The Village has published the ePacket agenda for this evening’s Zoning Board of Appeals meeting. This packet includes the documents to be discussed by the board, and for the first time in our experience, drafts of minutes from the three September board meetings for approval. It is unclear why minutes are now being recorded since a stenographer usually provides transcripts from every meeting.
A memo from Bob Kosin to the Village Board is also included in the packet that addresses seven questions posed by the board regarding the horse boarding text amendments. A quick review reveals many questions remain unanswered.
A copy of the packet can be downloaded here. Tonight’s meeting begins at 7:00 PM at Countryside School in the multipurpose room.
Isn’t it obvious that Chairman Judy is attempting to whitewash and legitimize what has been a corrupted process? Ex-Parte* Communications is the norm with this Chairman. The outcome of these hearings has obviously been pre-determined, given that advice of legal counsel has been ignored and the “Anderson/LeCompte” Amendment approval was railroaded through to the Board of Trustees, absent any “facts”.
Thank you Village Trustee Joe Messer, ZBA Chairman Judy Freeman, ZBA Members Kurt Anderson, Karen Rosene and Clark Benkendorf! You are fine examples of what objective, fair and open minded Village Government should be. Hopefully, you will have the opportunity, along with others, to give sworn testimony in a Court of Law that might explain your actions and will clear up any misunderstandings the public may have on this issue.
*”Ex parte is Latin meaning “from or on one side only, with the other side absent or unrepresented. In a democratic society, open, fair decision making is critical to whether the public trusts what the government is doing. In planning circles, ex parte, or one-sided communications, are usually problematic, either legally, ethically, or both…” – Talking Behind the Public’s Back – The Ex-Parte Problem – Ted Shekell, AICP.
What games? Who instructed the Village Clerk to show David Stieper as absent from the September 9th meeting in the minutes posted on the site? Judy? He was 5 minutes late, missed the role call and invests personal time away from his family and work for a 3+ hour meeting where he was the most vocal and well informed Member (the audio recording is clear evidence). The petty games being played by the Chair in attempts to manipulate her personal agenda to promote commercial horse boarding at all costs is disingenuous and contrary to the will of the Village majority of residents. The process manipulated by Freeman and Messer is tainted and the Village should be exposed for potential illegal actions. Their immediate removal from office should become the request of every resident and vocally demanded. Our Village governance is a disgrace to our community. What a “messer!”
Anyone out there have input to public or private agencies willing to bring this foolishness to light and prosecute offenders? Fines and jail time may shout to all our officials that any illegal manipulation will not be tolerated.
Confused!! Can anyone shed some light? A public meeting held on 9/9 highlighted the strong opposition to the proposal of change to Agriculture in our code to promote horse boarding. Two days later, a continuation of the special meeting occurs, the new “Anderson Amendment” is proposed and Judy’s pawns approve a recommendation that legalizes Oakwood and allows 15 horses per 5 acre property for horse boarding, completely contrary to the majority wishes of the Village.
The BOT meets 9/22 and Joe Messer recommends approval as Trustee liaison to the ZBA. With obvious reasons, Village counsel identifies the legal exposure with process and the BOT sends a recommendation back to the ZBA to analyze properly the impacts of recommendations. [By the way, Messer and Harrington are also leading an effort find a new Law firm to replace Bond Dickson whose advice they don’t like – that special meeting is 10/22]. Instead of now analyzing the Anderson Amendment with proper due diligence, the ZBA meeting tonight’s agenda is calling for discussion/approval of the other 3 text amendments proposed.
This is silly! The management of the process is anything but open and continues to be a personal agenda of the Chair and other conflicted Trustees and ZBA members to find a way to legalize Oakwood Farms and destroy our Home Occupation in order to promote Barrington Hills as THE commercial horse boarding destination for the area.
Why should the public be jerked around like this? It is difficult to predict tonight’s meeting’s intended actions. Given past actions, who knows, maybe Judy now intends to approve another version of a Text Amendment. The public can’t be vigilant at every meeting while our elected and appointed officials game the process only to meet their desired and special interest goals. They are obsessed.
Correction, ZBA meeting is tonight (10/20) and BOT special meeting is tomorrow (10/21). Stay away from these meetings. The Judy and Joe duet do not need any further distractions that may impede their ability to Save Oakwood Farms and promote commercial horse boarding.
Thank you Matt Yetarian for your illuminating comments at the end of public opinion during the 10/22 ZBA meeting. Mr. Yetarian stated emphatically and concisely that the entire text amendment process was solely in place to resolve the Oakwood Farms operation. No one from the ZBA board challenged this (because it’s true). As past President of the Barrington Hills Riding Club, his statement in this matter has interesting bearing on current ZBA rush to change Village code. According to Yetarian, if you want Oakwood to stay open, Agriculture designation is required. Special Use in our existing code will not allow Oakwood Farms to operate without changing the operation to conform to Village specifications.
The resolution is to do what’s best for the Village. Problem is that conflicts of interest require payback.
Mr. Yetarian did fail to expand on the unintended consequences of this change. First, Oakwood is in litigation and the Village ZBA is working to favor one party (Oakwood) versus the other (Drury). That will expose the Village to serious litigation. Second, Villages such as Bull Valley and Mettawa use Special Use which is exactly the right formula for Barrington Hills. Third, our Village officials and ZBA are changing code for one individual at the expense what’s best for the Village. That doesn’t sound legal.