The Village recently released edited audio recordings from the August Village Board meeting, which we understand was relatively well attended.
Five residents made public comments at the beginning of the meeting, including a former member of the Zoning Board and a recently defeated Village Trustee in the April election. Most of their comments centered on the special Village Board meeting scheduled for later this month, and on an item under the Administration agenda titled, “Compensation for Special Counsel.”
Before listening to the public comments made, readers should know what the special counsel compensation discussion item and vote was all about.
Earlier this year during the February Village Board meeting, former Trustees Messer, Selman and Meroni along with current board members Gohl and Harrington voted to set special counsel compensation at $0 to thwart an investigation into any improprieties that may have occurred in the process leading to the passage of the Commercial Horse Boarding Amendment.
In their ill-advised and reckless haste in doing so, they amended Title 1, Chapter 6, Section 1-6-6 of our Village Code covering compensation for all current special counsels retained by the Village. Special Counsels are employed by the Village in various capacities: for labor negotiations, traffic court and other special attorneys besides the regular Village Attorney.
Therefore, in actuality since February, when Village Board voted monthly to approve those attorneys’ bills, it was inadvertently violating the defective amended compensation code, so clearly, the code needed to be corrected.
The second speaker of the night was a former Zoning Board member who has taken credit for single handedly crafting a number of changes to the commercial horse boarding text amendment proposal submitted by the owner of Oakwood Farms, LLC, Benjamin LeCompte, which was ultimately adopted after a veto. Some consider his comments to be threatening to the Board, but we’ll leave that to our readers. His comments can be heard by clicking here.
The fifth speaker, a former trustee, voiced her concern over settlement of a case stemming from a resident’s violation of the Heritage Tree Ordinance in Cook County court system. What she failed or refused to recognize is the ordinance has not been consistently enforced by our Building Department over the years since its passage, and that inconsistency dramatically diluted the effectiveness of the ordinance, especially in a court of law. Her comments can be heard here.
The balance of the meeting that lasted just over two hours was fairly routine until the Administration portion that lasted over forty minutes, thanks mostly to Trustee Harrington.
During that part of the meeting, President McLaughlin formally announced a special Village Board meeting which will take place in September to allow residents to weigh in on whether the Village should potentially settle litigation (Drury et al. v. Village of Barrington Hills) against the Village. Settlement could mean voiding or repealing the Commercial Horse Boarding Text Amendment code passed earlier this year.
Next, McLaughlin prefaced the discussion on compensation for special counsel by stating that he has no immediate intention of retaining any new counsel, investigatory or otherwise. A range of $175-650 per hour was discussed, the higher end of the range being suggested by Village Administrator, Bob Kosin. After the ensuing discussion, the motion passed by a vote of 5-2, with Gohl and Harrington voting nay.
Trustee Harrington then expressed his dissatisfaction that the President, and not the Board of Trustees, can appoint special counsel, despite the fact that this has been the case for nearly 50 years in Barrington Hills, and Illinois statutes and case law support it. Harrington was informed multiple times that the only way this could be changed would through a referendum voted on by residents, since such a change would alter our form of government.
Not pleased with this answer, Harrington made a motion seconded by Gohl that would allow the board to vote on compensation for each individual special counsel, thus allowing for another vote to set compensation at $0. Harrington’s motion failed by a vote of 5-2, with only he and Gohl voting in favor.
To listen to the entire special counsel discussion and vote recording, click here.
The menu for the edited audio segments from the entire August 24th meeting can be accessed here.
Read Full Post »
