not understand please post and I will try to enlighten you. Thank you for asking.
How many people will try to get their acreages rezoned Agriculture instead of Residential. Some people are fighting for the right to farm and raise animals or crops? And be able to make a living and pay their real estate taxes to keep their large acreages. Nowdays for some people during the recession have found it hard to keep their executive jobs in the city or towns. At least they can pay their bills and keep their family in their home and enjoy the rural life.
http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/rural-neighbors-right-farm-29869.html
So the entire community should change zoning requirements ??? That is far from fair and equitable. Please read the text amendments – giving carte blanche to commercial horse boarding will destroy this community.
Five acres doesn’t qualify for agricultural assessment valuation factors in any of the four counties. If it did we’d all have corn or soy beans growing in our yards right now. Our home valuations make up over 90% of our tax bills and agriculture designation of the property would not change the home’s assessed value.