Should Naperville buy Ponds of Hobson West?

Do whatever it takes to keep it Open Space.

This one couldn't be more clear. If we can't find a way to purchase a small tract of land for open space/park land, between two already existing small parks, then I wonder if we are really as great a city as we claim we are.

Lets hope the will is found to make this happen.

It's a shame that the city spent so much money on that stupid bell tower and a former city employee (who quit).

I modestly support the purchase of this parcel only because it is already between two current small parks. But I would also like to see what the Park District plans to do with the land--sports fields, walking track, playground equip, etc. There has to be a plan, not just a purchase for the sake of "open space".

However, that being said, I am tired of people who live near any open space assuming that it should stay that way forever and looking to the city to buy the land as a solution.

The park district is offering $2.5 million, and the developer wants $4.1 million. Let's suppose for the sake of argument that they somehow--without filing a lawsuit--agree on mutual price halfway in between, at $3.2 million for 6 acres. That works out to about $530,000 per acre, or roughly what the jury said the Brach-Brodie property was worth. If they can't agree on a price without going to court, the last thing I would support is a condemnation suit to get the land.

I think that the city of Naperville should initiate condemnation proceedings and offer to pay ONLY $2,500,000. Then, when the jury verdict comes in at $8,200,000 (more than twice the original price) the city can turn to District 204 for real estate, financial and further legal advice.

T.B. has a good point.

People should not complain who live near an open area or an empty lot.

No matter what anyone tells them, it might (will) be rezoned.

No shoulder to cry on here!

If the park district can't make this happen then I think it should stay zoned as single family homes. Why do builders agree to purchase land zoned a certain way and then cry that the land was too expensive for them to make a profit and ask for higher density? And why does the council contantly give in on these requests? It's only a good MASTER PLAN if you stick to the PLAN part!

I also think Grant Wehrli should excuse himself from all future votes on the matter as he is closely related to the builder that would profit on the transaction.

TB - great point about open space. i agree. i would be against developing it for homes. but i also think the park district should develop a valuable way to use the land for the benefit of the citizens of naperville and not let it just sit there for the sake of open space.

Tired - Great point about planning and grant wherli. also agree 100%. the only chance for him to recuse himself is for you to go to the city council meeting and point out the conflict of interest and ask him to recuse himself in open forum. that would be a great thing to do. he has voted against the citizens desires and for developers on these types of issues more consistently than any other councilman. rosanova and bouyajian (spelling?) are close.

This property should remain "Green Space". This is a beautiful piece of property where my grandchildren and I enjoy fishing, watching the wikldlife and just walking. The zoning should never have been changed by the City Council in the first place. However, reversing this decision might just provide the Park District with a favorable bargaining position they need to aquire this land at a reasonable cost. Our Park District has already proven they are capable of maximizing the use of "Green Space", so I don't view that as an issue. My thanks, to the Park District and (4) Councilman in favor of this purchase, for your hard work. For the remaining Councilman I am disapointed in your inability to "smell the roses".

Tired,

Excellent point regarding wherli-

My suggestion is you send Grant Wherli an email, copy city attorney Margo Ely and all other concilmen. Ask Wherli if he has delivered the following disclosure to the City Manager as required by the Naperville Municipal Code. And, if not, why not.

Finally, even if he can avoid the code requirements on some technicality. Point out that what you said in your posting and ask him to recuse himself to avoid "even the appearance" of a conflict of interest.

NAPERVILLE MUNICIPAL CODE

1-13-4: DISCLOSURE AND ABSTENTION:

When any member of the City Council has an ownership, employment, or family interest, in a proposed contract, business, or transaction with the City, which interest is allowed by Section 1-13-3 of this Chapter, such Council member shall file with the City Manager a written disclosure of such interest, a description of such interest, the provision of Section 1-13-3 of this Chapter relied upon, and a description of the applicability of such exception on a form as follows:

DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST
IN CONTRACT, BUSINESS, OR TRANSACTION

Name: ______________________________

Position with City: _____________________

Name of entity contracting with City: _______

Proposed contract, business, or transaction: ___

I have an [ ] Ownership

[ ] Employment

[ ] Family

interest in the proposed contract, business, or transaction as follows: ____________________________________________________________

I am entitled to have such an interest under the provisions of Section 1-13-3 ____ because of the following facts: ______________

Dated: ____________ _

Signature

1. Such written disclosure shall be filed with the City Manager not later than the call to order of the City Council meeting at which the proposed contract, business, or transaction is to be considered. The City Manager shall bring the written notification to the attention of the City Council in public when the item is called on the agenda for consideration.

2. A member of the City Council having an interest for which a disclosure is required shall leave the chamber where deliberations take place during the discussion and vote on the interested matter and shall not vote on said matter. (Ord. 87-70, 6-2-1987)

http://www.sterlingcodifiers.com/IL/Naperville/03013000000004000.htm

Let me provide some history and context related to the property now referred to as the “Ponds of Hobson West” (about 6 acres located between the two ponds). I’ll try to keep it as brief as possible, but this will not be short.

The 195-acre Clarke farm (now Hobson West) was roughly bound by Emerald Street on the East, 75th Street on the South, Naperville-Plainfield Road on the West, and Green Acres subdivision and the Garden Plots land on the North.

In the early 1970s, Metropolitan Structures (a subsidiary of MetLife) purchased the property and wanted to put a “huge” development on the property that included a ten-story high rise in the middle, five-story apartments along 75th Street and other homes that added up to a proposed population of 10,000 people. Can you image what Naperville would be now if this proposal was adopted and many other farms became densely-populated developments?

Residents fought this proposal and spearheaded the efforts which resulted in it being rejected. In fact, an outgrowth of this effort was the establishment of the Naperville Area Homeowners Confederation.

Metropolitan Structures sold the property to Weathersfield developers who wanted to build a development of 6,000 people on the property. It also was ultimately rejected. Then, in the later part of the 1970s, Mid-America Bank purchased the property for single-family development and sold 408 lots to developers (and in the early 1980s several remaining lots to individuals a well).

The six acres and farm house were kept by the Clarke family as their residence. The two pond and other common areas of the new Hobson West subdivision were given by Mid-America to the newly formed homeowners association. The homeowners association gave the two ponds (a total of 9 acres) to the Naperville Park District.

It was “rumored” that when the Clarke’s died they wanted the property to be donated to the Park District; but, a son took it to court and took possession. The property was composed of two lots. The properties were subsequently sold to Dr. Soper and his wife. A church congregation looked into buying the southern-most lot for building a church but decided not to do so. Again, it was “rumored” that one finding was that the water table was too high and that the one property was not large enough.

At some point in time, the two lots were zoned single family residential and placed as such in the City’s Master Plan as such.

In the spring of 2004, Crestview Builders purchased both properties for a total of $2.75 million with the intent of constructing townhouses on the properties. Crestview began dialogue with the board members of the homeowners association. (Context: many of the homeowners had recently become upset when this board was proposing building a large club house at its current site and the homeowners rejected the proposal). It is “rumored” that Crestview offered to provide funds toward a new club house provided that residents of the new development would become members of the homeowners association and have access to the swimming pool, etc.

In the fall of 2004, Crestview invited homeowners to an informational meeting at the Barn on Martin Ave. They showed a proposal of 6 buildings containing 29 townhouses. Most of the residents indicated their disproval. One Hobson West resident said that when Ron Wehrli, owner of Crestview Builders, left the meeting, Mayor Pradel was waiting outside in a car for him.

On November 3, 2007, Crestview brought a proposal for changing the zoning and to construct 6 buildings and 27 units before the Plan Commission. Many area residents spoke before the Plan Commission. There were two more public hearing sessions. On December 8, 2008, it was rejected by a 7-0 vote. Grant Wehrli, a Plan Commissioner, before he voted, said “...lower the density, then at least give us something that we would have the possibility of considering.”

Upon hearing that Crestview Builders was going to again submit a proposal to change the zoning, a petition was circulated. Virtually all of the over 1,000 people signing it were against a zoning change. On February 15, 2006, Crestview proposed 5 buildings with 22 units. At the public hearing on April 26, 2006, the Plan Commission rejected this proposal by a 4-2 vote. One Plan Commissioner, who was a resident of the Hobson West subdivision, recused himself from the vote. By this point in time, Grant Wehrli had been appointed to the City Council to fill a vacancy.

Crestview, on July 6, 2006, decided to take their rejected proposal directly to the City Council for approval. The first public hearing was postponed and the next one was tabled. Then, on September 5, 2006, it was again postponed as the Council directed staff to explore with the Park District and the Conservation Foundation about property acquisition for open space. On October 17, 2008, a vote to retain single family zoning failed by a 4-5 vote. However, it was voted to have Park District staff and the Conservation Foundation to seek ways to purchase the property.

Note: At this point in time, then Director Heller of the Park District had at her highest priority the building of a $35 million recreation center at Frontier Park; thus, there was no interest in spending several million on land. The Park District said it did not fit their profile of land (of at least 15 acres). They sent a letter to the City Council indicating they had no interest in purchasing the property.

On December 5, 2006, a vote to have the city purchase the property failed by a 4-5 vote. The City Council then voted to have an ordinance prepared for the rezoning from single family to multi-family and approve the 5 buildings with 22 units. But, Crestview was not to build for 6 months to allow for purchase for open space which was to be valued as if the zoning was still single family.

Note than there were many residents who stood up and spoke at these public meetings. In addition some met with staff and Councilmen. Also, several Councilmen were invited to meet with residents (from different areas of the City) to discuss the issue.

On January 3, 2007, when the ordinance was on the floor to be voted upon, both Councilman Rosanova and Councilman Wehrli were asked to recuse themselves from voting. Rosanova’s son, a lawyer, had been hired by the law firm representing Crestview. The City Attorney said it was okay for Councilman Rosanova to vote because law firm indicated that the son would not work on matters that would come before the Council. Also, Councilman Wehrli’s first cousin was the owner of Crestview. On a 5-4 vote the Council approved the zoning change and approved the preliminary plat that allowed 5 buildings and 22 units. There was also to be a 12-month period before construction was to begin and that the property, should it be sold to a public body, be valued as if it was zoned for single family residences. Before the vote, Councilman Wehrli said he now supported the proposal because the “facts had changed.” This was said, even though the proposal was the same as the one rejected by the Plan Commission on April 26, 2006.

So, the residents began appearing before the Park District Board to ask them to purchase the property as well as to give many ideas as to how the property could be utilized for Park District activities. On January 4, 2007, 25 residents appeared before the Park District Board. On February 8, 2007, several residents again spoke on the issue before the Park District Board. The Board directed its staff to investigate whether the District should acquire the property. At the March 8, 2007 Board meeting, residents again asked that the property be acquired.

At the candidate forum on March 21, 2007 for those seeking election as Park Commissioner, the seven candidates were asked whether the Park District should buy the property. Six gave strong affirmative answers and the other one did not oppose the purchase.

At each of the next four monthly Park District Board meetings, residents asked for the land to be purchased. At each of these meetings, no comment was made by the Board.

On July 25, 2007, ten residents met with a reporter for the Daily Herald to discuss the “Ponds of Hobson West” property. An article and picture appeared in the newspaper several days later.

At the Naperville City Council meeting on August 6, 2007, the council members discussed a letter received from the Naperville Park District requesting a meeting where funding of the purchase of the “Ponds of Hobson West” property could be considered. The $3.3 million price was mentioned as well as a suggestion that the City should consider paying any difference if the selling price was higher since the city was responsible for the increase in value of the property.

At the August 9, 2007 Park Board meeting, about 20 residents again spoke to the Park Commissioners about the importance about purchasing the property and to make a decision. The Board President said that options were being evaluated and that funding considerations needed to be addressed.

On September 3, 2007, a number of residents participated in the Last Fling Parade entry of the West Street Greenspace Preservation Coalition that focused on saving open space and, in particular, the open space between the Hobson Ponds. The marchers received applause often along the parade route.

At the September 13, 2007 Park Board meeting, several residents commented on the efforts of the Park District related to the “Ponds of Hobson West” property. On October 3, 2007, several residents met with two Park Board Commissioners to discuss with them what the residents could do to keep the purchase of the “Ponds of Hobson West” property by the Park District a viable possibility. Since time was running out, the residents indicated that Board members should be held accountable by voting in public instead of only discussing a purchase in Executive Sessions.

At the Park Board meeting on October 11, 2007, presentations were made that:

1. Emphasized a shift by the residents to not only support the purchase of the “Ponds of Hobson West” property but to focus on saving open space in the Naperville area,
2. Stated intentions to create a Naperville Save Open Space foundation.
3. Discussed possible uses of the property,
4. Discussed limited matching-fund grant money that could be available, and
5. Recognized that the 2004 Park District Survey called for acquisition of open space as the top priority.

A number of other residents from different areas of the city spoke in favor of the Park District purchasing the land. The Park Board President said that the “Ponds of Hobson West” property would be on the agenda for the November 8, 2007 Park District Board meeting. But, again at the next meeting, no specifics were stated by the Board other than the Park District was working with the Conservation Foundation.

In early December 2007, the Park Board attorney sent a letter explaining why they were only offering $2.5 million for the property. At the December 18, 2007 City Council meeting, several residents spoke to the Council about the property and that time was running out. The attorney for Crestview piped up that he had sent a letter to the Park District that very day. The letter stated that the Park Districts offer was rejected and that the developer now wanted $4.1 million for the property and that additional time would be considered to extend the delay in construction. A reply letter by the Park District acknowledged the extension until January 31, 2008.

At a Special Meeting of the Park District Board on December 18, 2007, the Park Board was asked to consider acquiring the property through its eminent domain power and to get an injunction to prevent the property from being destroyed during that process.

At the January 2, 2008 City Council meeting an attorney for Crestview stated that Crestview would be unwilling to extend the negotiation period beyond January 31, 2008. One Councilman suggested that an interest-free loan be given to the Park District to cover the difference. Another Councilman suggested that a land swap (the 5th avenue former storage site) be made with Crestview for the property. A vote to allow City staff to work with the Park District to seek ways to make the purchase by the Park district possible failed by a 4-5 vote

Mr. Rod Randall,
Thanks for your long post. If the Dr. Soper you are talking about was my dentist who was located at 361 E. Bailey Rd in Maplebrook Plaza, then I have some light to shed.

He had always complained about flooding in his home. Many times over the 20 years he was my dentist. So "IF" the farm house you are talking about was him home, we have a really serious flood plain not suited for building.

I am beginning to suspect that Crestview Builders discovered it was a flood plain not suited for building somewhere along the way and are playing their cards with the city and Park District to try to milk us for some serious money, knowing they could never build on it, anyway.

If in fact it is a property subject to massive flooding as I suspect from my conversations with Dentist Dr. Soper, they are tyring to off it on to the Park District because it is technically worth NOTHING. It can not be built on! If they sell homes on it that are flood prone the homeowners will sue them.

And it seems like some kind of game is going on to help Crestview Builders get paid for a huge mistake they made. To have council members with conflicts of interest vote to have it zoned to a higher density sounds like a possible scam to milk 4.1 million dollars from the taxpayers for a flood zone that should never be built on.

Crestview should take the beating for not checking out the flood plain status before purchasing the property from Dr. Soper and his wife and donate it to the Park District! Knowing Dr. Soper, he is just too honest and probably told them his home floods annually and they still bought it for a very cheap price in order to possibly scam the taxpayers by pretending it is suitable for building while having purchased it for no reason other than to sell it to the Park District in the first place for an outrageous and unreasonably high price! I would not be surprised if they planted the opposition against building. It is the only way they get 4.1 million for swamp land!

How much did Crestviw Builders pay Dr. Soper to buy this alligator-less swampland? I bet almost nothing! I suspect they knew what they were buying and bought it for the sole reason of selling it for a higher price to the Park District knowing they could never build on swamp land.

I hope you can help us a little more Mr. Randall. I also could be totally wrong if Dr. Soper had a second home I did not know about. But he was not the investor type and worked 80 hours a week so I tend to believe he lived in that farm house that flooded almost every year. He had to close his practice many times because his home flooded. And he had state of the art sump pumps with the back-up systems. He said it was a hopeless situation and he needed to move elsewhere one day.

This is what I know. I hope bloggers with more information can shed some more light so we can understand how the Establishment helps their relatives make money and get out of messy flood plains.

Joe stated if we can't find a way to purchase a small tract of land for open space/park land, between two already existing small parks, then I wonder if we are really as great a city as we claim we are.

Actually Joe, what makes a city great is not rolling over to every NIMBY group with a handful of residents claiming to be some sort of majority representing the community.

Another sign that Naperville is a great city is the fact that they and the builder agreed to give the homeowners a year to come up with someone to purchase the land.

Now that the year has passed, with no signs of a viable purchaser, it is time to move on and let the rightful owner to do with the land as he wishes.

Melissa, I am sure Crestview had the land surveyed before they bought it and if it were a flood plain as you claim, they would have never purchased it. There is a big difference between "flooding in a home" and a flood plain. Flooding in the home was remedied by eliminating the home, and the new structures would be built higher to eliminate such flooding. A flood plain is designated as such, and no building would be permitted, which would have been noted on the master use plan.

I highly doubt Crestview would have purchased the land and spent the money on engineering and design for their project if it were on a piece of land designated a flood plain. Nor would the City allow Crestview to even consider building on it.

Mark,
The city makes mistakes on flood plains. They let people build in certain areas of Ashbury that turned out to be flood plains when heavy rains ensue. Not only are streets flooded with a few feet or rain water, but basements get 9 feet of water and no sump pump or pumps can keep up.

I guess this piece of land could not have basements...that is for sure. But I guess as you may be suggesting, they can haul in tons and tons of dirt and try to build the homes on mounds of dirt to be higher. But that is an expensive process. Thus there could be a hidden desire by Crestview not to want to build.

Many people buy land without having it checked to see if it is in a flood plain even though it is surveyed.

Keep in mind Crestview Builders have conflict of interest supporters in the City Council. First cousin Wehrli to be specific and second Rosonova who has a son working in the infamous Brestal Law Firm. And they already pulled one scheme by increasing the density from home to mulit-unit which increased the value of the property for negotiating purposes with the Park District. That gave Crestview the confidence to ask for the ridiculous 4.1 million instead of the 2.5 million the Park District offered. Of course the city stated that they can not consider the high denisty price but only the single family price when negotiating. That is like telling someone we just put 4.1 million in your pockets but for all practical purposes when you count the money, you are suppose to count it as 2.5 million. Common Mark, do you think taxpayers are really this naive that the city and developers can pull stunts like this on them at our expesnse. Pul...lease!!!

These things that are being done by connected people can not be done by ordinary people. Do you think Dr. Soper could have gotten this rezoning and increased the value of his home the way Crestview(Wehrli) did? Of course not! He was to honest, would never tolderate conflicts of interest, and does not have relatives and friends on the city council.

And yes you can build on flood plains. People build on beaches which are flood plains. They just have to elevate their home at great costs and hope for the best.

If I understood your blog, the home had to be eliminated because of this extreme flooding. I was not aware of that and thanks for pointing that out. I am a lay person but to me some of these things I am hearing, rouse some suspicians.

With land scarce in Naperville, developers are going for infill land, swamp land, land with old demolition candidate homes on them, etc. etc. I just think anything can be happening here and I am asking more bloggers who have information about the extreme flooding in Dr. Soper's home to shed some light. I am just hoping we don't have a Napergate Style story of sorts that may involve some cover up here and there. I just don't know at this point but somethings stinks about this project. I am seeing some red flags!!!

Melissa,
As far as having to eliminate the house due to this alleged flooding, that is not what I implied. The home was removed for whatever reason and the flooding isn't an issue anymore, if it ever was, seeing as this flooding is based on a very vague conversation with a dentist and you aren't even sure if this is the same property.

If the land in question was actually a flood plain then the two ponds would become one during heavy rains, which I have never witnessed. If that were the case, then it wouldn't be suitable for a park either, and the Park District shouldn't buy it.

You also allege that Crestview's asking price is a ridiculous $4.1 million, when you think it is worth $2.5 million. Let me ask you this Melissa, if your house was valued at $410k, would you be willing to sell it for $$250k? I didn't think so.

You can allege all the conspiracy's you want, but the fact remains, the City and Crestview gave a year to come up with a buyer and the clock is ticking. Having the Park District dump $4 million for a few peoples private park isn't a very good use of taxpayer money.

In a few short weeks Crestview will be free to do as they please with their property and it will be time to move on. Imagine the outcry if somehow the homeowner group did come up with the money and Crestview tried to back out of the deal. Both parties agreed to the terms, it is time to let things run their course and move on.

Melissa,
As far as having to eliminate the house due to this alleged flooding, that is not what I implied. The home was removed for whatever reason and the flooding isn't an issue anymore, if it ever was, seeing as this flooding is based on a very vague conversation with a dentist and you aren't even sure if this is the same property.

If the land in question was actually a flood plain then the two ponds would become one during heavy rains, which I have never witnessed. If that were the case, then it wouldn't be suitable for a park either, and the Park District shouldn't buy it.

You also allege that Crestview's asking price is a ridiculous $4.1 million, when you think it is worth $2.5 million. Let me ask you this Melissa, if your house was valued at $410k, would you be willing to sell it for $$250k? I didn't think so.

You can allege all the conspiracy's you want, but the fact remains, the City and Crestview gave a year to come up with a buyer and the clock is ticking. Having the Park District dump $4 million for a few peoples private park isn't a very good use of taxpayer money.

In a few short weeks Crestview will be free to do as they please with their property and it will be time to move on. Imagine the outcry if somehow the homeowner group did come up with the money and Crestview tried to back out of the deal. Both parties agreed to the terms, it is time to let things run their course and move on.

Mark,
You missed my main point. The city jacked up the price of the lot by changing the zoning to higher density thus making it undesirable for Crestview to want to sell the land for 2.5 million to the Park District when it was zoned low density residential.

This is disturbing! The city can take any 2 or 6 acres on 75th St. and change the zoning from residential to commercial if they choose. By doing this they would triple the value of an acre from 300,000 to over a million or even a million and a half. Residential lots on 75th Street are not worth much being on a busy street. But if someone has the connections at City Hall to get the necessary vote to change residential zoning to commercial, they just hit the jackpot.

I was around in the Napergate Era when all this was explained to us in those full page ads. Now as many are saying we again have conflicts of interest between council members, developers and that famous law firm of Brestal. It just seems we learn nothing when the spotlight is taken off and we go back to business as usual.

Yes, I am not 100% sure if my dentist was complaining about his home on that piece of land between the 2 ponds that he owned.. But I assume he was and did not suspect he had a second home. So I asked bloggers if they knew if had a second home so I could not be dispensing erroneous information. Unfortunately, Dr. Soper retired a few years ago and I don't have his phone number or I would asked him. But if we are talking about the same home on that lot, he experienced very very heavy flooding and also very very often. That was the topic of discussion in his office after every heavy rainfall. I guess he finally sold to relieve himself of all this flooding!

Finally, you statement "If the land in question was actually a flood plain then the two ponds would become one during heavy rains, which I have never witnessed. If that were the case, then it wouldn't be suitable for a park either, and the Park District shouldn't buy it." is very nonsensical.

Most if not all subdivison have huge retention areas/parks which flood during heavy rains. When the heavy rains finally evaporate or make it to the river, they become parks again for the subdivision where the kids play soccer or baseball. There is one of those in my subdivision. I think they have mult-purpose duties. Retention and park depending on the weather! Pond do grow by leap and bounds during heavy raining and do not necessarily have to connect and become one during heavy raining. They could still be separated by an acre while 5 acres are gobbled up by the rain. Just like I am not sure of Dr. Soper's home, you are not really sure how much of this land floods or how much the ponds increase in size during heavy rainfalls! Analysis needs to be done!!!

But these retention ponds/parks in most subdivisions could never be built on unless you want your home surrounded with 10 feet of water during heavy rains. That is all I was trying to say. Someone needs to do a thorough analysis!!!

Melissa,

Yes, Dr. Soper (the dentist) and his wife lived on the property for many years.

The house is still there. It has been vacant now for almost 4 years.

The Park District's offer was $2.5 million in cash. it also suggested that any remainder between that and the selling price be a land donation by Crestview Builders. This would give quite a tax break on the remaining "donation." Of course, this was not acceptable to Crestview.

Mark,

The property is located where virtually everyone in Naperville would have convenient access to it. That is why the residents have suggested various uses for the land that would appeal to most of the residents of the Park District.

Mr. Randall,
Thanks for confirming my beliefs that Mark did not want to seem to confirm. I had no proof but strongly believed Dr. Soper only owned this one home and his annual complaints of flooding were about this ONE home.

The fact that it has been empty for 4 years also speaks volumes. I think since this is a flood plain, the Park District can use this leverage to bring the price down to one million dollars as it is really not suited for buildings. No house on this piece of land could ever have a basement. Just impossible!! And the townhomes would really have to be elevated. If we ever get a rainfull like the one we got 12 years or so again, these homes would need helicopters to rescue their habitants. Does our fire department own any helicopters? Will this evacuation be at taxpayer expense or Crestview Builders expense? Will Crestview Builders warn all townhome purchases that the current home on the property floods annually despite a sophisticated sump pump system with a back-up?

Having said all this, I have never seen the property. Could you kindly give me directions to visit the property starting from the corner of 75th St. and Naperville-Plainfield Rd.

Thanks so much for verifying my information, Mr. Randall.

I enjoyed your long blog but I was not sure what your opinion was on the subject property....whether it should be bought by the Park District and for what price or if the City Officiala should allow their cousins to build on a flood plain at taxpayer expense due to future certain litigation!

Melissa

Melissa,

I grew up in Hobson West, near this property you are asking about. You can get there by taking Rickert (Naper/Plainfield Road turns into Rickert after you cross over 75th) and go to West Street and take a right (light by Wendy's). It will curve around to your left and the property is the white house with a couple of other white smaller buildings on the left side. You should see it when you are on West Street as it is in between the two ponds everyone is referring too. Mrs. Soper was my 6th Grade Counselor at Lincoln Jr. High and a very kind lady who helped a lot of kids over the years.

Regarding the flood plain question, I was not aware that this property was in a flood plain. In fact, during the real estate transaction this would have been disclosed. I am a Realtor and after a Buyer purchases a home, one of the first things the attorney does is send over a letter with a bunch of questions with one of them asking the seller to disclose if they are in a flood plain, even if everyone knows they are not. So if it was in a flood plain, it would most likely be known through that process.

Take care,

Kevin

Anything in Naperville can (and probably will) be rezoned at some point in the future. Even already-developed land can be rezoned and modified as we saw with Edward Hospital. No one should ever assume that the view or surroundings they have grown accustomed to will stay that way.

Kevin,

You are making an assumption that everyone is honest and will always disclose that their basement floods annually.

If a seller admitted that, the house would NEVER SELL. So must sellers would be reluctant to admit that especially if it would cost them a half a million or a million dollars. In this case 2.5 million dollars!!!

I suspect most sellers would not admit to that.

They would sell and flee to their retirement home.

I want to be clear that I am not speaking of Dr. Soper or his wife as I have no first hand knowledge or information other than dental office talk about non-stop flooding of this specific property on an annual basis.

Melissa
PS. Dr. Soper could have disclosed this and Crestview bought the property knowing from Day One it is a flood plain and that they will off it to the Park District or City. Remember Crestview is cousins with Naperville! Does Wehrli ring a bell? I believe he is on both sides of the equation and does not RECUSE himself. And does Roson0va ring a bell? He is also on both sides of the Brestal equation and does not RECUSE himself. Need I say more!!!

Melissa,

I guess we might be confusing two things here; flooding in a basement and living in a flood plain can be two separate issues. Your basement can flood for many reasons like the home being old and having cracks in the foundation, a bad sump pump or just bad grading around the home. To determine if you live in a flood plain, you can always check with your insurance carrier as they would have flood plain maps that show you who is and who is not living in a flood plain. There are homes that live in a partial flood plain too where only the back half of their backyard is in a flood plain for example, I have seen homes like that before.

The new buyer of the home would need to know this information for their home owners insurance policy and the insurance companies check so they know what they are insuring too. I have listed and sold homes that are in a flood plain before and each seller disclosed it with no issues as it would be tough for them to lie. It also doesn't benefit the home owner to lie about living in a flood plain as they would want to make sure their home is properly covered through their insurance carrier in case their home floods and they seek damages. I guess I would not take that risk myself, but maybe others would. Like you said though, not everyone is honest out there and I see your point with that.

Take care,

Kevin

Melissa,
You seem to be confused as to what a flood plain actually is. A flood plain, is flat or nearly flat land adjacent to a stream or river that experiences occasional or periodic flooding. Somehow, I don't think the property in question would be considered a flood plain under the true definition and it would be nice if you checked the facts before insinuating that the property is in a flood plain.

As far as a seller not disclosing whether the basement was prone to flooding, he would be taking a great risk. If it wasn't disclosed by the seller, it most likely would be found out by the home inspection service. If by chance it wasn't, the first time it did flood, the buyer would sue and most likely win.

As far as Crestview buying a swamp without checking if it indeed could be built on, Pul...ease! No builder/ developer just buys land on a whim and hopes it works out.They are in business to make money, not lose it. A whole lot of planning and engineering and feasibility studies are done beforehand to make sure the land they are interested in is actually a good investment.

Melissa -

I think Kevin and Mark did an excellent job describing for you that a flooding house does not equate to a flood plain.

That being said, suppose you're right. Wouldn't the best outcome for you be for Crestview to build there, flood, and be sued? Then the big, bad builder would go out of business, right?

I find it odd how I can't get the park district to put a couple of benches in my neighborhood park (a flood retention area with no play equipment) because it is not in their five-year capital improvement plan. However, some NIMBY people may get a new $2.5 million park. I guess the sqeaky wheel really does get the grease.

Kevin, Mark and T.B.,
I know little to nothing about real estate. You got me there. I was not even 100% sure that my dentist lived in that specific home until Mr. Randall verified he did.

As a lay person with no expertise, I would never buy a home on a lot that had a previous home that flooded at least twice a year. Sometimes 9 feet in the basement and one or two feet on the first floor according to my dentist, his wife Mrs. Soper and their receptionist.

If other people want to buy that lot or build on that lot, more power to them. But most lay people like myself would not take a chance. And with so many options, why would anyone take a risk on a lot like that.

From my point of view, if a house floods that bad, it is in a flood plain. My brother lives in Ashbury Subdivision and his basement only flooded once to the tune of 9ft. The streets in front of his home were lakes for a few days. That seemed like a once in a century rainfall about 10-12 years ago. He even finished his basement since that 17 inch rain storm that flooded almost every basement in Ashbury. He is taking a small calculated risk.

But in my opinion, despite what you experts and realtors are saying, I would never buy or build on a lot that flooded twice a year for 20 years. It is my belief that if Crestview Builders disclosed to the buyers the severity of flooding on that lot, that no one would be stupid enough to chance it no matter what kind of grading or elevation they did.

Anyone knows living between 2 ponds is beautiful. I am sure that is why Dr. Soper bought the home. But if he knew living between 2 ponds meant he would experience 2 floods in his home every year, I don't think he would have bought the home and lived in it.

Now while you guys say I don't know the difference between a consistently flooding house and a flood plain, I will concede you are right.

But my question to you is, would you guys buy a lot on that land and build a home knowing of Dr. Soper's problems of non-stop flooding on that parcel. My guess is if you were investing your life time savings, you would not put your money where you guys are putting your words. Just my hunch! I wonder if any lay people would agree with my feelings!

Melissa

PS. Dr. Soper was a very intelligent and wealthy person. He was even a Professor in dental school. I think if his problem was a cracked basement wall, he would have fixed it for 500 dollar or a 1000 dollars. His problem was probably what happened to my brother. So much water it just breaks thru the basement windows and sump pumps can never handle true flooding when it comes in the manner it hit my brother in Ashbury once and Dr. Soper repeatedly.

Melissa,
As far as having to eliminate the house due to this alleged flooding, that is not what I implied. The home was removed for whatever reason and the flooding isn't an issue anymore, if it ever was, seeing as this flooding is based on a very vague conversation with a dentist and you aren't even sure if this is the same property.
Posted by: Mark | January 6, 2008 04:48 PM
******************************************************************
Mark,
You seem to be challenging Melissa quite a bit here on these blogs. She has tried to be honest by saying she is not very sure but thinks that is the case.

You seemed very confident the house was removed off the property, but Mr. Randall says it is still there and vacant for 4 years.

Melissa's conversation with the dentist about his home flooding was not vague. She was just vague to the possiblity he may have owned a second house and did not live in this particular home. But Mr. Randall confirmed that Dr. Soper actually lived in this home before selling it as Melissa had thought or speculated!

And since you lost your credibility by saying the house had been removed while it is still there, do you expect yourself to have any credibilty with the bloggers when you speculate the land is not prone to flooding.

Your assumption that since you have never seen the 2 ponds connect the land must not be prone to flooding. Maybe the entire United States is not prone to flooding since the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans have never connected before. I am exaggerating to make a point.

And further have you watched these ponds 365 days a year to make sure they never connected. Obviously you have not since you did not even know the house is still on the property and thought it was removed.

It amazes and bewilders me how some people who admit to having vague or no knowledge sometimes have way more knowledge than those who assume to have that knowledge while not really having any knowledge. My 2 cents worth!

Ameena,

It's a natural tendency for people to draw conclusion from what the observe or don't observe. If they explain why they draw those conclusions and even though you may draw different conclusions; it's not a sign of 'lacking credibility'.

I seem to recall a previous thread in December where someone else drew an incorrect conclusion based upon what they claimed to have seen and not seen on a street.

It doesn't mean that everything they say after that point is now automatically without credibility, does it? People are human, they make errors and we have different opinions and draw different conclusions based on our own life experiences and observations.

Melissa,

To answer your question..."But my question to you is, would you guys buy a lot on that land and build a home knowing of Dr. Soper's problems of non-stop flooding on that parcel...Posted by: Melissa | January 9, 2008 02:37 AM" My answer would be no. However, in your previous entry on this blog you made speculation that not everyone is honest and tells you that the home floods or is in a flood plain at the time of purchase. So I was just commenting on that part of your entry and then trying to explain the flooding vs flood plain question as it is a very good one. However to answer your question above with a little more detail, the only way I would know if the home did flood twice a year like you said or it was in a flood plain is if it were disclosed at the time of purchase by the seller or in the case where the seller was not honest, by my insurance carrier while they do their search on the property on their flood plain maps. There are plenty people out there who do not care if they live in a flood plain, now you and I do care an would not live in one, but there are people who don't care.

My overall question here is, does this home we are discussing reside in a flood plain...I don't know...I was just explaining that not every home that floods is in a flood plain. It would be interesting if there were an insurance agent on this blog who can look it up for everyone so we have the facts.

Also, some other history on the property...I grew up near it and across the street from Rod Randall...at one point there was an in ground swimming pool on the property...not by floods either. That was later filled in with concrete many years ago, but it had an in ground pool with a pool house. When the Soper's lived there I never really saw the pool being used that much or remember the pool having water in it. You can still see the pool house as it is one of the little white buildings still standing today. Just some more history on property.

Take care,

Kevin

Melissa -

Your guess that lay people would not buy there isn't such a lock as you seem to think it is. I'm not in real estate, but would buy there if I thought the homes were built correctly and were of good quality. Except, of course, I probably couldn't afford it!

I grew up in a house that flooded, but my neighbor's house didn't. My current house does not flood, but my neighbor's does. There are varying reasons for flooding and most are not $500-$1,000 fixes as you expressed. Did your dentist ever say he even attempted to fix the flooding or determine the cause?

Also, exactly how old was this farm house? I would suspect that age is the root of the flooding problem and also made any flood repairs cost prohibitive.

Ameena -

Just because Melissa has been honest, doesn't mean she shouldn't be challenged. She repeatedly called the land a flood plain, when I think it is obvious from later posts that she was making an assumption based on limited knowledge of the subject. She then said that she was not sure if it was a flood plain, but she would never buy there. I think it was a good back and forth and she eventually got her opinion across without making assertions that were not true.

Mark appears to be just as honest in his opinions as Melissa. Just because he disagrees with another blogger regarding the house still being there, that doesn't mean his entire post is not credible. Which post are we to believe about the house and why?

Your dicing of Mark's words about not watching the property 365 days a year for flooding is rather...well, Joe-like.

Just my "two cents" worth.

T.B., Kevin, Joe, Ameena,
Either the house is there or it is not there. If Mark says it is there and Joe and T.B. want to believe him, that is fine.

I figured if Ameena can go research Napergate ads at the library, I can go research the property. I did go there this morning and as Mr. Randall said there was a large white house surrounded by sheds and 3 abandoned cars. I took Mr. Randall's word that the house was vacant and drove into the driveway. In the back yard was an old wooden snow man sign, that read Happy Holidays from the Sopers!

The larger pond had overflowed and created a third small pond even though there was little to no rain the last 24 hours. The smaller pond had overflowed and created pockets of water towards the street and Dr. Soper's home.

My guess or hunch was Mr. Randall was being factual and credible while Mark was just babbling to act smart despite having no knowledge let alone first hand knowledge. My hunch was right and a house was there! If you say a house is not there when in fact it is there and was never removed, in my opinion, you do not have any credibility to be be making such fabricated and false statements. Don't know why Joe would defend such a guy but that is Joe always trying to take the opposing veiw whether it is right or wrong....kind of like everyone says for the sake of an argument to get a high of sorts!

I was admitting I was vague. Mark was acting like he knew it all. He turned out to be wrong and I guess anyone can verify that if they want to waste a gallon of gasoline to see for themselves. I just think it is terrible that we have to have bloggers that shoot their mouths on these blogs while others have to go out and verify the truth.

Anyway, after visiting the property which was in a single home residential area, I thought it was terrible to zone it multi unit because a developer paid to much money for a property prone to flooding. If the Napergate Man was around and rallied the residents, this council decision would have never taken place.

I don't see this very wet 6 acres as being Park District quality land. The Park District has a policy of only seeking 15 acres or more. They should stick with that policy. I am totally against spending 4.1 million dollars of my money on this flood prone piece of land. The one soccer field you could put on would be way to moist to play on even after a week of sunshine. Most other times I would think it would be very muddy and wet when not flooded.

The Park District should not buy this land. The city council should reverse its decision to have made it high density. For those residents who don't know this can be done.

The Napergate Man led many subdivions to stop the building of a commercial plaza on a formerly residential lot known as Spring Green, that was rezoned by Brestal and the city council. I believe the Napergate Man also led another group that stopped a shopping center from being built on the SW corner of Naper Blvd. and 75th St. To this day it remains vacant land because of his struggles and those of the nearby residents. I believe he ran the residents in that area a full page ad called SouthWest Gate to publicize their cause and rally them.

Just because we lost the Napergate Man, that should not mean we can not fight or stand up to City Hall anymore. Why can't the residents of the area at least demand the improper multi-house zoning be reversed back to single family homes? And if Crestview wants to build let them build single family homes on a lot prone to flooding. Hopefully, they will bring in thousands of trucks of dirt and elevate the property if that is possible. Something tells me that pond water seeps undergroud as well as overground(but I could be wrong) thus the non-stop flooding of Dr. Soper's basement to the tune of 9 feet twice a year.

But it is ludicrous to think we taxpayers should pay 4.1 million for this lousy piece of property. Let Crestview take a beating as one blogger said. The Markham Developer who eventually built homes on Spring Green took a massive financial beating after the Napergate Man and residents stood up to him despite his Brestal connections to City Hall.

And really Dick Furstenau should be leading us in Napergate Style battles instead of wasting his time in court and leaving us without leadership. If Mr. Furstenau is not going to replace the Napergate Man somebody has to step up to the plate or Brestal will ruin this town just as he attempted to in the Napergate Era. Where is Council Member Douglas Krause when you need him? I guess running for state elections!

And maybe as some man named Frank hinted on the Napergate thread, maybe it is not the duty of citizens like the Napergate Man to be spending tons of money on ads over issues that concern most residents....maybe it is the duty of the Naperville Sun to try to be more like a watchdog instead of having citizens like the Napergate Man try to take on the massive responsibility and duty of newspapers.

Melissa -

Good to see we at least agree that the park district shouldn't be buying the land, at least not for $4 million. I can mildly support the purchase for a (much) lesser amount if the park district came out with a plan for the expanded park. But I haven't seen anything expect people who don't want to see more development in their area.

As for the flooding, there were many flood advisories on the news the last few days. Seems the melting snow doesn't seep into the still-frozen ground well. I am NOT putting this forward for the flooding there in the past, just anecdotal regarding what you maybe saw today.

I wasn't arguing for or against any one blogger's credibility, just pointing out that I would reserve judgment until it was something more than he-said / he-said. Thanks for taking the ride out there for a first-hand account.

Melissa,

I was defending against only the stance that some are trying to build on these blogs lately that one error makes them non credible for anything else. Everyone is wrong at times.

Had we accepted that stance then every single one of us have zero credibility because over the course of blogging we have all been wrong about something. There are multiple 'lots' over there and also have been multiple 'hobson' things up in front of the planning commission over the last few years and people sometimes make mistakes when conveying information.

That's what appeared to have happened and I don't think anyone's going to accuse you of 'harassing and bullying' Mark or ask that you be banned from the blogs either, so thank you for actually going and looking and reporting back with eye witness facts.

Melissa,

I knew the property was there the whole time as I drive by it at least 3-4 times a week. So I never believed that it wasn't there and I also gave you some directions on how to get to the property per your request. All I was doing was trying to clear up the whole home flooding vs. living in a flood plain question. I agree with you that $4.1 million is a lot to pay for the land and the Park District should not pay that price for it. Before I decide whether or not they should buy it though, I would like to know what they plan to do with the property if they do in fact buy it. Has anyone seen what their plans are? I agree adding any sort of playing fields would be a bad idea for a couple of reasons...one the potential for the fields to be very wet and two the fact that the property is in-between two very busy roads. I would hate to see soccer balls flying into the road as people are driving by, it could cause some traffic problems or potential injuries for kids running into the road to retrieve their ball. If they are just wanting to put a playground on the property, than that might be a different story...although it would be one expensive playground! If anyone has heard of their intentions for the land if they do buy it, please share that with us.

Melissa, I like your passion and your writing style. I enjoy reading your entries to the various blogs (I assume you are the same Melissa on the Furstenau blogs) as they show real energy and have good insight on the various topics. You have some good ideas and I think you make some good points in your entries. I hope you don't think I was attacking you on this blog, I was just trying to clarify things.

Take care,

Kevin

Kevin,
Thank you for the directions. My remarks were not directed at you but at Mark who said there is no home on the property. You gave me the directions and I drove there to find out the truth.
This Mr. Randall guy seems very credible and I believed him over Mark. But I guess nothing counts unless you go verify for yourself these days. It seems like T.B., Joe and Mark were calling me out on this one, so I decided to go out and do a personal inspection inspired by Ameena's visits to the library to get us facts on Napergate instead of rumors. I must admit she inspired me and you made it easy with your pin point directions. So thanks to the both of you very much!

I am the same Melissa from the Furstenau blogs as you correctly noted. I just left that thread because I felt we were just repeating ourselves over and over again. People did blog after I left and Joe was somehow insinuating they were me when I was here focused on another topic. Joe, does seem to be toning it down just a bit and I appreciate that. But he made a mistake and I made a mistake thinking someone was impersonating Mrs. Police Officer. It just seems like 2 different people were writing, but as soon as Mrs. Police Officer said it was her, I just figured she can be moody like the rest of us. I guess I had her on a pedestral because she showed so much control and diplomancy, and suddenly she become one of us moody ones. I guess I realized she is human with strong emotions and took her off the pedestral and consider her one of us now. I don't know if that makes any sense!
But in no way was I trying to hurt her. I was trying to defend her from what I thought was an imposter trying to take advantage of her respect and credibility. How wrong I was....almost embarrassing but my intentions were good and I was not trying to deceive anyone like Mark who said there was no home on the property and I did not know what I was talking about.

Kevin, I agree with what you said about that plot of land. It needs a lot of work and even for a soccer field it is to close to 2 streets as you indicated. I just hope taxpayers don't buy it. I think it is a terrible parcel of land that should be donated to the Park District by Crestview as it needs a ton of work and I believe will always flood. My feeling is Crestview knowingly bought a retention pond and their real desire is not to build on it but sell it to the taxpayers for 1.6 million profit or more based on a 2.5 million purchase price. Why do they deserve to make a profit when land has gone down in the last year.
Even much better land location-wise and not so flood prone was determined to cost half a million an acre by a Judge. So how could these 6 acres that are in a worse location and flood prone be worth $683,333 an acre. Just does not make sense to me! The Judge's ruling for the District 204 land price was before the value collapsed due to the bad real estate market and sub-prime mortgage problems..

It just seems as Ameena and others have said the opposition to the Brestal Law Firm collapsed with the retiremant of the Napergate Man. The majority in the city council and Brestal Law Firm run this town with no opposition or serious input from residents. Residents are just not questioning their leaders like in the Napergate Days. Residents it seems are so much more passive and missing leadership and organization.

Even during Napergate we had an activist named Donna Rogers who was able to mobilize almost as much as the Napergate Man without the power of his ads. Of course, I know he ran several ads for her but she seemed to have done a lot even without those ads. And when they combined forces, they seemed to have the ability to move mountains.

Since it seems like no one these days is willing to pay for expensive ads to mobilize some opposition to some bad projects, I just hope us bloggers can one day find a way to solve some problems and have a strong voice before city council as the residents did in the Napergate Era.

I obviously don't have the solution or leasdership skills, but I am just going to keep trying. And thanks again Kevin for those directions as I could not find them on the Internet. You were so helpful!

Melissa,
PS. Yes, Kevin and the thought of a 4.1 million dollar playgroud with a few swings and slides is frightening. That would be the most expensive playgroud in the USA undoubtedly. Plus it would be a very dangerous playground since it is so close to 2 ponds that kids could accidentally drown in if their Mommies or Daddies took a cell phone call and lost some concentration. My vote is NO to buying the land. Seems crazy that the Park District is even considering it after making my visual inspection!

Let us make it a landfill for 5 or 10 years so we can get some higher ground and then cover it with dirt and build a castle on top for visual effects....OK, I was just kidding on my last point!

Melissa,
Along with Kevin, Joe and T.B., I want to thank you for making the personal visit and giving us an eyewitness account full of details that no one would know unless they visited....such as the wooden Snow Man you mentioned with the Sopers wishing everyone a Happy New Year. I guess that quashed any doubt that this was your dentist's home.

It just seems odd how you were so unsure of yourself while Mark was so sure of himself and we find out he did not know what he was talking about.

Anyway thanks for making the visit and of course I agree with you that I wish the Napergate guy was around to help us get some results.

For the record I agree with T.B., Kevin, and Melissa that this property may not be best suited for Park District and expensive at that.

I respectfully disagree with Joe's Blog,
******************************************************************
Do whatever it takes to keep it Open Space.

Posted by: joe | January 2, 2008 02:58 PM
******************************************************************
It just seems like Joe has no limit as to what he is willing to pay for open space. More open space that is unnecessary really increases ones Real Estate Tax bill and with all the economic problems we are having I just don't want any more increases in my taxes especially due to a 4.1 million kiddie playground. May God have some mercy on this one!!!

Ameena,

The reason for my short remark about open space is because I keep observing the habit around here where open space is being paved over in the name of 'progress'. I saw it happen before where I lived in places that are now completely 'built'. By that I mean no more land anywhere. Lots get further and further subdivided up until you literally have only a few feet between structures on different lots. Quite frankly, it's a disgusting inevitability with the 'just keep building on it' mentality. Once open space is gone, it's gone.

Look at Springbrook Prarie. It's been made more 'human compatible' over the last few years and it will continue to be encroached upon until one day (I fear) it will no longer be what it is that it may lose its 'preserve' status. There's talk of building golf ranges, archery ranges and other 'human compatible' facilities and structures there and in other 'preserves'. Someone forgot what the word 'preserve' actually means.

Ideally the land owner would donate the parcel to the city and follow in the lines of the Mitchel estate with gifting land for public use but I seriously doubt that will happen. Again, once it's gone, it's gone. Concrete jungles are disgusting places to live and it would be a shame to see Naperville continue on that path of eventuality.

You are mostly correct though, Ameena, having seen the extreme other end I have no problem opening up my wallet to preserve open space in the city I love.

I guess I am slightly embarrassed but not quite the serial liar that Melissa makes me out to be. I admit, I assumed that Crestview already demolished the house as most builders do for liability reasons (hate to have some child drown in the severely flooded house; there must have been water pouring out of the windows). However, a bad assumption on my part does not really change any of my previous statements.

I'm glad you did a little field trip out there, Melissa, because your own statements show that your claims have little merit. You drove into the property, so obviously it could not be in a flood plain, or prone to the biblical flooding you seem to say will happen. While many other areas in Chicagoland are experiencing major floods, you were able to get out and walk around the property(I assume this as you made no mention of needing a boat). Must not be that big of a flooding problem. While you were trespassing, did you check out the basement for water? Assuming that the electric has been off in an abandoned house, water should have been pouring out of the windows as sump pumps would not be running.

You say that one of the ponds had overflowed, "even though there has been no rain in the past 24 hours". So an old unimproved piece of farmland is supposed to magically drain when the experts are saying rivers in the are have not even crested from the rainfall we've had? And even with that flooding, your floodplain is even completely flooded?

You say I am not credible because of a bad assumption that really has no bearing on the discussion. Your whole field trip shows at least your lack of knowledge, if not your lack of credibility.

Flooding issues, engineering issues, and credibility issues aside, the real issue is that the NIMBY's want the rest of the city to buy land so they can keep their open space at someone else's (taxpayer's) expense. I wonder who didn't want your home built so they could keep 'their' open space?

Bottom line is, if people want open space so badly, they should spend their own money to buy the property and not saddle the taxpayer's with their problems.

Edward can build 120 foot building in somebody's back yard. Water Street developers can build condos that will tower 70+ feet over the Riverwalk. Developer gets higher density on Hobson Ponds property because he "can't make money" on prime land in the #2 city in the country. What do all of these have in common? A council that refuses to protect homeowners. But they have one other thing in common. All were represented (like many other developers asking for major zoning changes) by Dommermuth Brestal. And all were supported by Rosanova, whose son works for Dommermuth. Curious, with the hundreds (thousands?) of law firms in the Chicago area that the son of a member of city council finds employment with the most connected developer attorney in town. But, of course, Rosanova keeps on participating, agressively endorsing the plans proposed by the son's employer. Anybody else here smell a rat?

Here is a challenge for the moderators: Aside from the issue of Hobson Ponds, ask straight out whether Rosanova should be voting on issues brought in front of council by his son's employer. Run an online poll. Start a potluck thread. Whether or not it is a technical violation of the law, should a member of city council be voting on issues that favor a child's employer?

Mark,
You started up with Melissa assuming her assumptions were wrong even though she admitted she was vague and not sure.

Well, her vagueness exceeded your certainty about the house being taken down!

She did an honest eyewitness report. She had initially only said her dentist said the house floods 2 times a year. So she visited the lot one of the other 363 days and found partial flooding instead of full flooding. How does that make her inaccurate?

Now, you want to slam her for your incompetence by splitting hairs. That is really being ridiculous!

And she never called you a serial liar...you called yourself that! She said that you were lacking a little credibility...that's all! So let us not make a mountain out of a moehill.

Sorry, but your defense does not sit well with me! When you are wrong you are wrong, it is no big deal. You seem to want to make it a big deal by defending yourself by dicing and slicing!

She visits a vacant property that the Park District is trying to buy with her and our money. And you also accuse her of trespassing but yet you want her to break into the home and check the basement. Now, wouldn't that be burglary! I have never seen such a defense full with so much logic before in my life.

Fed up with spineless council,

You are echoing what all those Napergatians have been saying on all these blogs regarding the Brestal Connection for months.

They city council ran rampant pre Napergate Era...

The Napergate Man seemed to neutralize them in the Napergate Era...

And now they are running rampant again post Napergate Era...

Like many others you seem frustrated and we need some leadership to replace the retired Napergate Man. I am hoping it will come from the Naperville Sun as they really seem like the only ones with the resources to do it. The Napergate Man did it with black ink he bought from the Sun. The Naperville Sun owns tons of black ink. Are they willing to use any to help the residents? Don't know! Maybe the Moderator has the answers?

Jenny, Fed up with spineless council, et. al.:

This is a great forum, we're seeing good citizen participation and hearing a lot of valid criticism about decisions and decision-makers in Naperville. Thanks for the suggestion about Rosanova, we'll plan on getting a thread up about that soon. I think while this blog has potential to effect change, it's important to realize that it's only one means and that if people really want to hold public officials accountable and have a say in policies and laws they need to become more active in the civic process as well. What I'm trying to say is, The Sun's print edition will pursue investigations and continue reporting on issues around town in the traditional method that people are used to. There are opportunities at every school board, park board and city council meeting for people to ask questions of their elected officials. If there was a grassroots movement to effect change, we'd be all over it. Yes, we have the means to shape public opinion, but there is a huge responsibility that comes with that. Some people talk about wanting change, but what are they actually doing about it? Look at the harsh criticism directed at the District 204 school board, then look at the results of the last school board election, and the third high school referendum. We've got to be fair. I've got to run, more on this later.

Randy -

While not trying to validate all of what Mark wrote, I think you missed some of his sarcasm and I think he did have a point regarding the flood warnings. I don't think a day on which there were flood warnings is a true indicator of whether or not the property is very prone to flooding. Though I do appreciate Melissa going out to the property and I mostly agree with her opinions regarding the purchase of the property and its usefulness (or lack thereof) to the park district.

Jenny -

I somewhat agree. Though I would like to see The Sun do more investigative articles on the city councilmen's ties to builders and the alleged good-old-boy network (previously described as The Establishment); The Sun has to walk a fine line.

If I were to percive the paper as being biased one way or the other, I would cancel my subscription as I prefer my news sources to be objective. The Sun has an obligation to report news, not make it happen.

T.B.

T.B.,

You get it. You used a lot fewer words to express the point I was trying to make.

Randy, when someone says that I am "just babbling to act smart despite having no knowledge" and "in my opinion, you do not have any credibility to be be making such fabricated and false statements." then finishing it off with 'Don't know why Joe would defend such a guy" she is doing a little more than saying I am "lacking a little credibility". Was I harsh with Melissa? Only as harsh as she was with me. By the way, Randy, the 363 days thing is splitting hairs when we actually have flood conditions now.

I admit that I was wrong in assuming that Crestview Builders took the usual route of immediately demolishing the house as most builders do for liability reasons. Even the city did this with the property the took from the business owner on the NE corner of 75th and Washington, property that has still not been put to use. Wonder how many tax dollars Naperville has lost out on by forcing out a good business to early? But that's another subject. The fact is that Melissa herself saw a little flooding on a property that would get all new drainage systems when it is developed, not the flood plain type flooding she insisted was there. Her insistence of flooding was and is much more strident than my two sentences assuming that the house was gone. Not incompetence, Randy, just a bad assumption. Oh, by the way, if she had looked into the basement, it would have only added breaking and entering to her trespass charges.

Once again, all other matters aside, the question was should Naperville buy the property.

Melissa fist said no, the price was too high, condemn it and take it for a lower price. One of my problems with eminent domain is that cities try to low ball the property owner, and then make them go to court to receive the true value of the land, as we just saw in the 204 case. If the property is really needed for the 'good of the people' as eminent domain was created for, the cities should pay the property owner at least twice the value of the land, if not more, for forcing people off of their own land, or refusing to let them profit from their investment.

Now Melissa is saying that Crestview should just donate the land. Would she just donate any investment property that she bought? I really doubt it.

As I said before, if people want the open space left after they built their house in someone else's open space to remain open, buy it. Don't expect your view to remain at the taxpayer's expense.

Fed up with Spineless Council, Jenny, T.B., Randy, Melissa, and Host Ted,

I was enjoying your conversations especially Host Ted's quote,

------------------------------------------------------------------
"There are opportunities at every school board, park board and city council meeting for people to ask questions of their elected officials. If there was a grassroots movement to effect change, we'd be all over it."
------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes, I was at the library again and your quote above so much describes what the Napergate Man did in Napergate XXXVI. That is the one following the AD the Naperville Sun published on the Napergate thread which was Napergate XXXV. In this ad he does exactly what you wrote. He told people about an election forum sponsored by the Naperville Homeowners Association and urged them to come check out the 11 candidates of which he had already endorsed 3. Based on his personal attendance of this forum he picked and endorsed the 4th in a subsequent ad!

His grassroots movement was based on exposing these developer friendly candidates who were beholden to Brestal's Law Firm. He explained to his readers that they must get involved in order to stop what he perceived as corruption or at the minimum a conflict of interest! His grassroots movement was converted to votes that made a difference in a big way at election time.

That year of 1999, again his entire Napergate Slate of Mary Ellingson, Gary Von Behren, Dick Furstenau and David Fiore were all elected. They were the, 4 out of 11, he asked the voters to vote for. He convinced the residents to elect his candidates thru his grass roots movement, some hard core facts, and by rallying the residents thru his Napergate Ads. He pulled a COMPLETE SWEEP!

Other candidates he had endorsed successfully at different elections were Douglas Krause, Darlene Senger and the now infamous Rosanova. In this ad dated Feb 10, 1999 he yanked his support for Rosanova who he endorsed at an earlier time and accused him of alleged betrayal for receiving three $1000 dollars contributions from developers and an attorney. His exact words were,
------------------------------------------------------------------
"In case you have not heard, it has now been learned that Council Members Macrane, Gallaher, and Rosanova have each received 3 one thousand dollar campaign contributions from developers and an attorney."
------------------------------------------------------------------

So it seems the way he did it was dig up the mud, publish the mud in his Napergate Ads, and call for the residents to join his grassroots movement. It worked!

I think what is missing in this post Napergate ERA is the INK that Jenny mentions. Without the INK to reach the estimated 22,000 subscribers and 60,000 readers of the Naperville Sun(half the town at the time) he could have never been successful in his grassroots campaign. The INK filled the elections forums, the city council meetings, and Homeowner Federation meetings.

I don't think we can get the grassroots movement he developed without the INK. I really believe he was doing the duty of a newspaper. And the Sun needs to take over his duties. Many newspapers endorse candidates including the Chicago Tribune and Sun-Times. Why can't the Naperville Sun endorse anti-establishment candidates who are against the conflicts of interest we see being perpetuated by Council Members Wehrli and Rosanova?

I disagree with T.B. that it is the duty of a paper to remain neutral. It must be pro-active and go to the direction its investigative reporting leads it to. If it uncovers that the Establishment Party is corrupt, it should tilt to the Napergate Party. If it uncovers the Napergate Party is corrupt it should tilt to the Establishment Party. But staying neutral in the face of corruption by either side is NONSENSE!

I think a newspaper has the duty to do investigative reporting and not endorse candidates who carry a lot of baggage and all the wrong connections. It is a duty of the newspaper to always try and uncover the truth and report it to its readers. It is the duty of a newspaper to publicize all these forums and encourage its readers to attend them.

After reading TB's post, it seemed he easily swayed Host Ted to back track a bit from his GREAT POST of 9:39am. I felt TB issued an unfair ultimatum to the Host by threatening to cancel his subscription if he does not tow the Establishment line under the cover of "DON'T YOU DARE BE BIASED" or I will cancel.

I disagree with TB that the Sun only has an obligation to report the news. The Sun should make it happen when necessary. Endorsing candidates makes it happen. Editorials make it happen! Investigative reporting makes the news happen. It is silly to think that investigative reporting is the sole domain of the Napergate Man. It should not be! The Naperville Sun has every duty and obligation to its readers to do its fair share of investigative reporting and uncover mud where ever it can be found and make sure it falls on the heads of the culprits who created it.

I was very impressed with Ted's blog(Posted by: Ted Slowik, host | January 10, 2008 09:39 AM ). It seemed to contain the secret formula used by the Napergate Man for many years to develop a grassroots movement and shake and bake the Establishment just a bit.

Ted has promised to give us a thread on Rosanova soon. Ted stated,

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I think while this (Rosanova) blog has potential to effect change,"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

and this is exactly what you need to get the grassroots movement going combined with all the rest he mentioned in his well thought out post.

It is apparent that the Napergate Man called Rosanova out in his Napergate XXXVI dated on February 10, 1999. I think Host Ted is going to allow us to call him out again 9 years later, after we are done bloggin about him and his connections to the Brestal Law Firm which may not be limited to ONLY his son, but also conflict of interest campaign contributions as disclosed by the Napergate Man in his ads. His SCREAMING at a resident is only relevant as it pertains to his hypocritical censure of DF for allegedly SCREAMING at city employees. But we have Rosanova on video tape! We have DF on nothing! Who is more guilty??? Who is the only one guilty for CERTAIN?

Again for all those who don't want to see the relevance between the Napergate Era and NOW, it is all there for you to see in black and white. The Napergate Man was light years ahead of the rest of us in telling us Rosanova was a bad apple after endorsing him and watching him FLIP FLOP to the establishment for favors provided to him by the good old boy network in town!

Yes, we are in the INTERNET AGE but INK still matters. I am pretty sure the Naperville Sun still has a circulation of over 20,000. We are lucky to have 200 bloggers yappin on here. And if Joe is right we may only have 2 bloggers....Joe and everyone who is against him who he pretty much now claims may be one person disguised as the other 199.(slightly exaggerating) If Joe is right he made the strongest point for INK yet....lol...

So either INK is still 100 times as powerful as bloggin, or if Joe is right, 10,000 times as powerful as bloggin. Either way we can not underestimate the power of a PRINT NEWSPAPER. The Napergate Man never made this mistake despite having had a Napergate.com Web Site, a Napergate@hotmail.com e-mail address, and phone voice mail even in that ERA. He used all the ammunition he could muster his hands on to get a grassroots movement going. We need to follow suit or we will fail in forming a new grassroots movement to effect change, that Host Ted suggested we need while stating "we'd(the Sun) be all over it", if it happened!

Ameena,

Wow, Naperville is lucky to have you.

Another way to look at it is those two anti-war protesters--one from Naperville--who are awaiting trial in DuPage County for hanging an "Impeach Bush" banner from the tollway. They get a lot of ink from us and other media. They're anti-establishment, saying the cops are hassling them for political reasons. Heck, two weeks went by after the incident before police showed up and arrested them. (Sound familiar?).

Now, you could say the media -- including The Sun -- is biased toward their cause, because we report stories that appear sympathetic toward them. Actually, the way it works is that the anti-war protesters get ink because they are organized! They get a half dozen of their friends and supporters to show up outside the courthouse in Wheaton whenever they appear before a judge, they put out a press release saying they'll be out there, and the press shows up, and if it's a slow news day they might be on Page 1! It's happened. Admittedly, most assignment editors are lazy, unthinking, uncreative, unoriginal and uninformed. I don't even think some of those are words. See how ignorant I am? But most of us know news when we see it, and I remember we did write stories and take pictures when Donna Rogers got 200 people to protest the gas station known as Spring Green.

So, Ameena, I agree with half of what you say. A community newspaper like The Sun absolutely has an obligation to investigate public officials, and report on controversial issues in the community. But I would say we shouldn't be driving the bus. Maybe we have a seat near the front of the bus and we're shouting directions in the driver's ear, or maybe the press is the bus itself, but in the chicken-and-egg scenario people have to do something first before the press reports it and/or provides the forum for people to express opinions about it.

Ameena, point of clarification:

I made no claim about the number of people posting here even though you write as if I have stated anything as an accusation or fact.

Since you obviously do take the time to dig into FACTS in the library, please also take the time to dig into FACTS on this blog area where I stated a number of times that I am not certain what's going on with the postings and their origins. You restating it as a fact that "And if Joe is right we may only have 2 bloggers". I distinctly recall stating on multiple occasions at least 3 scenarios, all of which still include more than 2 bloggers.

I wouldn't want your 'credibility' to be hurt by such inaccurate representations of what other people post, so consider this a polite 'correction' where the truth is concerned.

Hello,

Just an FYI...Rod Randall is quoted in the Sun about the Hobson West Ponds...here is the link to the article, http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/napervillesun/news/736493,6_1_NA11_PARK_S1.article. Check it out!

Take care,

Kevin

Joe,
Lighten up! I was just joking with you to make a point as to the power of the INK the Napergate Man purchased from the Naperville Sun for his full page ads! I know you believe that there is more than one blogger on these sites besides you. I do too!

Anyway I would rather have seen you commnent on the important issues I wrote about, instead of commenting about YOURSELF especially when I was just harmlessly kidding around with YOU!

OK, here is a question for you Joe? Do you think that INK the Napergate Man purchased from the Naperville Sun was powerful or useless? Try to give me a straight answer with no ifs or buts! And tell me why?

Ameena
PS. I am glad we put my towing problem behind us and we can move forward....as Eli said we need to stop beating dead horses. I miss Eli!

Ameena,

Previously I said I did not receive the Sun nor see his ads at the time, but I did see the scan of the one posted here.

Having said that and knowing the proliferation of internet based news during that time period and the percentage of penetration into the public sector with people who routinely turned to the internet for their information, I would have to agree with you that during that time period INK would have been very powerful and definitely not useless. It's certainly not useless today even though internet usage amongst citizens is even greater than it was back then.

Amazing... something we agree upon :)

Ameena -

I never said the Sun (or any news organization) should not do investigative reporting. I never said or implied as you stated that “investigative reporting is the sole domain of the Napergate Man”. In fact, if you actually READ (yes, a rare capitalization on my part) my post, you will see that I said “I would like to see The Sun do more investigative articles on the city councilmen's ties to builders and the alleged good-old-boy network (previously described as The Establishment)”. I NEVER (there I go again) said the Sun should refuse to uncover corruption in the city.

What you obviously fail to realize is that investigative reporting can be done by a neutral newspaper. It just means that your news source would not have a bias, would not have an agenda, and would remain more CREDIBLE (how do you stop this?). If a news organization loses their neutrality and actively advocates for one side or the other, who would take the investigative reports seriously?

You see this happening in the press today, with those on the right dismissing CNN or the NY Times as liberally biased and those on the left dismissing Fox News as nothing more than right-wing propaganda.

I think Ted did a good job describing how the Sun rides the bus, but does not drive or direct it. I also think you confuse investigative reports with opinion and editorials. Investigative reports must be based on facts, where the Sun has the freedom to write opinion and editorial articles based on, you guessed it, opinions.

If the “INK” (your caps here, I’ve been through capitalization rehab) is so important, why doesn’t DF lend more money to his campaign and run his own Napergate-type ads? Ted, how much is a full-page ad? I bet it would be very manageable divided by the 3,000 or 3,500 Napergatians still out there.

T.B.

TB,

It's entirely possible that money from a lawsuit can be used to buy an awful lot of advertising and campaign material or even used to repay (sometime in the future) yet another fronted loan to an organization for said purposes.

It would not be the first time loans were floated to drive campaigns.

Joe,
Yes, Joe we finally agree! Thanks for not if-ing or but-ing my question. See how nice it is to AGREE!

I bet if you stopped if-ing or but-ing questions you would agree with many bloggers, gain a lot of respect and become very likable. Try it, you'll like it!!!

Host Ted,
Thanks for giving activist Donna Rogers her due credit. I was going to discuss her in a later blog but you beat me to the punch. My research indicates her and the Napergate Man fit like a hand and glove. They were very close and literally neighbors. Very effective when they teamed up on projects like Spring Green and SouthWest Gate.(SW corner of Naper Blvd. and 75th St.)

However if it was not for the INK the Napergate Man purchased from you guys to promote their rally she would never have had those 200+ foot demonstrators and dozens of horn beeping vehicles filled with children and dangling balloons.

I am curious what the Naperville Sun circulation is. The numbers I have been broadcasting are my personal estimates based on NOTHING. I wish you would straighten me out before someone CALLS me out for erroneous numbers! You know I just made peace with Joe, so I don't want him CALLING ME OUT!

And thanks for your nice comment about me. That was very nice of you and if you agree half way with me, that means I only need to work on you 1% more to bring you on my side. Should not be that difficult!

I don't mean to interupt all the nit picking, and personal attacks on this blog, but I would like to answer the question "Should Naperville Buy Ponds of Hobson West?"

This has been hashed, and rehashed for a few years now. Let the builder develop it. The PONDS will STILL be there. The builder is planning to build on the tract of land between the ponds where an abandoned residence currently sits. This land has been zoned residential, and now multi-family. It sits between single family homes and a townhouse development, so the new development will maintain the character of the neighborhood.

I love nature, and green space, especially here in Naperville, but the Hobson Ponds area is within blocks of Gartner Park, Brighton Ridge Park, Hobson West Park, Knoch Park, Westglen Park, and the massive Springbrook Prairie Preserve, just to name a few. There's plenty of green space, and recreational space to be found right in the area! Within easy walking distance!

This little tract of land between the ponds is not worth 4.1 million, 2.5 million, or even $600, 000 in my opinion.

I think City Council got it right. As others have mentioned, it is not a great place for a park, right between two busy steets. The city didn't want it, the Park District didn't want it, the Conservation Foundation didn't want it. NOBODY concerned with conservation came forward to purchase it.

I think the best use for that land is to have a multi-family development, as planned. The ponds will still be enjoyed by people nearby.

I have lived in Naperville for 11 years, and I have passed the ponds almost daily. I have never stopped to walk around there. It is inconveniently located. Nowhere to park. Not much to it. A view of townhouses, single family homes, and a grocery store...not very park-like. If they have to take half of that space to lay concrete for a parking lot for people to park, it won't leave much room for recreation.

The city has made a decision. It was the right one. Let's move on.

Ameena –

This may be a little off of the Hobson West topic, but you did bring it up so....

You seem to admire that the Napergate Man was able to “dig up the mud” on Rosanova by revealing that he took money from attorneys and developers.

Do those criteria still hold for someone to be in good standing with the Napergatians today? If so, maybe you should check out DF’s disclosures to the State Board of Elections where he shows he took money from the following:

Harp-Krug Venture LLC - the developers of Freedom Commons
Calamos Properties Development LLC
BBM Incorporated – developer Dwight Yackley’s company
Willard Brestal of the apparently evil Brestal law firm
Kimball Hill Homes
Moser Enterprises Inc.
Steve Carr Builders Inc

What’s good for the goose is good for the gander, right?

T.B.

For reference the web site is located at: http://www.elections.state.il.us/CampaignDisclosure/ItemizedContrib.aspx

WOW

For a thread that just recently started this has exploded.

I, along with Rod Randall and many other residents of the Hobson West and The Fields sub-division, have been very active in this process. Let me add to this blog.

I built my house in unit 1 of the sub-division when West Street did not exist. For a while we drove across the field to the stop sign at Emerald & West, The city finally stopped this by dumping some big piles of dirt near the stop sign.

The Ponds and the land between.

Rod's history "The two pond and other common areas of the new Hobson West subdivision were given by Mid-America to the newly formed homeowners association. The homeowners association gave the two ponds (a total of 9 acres) to the Naperville Park District." This was done sometime in the early years of 1980. Thus in our minds the residents of Hobson West have already stepped up and contributed to a key portion to this potential complete 15 acre park.

While I am in no way justifying the $4.1 million number if it is thought as the price of to be completing a 15 acre park, 9 acres of which were obtained at zero cost, it works out to about $275,000 per acre.

Every Hobson West parent knew Marge Soper because of her position at the local school, and more that a few (like Melissa) were patients of her husband.

It was not a secret that the property had been looked at by others who declined to purchase. I suspect that many concluded that building on it was deemed "iffy" for various reasons.

What kicked this whole thing off

Most of us did not know the property was sold until the public meeting signs went up for the Planning Commission meeting. Rod's recounting of the trial and tribulations of the rezoning is correct. The property had been zoned as R1A - Single Family Homes for many years.

What got myself and many others concerned was the fact that Crestview purchased the property. Crestview immediately perpared plans for townhouses and filed for rezoning. Crestview apparently never considered building single family homes. During review by the Planning Commission the Commission requested to see a plan for single family homes. This request was ignored by Crestview.

Many of us walked Hobson West, The Fields, Greenacres, Buttonwood, and the Highlands distributing petitions and collecting signatures. Of the 1,116 signatures collected, 1,061 - 95% DID NOT approve of the requested rezoning to multi-family townhouses. A common refrain was ... if it can't become park land for goodness sake lets keep it as single family not townhouses.

During the final City Council meeting on the rezoning request virtually every council member waxed eloquently about how great the property would be as .... a park, .... open space, ... a gem, etc., so close to the city center. After those speeches they promptly voted to rezone the property to 22 townhouses!

The one year hiatus in physical work on the site left a 12 month window to find another purchaser. The park District was the logical purchaser since they own the property on three sides of the property, the north and south ponds, and a narrow sliver on the east side which connects (landwise) the two ponds.

We have remained active in keeping this issue in front of the city and park district.

What could the Park District do

During the process we have provided the Park District a couple of dozen ideas including: picnic area, walking & biking trails, nature center, fishing center, wedding center, archery, and many many more. I believe that they probably have many, many more ideas but I understant they do not want to expend a lot of staff time to develop a definitive plan until the actually own it.

The Ponds and the fishing available off the dock is great. Unfortunately, it is difficult to get to because there is no parking on the site and therefore it underutilized. One of our group was present when a little boy pulled in an a really big fish (about 18''), he was not happy when his dad said he had to toss it back. Councilmen Wehrli commented to me that his son caught a big fish last fall.

The fishing is one of the key features of this site that makes the park a truly unique park in Naperville which is enjoyed by parents with their children from all over Naperville and nearby towns. It is significantly more then a local neighborhood tot park or retention basin/soccer field.

What Crestview plans

From the application for approval of the final plat submitted on January 2, 2008 and the documents submitted to the city in earlier proceedings:

5 Building lots around a very short cul-d-sac in the north end of the property. These 5 building lots will contain:
3 buildings with 5 townhouses
1 building with 4 townhouses
1 buildings with 3 townhouses

What is interesting is that even though the 3 unit building is only 20% of the buildings the sketches of the 3 unit building is included with the application as though it is representative of what will be built. Even more interesting, Crestview has sketches of 4 & 5 unit buildings because that is what they are building at their property at 248th Ave and 103rd St on the SW side.

6.001 Acres of the Property
1.004 Acres conveyed to the Park District as land donation (0.359 acres) and wet lands formed as the north end of the South Pond.
----------
4.997 Acres of Residential area.

4.145 Acres for the 5 building lots
----------
0.852 Acres for the Right of Way (short Cul-d-sac), common areas and the storm water pond with a capacity of 1.6 acre feet of storm water and estimated by me at about 0.54 acres of land.

Based on building size and the footprint of the private drives it is estimated that about half of the building lots area will be hard surface (no rain water adsorption). It won't take much of a heavy downpour to fill up that storm water pond.

The original plans call for these townhouses to have full basements.

Reportedly, one potential buyer did some soil testing and found that the water table was within 6-12 feet of the ground surface. If true the footing of the buildings would typically be "under water"; the sump pumps had better not lose power during a rain storm.

Someone stated "I would not be surprised if they planted the opposition against building. It is the only way they get 4.1 million for swamp land!"

Would that it be true. If we were getting the same rate that Brestal's firm is billing Crestview, my friends an I could retire today. As it is I anxiously await my SS deposit every month.

Wow, Doug, that was really generous of your homeowner's association to donate those ponds to the Park District. Kind of clever, too. You gave land that would have cost the homeowner's association a lot of maintenance money to keep up over the years without losing many rights as you could still use the now public property. Basically, because of your association, the public has paid the price of the upkeep of this property for years.

Now, when someone wants to develop privately held property, you want the taxpayers to step up and foot the bill again to keep 'your' open space. I guess if you made the scam work once, why not twice?

Bottom line, once again, if you want to keep that space open, buy it. Have your association buy it (and then you can pull the donation scam again). Otherwise, let the development go on, and then there will be more taxpayer's money available for the next attempted land grab.

Now that Doug Dallmer has added some further comments about the property, I think a few things should be emphasized.

The nearby residents had no objection to single-family homes being built on the "Ponds" property. It is estimated that between 10-15 single-family homes could easily be developed on the property and not leave a dense footprint like these proposed townhouses. Also, single-family homes would provide for set backs that would be compatible with the existing area.

The petition that was circulated only dealt with the proposed zoning change. Maintaining the land as open space was not discussed at that point in time.

The residents objected to the dense look to the proposed development. The five buildings are scrunched on one end of the property. Several of the buildings looked like massive walls of brick facing the streets. Also, the setbacks from the sidewalks are only a short distance from the sidewalks. The homes along West Street and the multi-family dwellings on Plainfield-Naperville Road across the road are set back much further and thus have a more open appearance (note: the rear of three of the buildings face the two streets). Crestview Builders said that there are many nice looking townhouse developments in Naperville. They cited the one at Chicago Avenue and Charles Street as an example. If the development looked like that one, most of the residents likely would have not been opposed.

The only entrance to the development would be a short cul-de-sac. Most of the 22 townhouses would have very narrow "private" roadways to give access to driveways. Five of the driveways would exit directly on the cul-de-sac. For a number of the townhouses, garbage pick-up would be very difficult as a garbage truck would have to back up from these townhouses to get back to the cul-de-sac. Snow removal would also be difficult on these narrow roadways.

There appears to be a sidewalk around the cul-de-sac. There are no sidewalks in front of the town houses. If there were to be any children living in any of the townhouses (or visiting), there is no outdoor place for them to play except for the driveways as there is limited space behind the buildings.

There are only 6 parking spaces allotted for visitors. And, these are all located across from one of the buildings. Thus, the owners of these townhouses surely would be limited to the number of visitors, etc., especially during holiday periods.

After the City Council rezoned the property (and at the urging of the City Council to pursue with the Park District the acquisition of the property), the residents approached the Park District to acquire the property.

The Park District survey completed in 2004 showed that those responding wanted, as the top priority, the Park District to acquire more open space and provide for more passive activities such as hiking trails.

The Park district spends minimal effort related to maintaining the two ponds. Of, course they do mow the grass around them.

I just read the Naper Sun article in todays paper, Ponds land sale stuck in limbo.
Interesting how resident Marion Baran stated to the Park Board; "This most beautiful open space should be added to the City of Naperville at any cost"
It is amazing how money is no object when spending everyone else's money, although it seems to be the norm for any NIMBY group with and agenda lately.

She then goes on to say; "Run a referendum just as the DuPage County Forest Preserve District did, and they were successful.The citizens of Naperville will answer the call." Then another resident went on to suggest the district should consider placing the question on the fall ballot.

Now that is a great idea. We then could actually find out how the rest of the residents feel about $4 million of taxpayer money being spent purchasing land for a park. But, in reality, I highly doubt the land will still be available by the time a fall referendum rolls around.

Moderator,
I posted this blog on an old Furstenau thread but since it has some relevance and discusses the Ponds of Hobson West issue, I thought maybe it belongs on this thread too. Thanks!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Joe and T.B.,
The only contriubution I could track was a $2000 one from Brestal to Citizens for Furstenau but it was for his State and not Local Election. I hope you can review my work.

Apparently after the Napergate Man first uncovered these contributions from Brestal to City Council Members on a frequent and continuing basis they stopped completley. He caught them red-handed, embarrassed them, and you could say straightened them out. There were no contributions to any City Council Member from Brestal or his law firm after the disclosure in those infamous Napergate Ads. It just show you the lasting effect this Napergate guy had on city politics.

If you want my "take" on why Brestal made that very large contribution to Furstenau: he wanted to get rid of him and install him in State Congress and off the City Council. Furstenau is a thorn in Brestal's back. As a State Representative he can not vote on local development projects.

And if it did not work, he would have indirectly pacified Furstenau with that indirect contribution. Brestal is very clever! I do not know if Furstenau was clever in taking this contribution. I think he was dumb in taking it even if it was for state. If misunderstood by the Napergatians, they could turn on him. They are really his foundation and the greatest behind the scenes supporters of Furstenau.

This Ameena librarian chick, really uncovered the deep and long connections between the Napergate Man and Dick Furstenau, but I do not think they are as clear as she thinks and I contemplate a double edged sword of sorts coming out of the mess she is digging up.(For example, she fails to disclose that the Napergate Man has a very good relationship with current Mayor George Pradel after having a terrible/disastrous relationship with the prior 3 Mayors)

Hey thanks for your help Joe and T.B.! I was really having a hard time. You both do a nice job neutralizing those Napergtians that seem to increase by numbers each day. I just think the word got out about bloggin, it has become popular, and with 3500 or more of them out there you will see more and more jumping on soon. They are known activists so this is a new forum for them to bring their agendas forward.

I respect them but I have to agree with the blogger who said they do flock to the Napergate Man like sheep. I think once he won a few major and long court battles against City Hall, and overturned a few controversial Brestal Development projects, they did begin to follow him blindly. That comment really upset the Napergatians! It really struck a cord with them.

It would be interesting to see what the reaction of Napergatians is to this $2000 Brestal to Furstenau donation. But it will be a gray area because it was for state and not for city council.

Now if he took a contribution to run for city council from Brestal and he started to vote pro-Brestal on each project, I can guarantee you the Napergatians would disown him immmediately as they disowned Rosanova whom they previously endorsed and successfully had elected when he was a no-name! They are not going to support any council member with ties to Brestal's Law Firm and who supports Brestal blindly or on nearly every project.

From what I gather I think the Napergatans are much more anti-Brestal than they are pro-Furstenau. I see some support for Fustenau from them but it is lukewarm as they do not want to be wrong and have it blow up in their faces.

That is a very organized and powerful group even though it is reported their leader retired. The Napergate Man had many sharp lieutanants including Activist Donna Rogers and Attorney Richard Strawbridge. If they are still in town, I do not know why they don't take over the leadership.

PONDS OF HOBSON WEST ISSUE....

I suspect if Brestal returns to his old ways they will pop back up stronger than ever. I think the zoning of the Ponds of Hobson West issue to high density is the kind of issue that drives this group crazy...insane is a better word! So I think the city council made a huge mistake here and I see some opposition building soon. When the city goes against 91% of the resident or whatever one blogger said, they are just bringing trouble. If just makes no sense a city council voted in by the resident would go against the residents. I just don't get it. I blame the city council for the creation of the Napergate Man. Their actions made it happen! He just did not happen in a vacuum.

The Napergatians could care less if it was a park or single homes. But rezoning it to high density by Brestal to enable the developer to make more money, I suspect is what is upseting them. It is so much like Spring Green. My prediction is without their leader and his ads, they will not be able to overturn it back to low density. The Napergate Man was the key to their success. He also was an articulate writer who used his ads to motivate people and bring them to the meetings like herds of sheep. I don't know why that blogger who said that was so intimidated for saying what amounted to the truth when the Napergatians jumped on him.

Having said all I said, I think Furstenau is an idiot. He is no Napergate Man! He is brainless and spineless! He does not think of the consequences of what he does. If he somehow became the leader of the Napergatians, he will bring their downfall. That is my opinion from some personal knowledge and reading these blogs.

Host,

I am the one who asked you to delete 3 threads to make your main page look better and be more productive. You did meet my request and thank you!

I noticed your thread, "Who do you like in Local Elections,"
is another dud that needs to be deleted before your most succesful thread ever, "City Attorney hits back at Furstenau" will be deleted from the Main Page the next time you put a new thread on.

One has 329 posts. One has 1 post! I am sure you will meet my 4th request even though I seem demanding and delete the "one post blog" to save your best thread yet a little longer. One post in 5 days really means you struck out for th 4th time. But at least you are trying just like baseball players until you hit the home run...which you have numerous times! And you had one grand slam that is about to be deleted...lets us enjoy your Grand Slam a little longer..

My invoice is in the mail. Please pay within 10 days!

NOTE from Ted Slowik, host:

Elizabeth,

When threads are bumped off the home page, it's easy to find them by going to archives or categories on right-hand side of the home page. We're still getting active participation in D203 threads that have been off the home page for weeks. Furstenau, while our most popular, has been up there for 2 1/2 weeks, since Dec. 27. As for threads with fewer comments, sometimes they take a little while to take off. Ponds and smoking were slow starters, only a few comments in first few days. And the election one we have to keep up because we told the local candidates we would, since in print we don't run letters to the editor supporting one particular candidate. Time to let it go.

Rod Randall -

I think those opposed to the current development plans would have more success getting the city council to reverse the multi-family housing zoning than they will in getting anyone to buy the land for open space.

Maybe the efforts are mis-directed?

T.B.

T.B., Rod Randall, R.J., Mark, and Doug Dallmer,

I agree 100% with TB latest post.

Also this quote from Doug Dallmer was very distrubing,
******************************************************************
Many of us walked Hobson West, The Fields, Greenacres, Buttonwood, and the Highlands distributing petitions and collecting signatures. Of the 1,116 signatures collected, 1,061 - 95% DID NOT approve of the requested rezoning to multi-family townhouses. A common refrain was ... if it can't become park land for goodness sake lets keep it as single family not townhouses.

During the final City Council meeting on the rezoning request virtually every council member waxed eloquently about how great the property would be as .... a park, .... open space, ... a gem, etc., so close to the city center. After those speeches they promptly voted to rezone the property to 22 townhouses!
******************************************************************

As you all know I have been researching old Napergate ads to see how this Napergate Man was able to beat City Hall time and time again in both court and council chambers.

This Pond Case resembles Spring Green if you study it carefully. And it can be reversed as TB suggested. In Spring Green the council voted 9-0 to put a shopping center before the Napergate Man and his supporters forced them to reverse themselves and the final vote was 7-2 against the shopping center. The residents were also over 95% against Spring Green as Hobson West residents are against multi-family town homes.

The city council brushed Hobson West residents off...a better description is waxed them off as Mr. Dallmer indicated. Mr.Randall and Mr. Dallmer just seem way to nice. The City Council unfortunately does not respect nice people and waxes them off as you correctly noted.

You really have a Napergate Case here. The city is being beholden to the Brestal Law Firm and Crestview Builders and does not care an iota about you guys. You will not succeed in overturning this multi-family zoning unless you get a serious grassroots movement like the Napergate Man did.

You need INK as I mentioned before. Secondly you need to make NOISE. INK and NOISE is what you need to turn this around. I did not know about this 95% number until I read it on the blogs. If you pushed your issue in Napergate Style Ads and exposed our City Council, they will fall apart and collapse. Where is your demonstration by the ponds with 500 residents? Make sure you have honking cars for a few hours with kids holding ballons out? Fill up the council chambers as the Napergate Man did with his supporters and don't let them WAX you!

It is reported when Spring Green Folks battled the Brestal Law Firm and developer in City Council, the Napergate Man got in the face of Brestal and told him he is sick and tired of his wallet being more important than the citizens. He let him have it after Bretal started with him. He made lots of NOISE!!!

If you guys want to win, as T.B. said forget about the park. You will not get grassroots support for the park because it is way to costly per acre...almost 700k an acre. No one from outside your area will ever support this kind of money for land that is flood prone and not even good enough for one soccer field in which the balls will fly into the dangerous streets when it is not flooded.

But you will get grassroots support if you want to over turn the zoning because the rezoning was improper and not in the best interest of the residents or the city. The zoning benefited the developer at the expense of the taxpayers and residents. By rezoning it and making the property more valuable, the city council made a Park Proposal and Offer impossible by increasing the value of the property.

As Mr. Dallmer stated, this was a WAX job on the residents. The city council asking the developer to continue negotiating with the Park District in good faith as if the price was for single family while having already increased it to multi-unit value is just ludicrous. It is the best WAX job I have ever seen in my life.

Unless you guys mobilize Napergate Style you will not overturn this decision. Napergate Style means getting tough, spending money on INK, making tons of NOISE and rallying the troops.

It can be done! It was done in Spring Green and it was done in South West Gate. If you would have collected 5 dollars from each of those petition signers you would have had 5305 dollars which could buy about 6 full pages in the Sun for Napergate Style Ads. It only took about 5 Spring Gate ads paid by the Napergate Man exclusively to overturn Spring Green.

Once the city council members, their connections and possible corruptions are exposed, they begin to crumble. All you have to do is get going! The Naperville Sun is even on record as stating they would support a grassroots movement. They were not supporting grassroots movements in the Napergate Era...only covering them!

So you guys are much luckier and have a better chance. Don't forget the INK and NOISE! Buy a lot of INK and make a ton of NOISE and you will WIN! It has happened before as well all know from documented Napergate Ads for anyone to read in the library.

Let us get PONDGATE going. Let us ROLL! I already gave you the title with all due respect to the Napergate Man for stealing his famous GATE he used in all his ADS. It is catchy and you need to catch the interest of the residents in order to mobilize and win.

Good luck to you All! I hope you do it! I promise to be at the demonstration with my home made sign! And my kids will come along with balloons in their hands!

Ameena wrote; "But you will get grassroots support if you want to over turn the zoning because the rezoning was improper and not in the best interest of the residents or the city".

Possibly improper and not the best interest of a very small minority of vocal neighbors. I doubt the majority of residents would see it that way.

"The zoning benefited the developer at the expense of the taxpayers and residents. By rezoning it and making the property more valuable, the city council made a Park Proposal and Offer impossible by increasing the value of the property".

How is the zoning at the expense of the taxpayers? It seems to me that the Park District purchasing the land would be an expense to the taxpayers. Crestview building the townhomes would generate more tax money for the city and school district than a park that will do nothing but cost the taxpayers.

RJ,

I think what Ameena meant (and please, correct me if I am wrong) was that the rezoned denser area is now more 'valuable' due to the new zoning than it was.

This new inflated value is what the Park District would pay for the land now. If the rezoning would not have happened the land would not be 'as valuable' and the Park District would probably not have to pay as much to acquire it.

So, it was the re-zoning trick of Council that will 'stick it to the taxpayers' if the PD buys the land at the now inflated price (due to the re-zoning).

What you say about land now not generating tax revenue, I agree with you on.. it would not if acquired.

Did I get that right?

For the record, I too would be OK with the zoning going back to what it was even if the PD does not acquire it for open space. I like attempts to be made to acquire open space but if it's not workable, it's not workable. I believe I was under the wrong impression initially that the existing ponds and grass area towards Garden Fresh Market were going to be part of the development. If that is going to remain as it is today then good. I would still like to see the zoning turned back to its original single family R1 or whatever it was.

RJ,
You must be confused! I am totally against this specific park being purchased at taxpayer expense that only benefits a small minority especially when the park is on a flood plain and does not even meet Park District minimum requirements of 15 acres.

But what upset me most, is when the city council jacked up the price of the lot by rezoning it to multi-unit, and giving the Park District a year to work out a deal with the developer. This was nothing more than a WAX job to give the developer what he wanted while giving the residents a fake unedible carrot to allow them to get over their emotions of wanting this to be Park District land.

I just don't like the politics that were used to mislead the residents and give them false hope. I wish the Council would have talked straight to the residents and not given them false expectations of the feasibility of park, while what were really doing is giving their Cestview buddies a 1 year delayed WINDFALL PROFIT.

Dr. Soper owned this property for 30 or 40 years. He deserved the appreciation on the property. What happens is Crestview goes to him and buys it for the single home zoning price. They probably told him this is all it is worth and it can never be zoned multi-unit.

They buy it for 2.5 million. They immediately give Bretal their buddy in the old boy network 10 or 20k and tell him to rezone it knowing he has the connections and power to do it before they even buy the land. Crestview took no RISK when they bought this land. They knew with 100% CERTAINTY it would be rezoned with the Brestal, Rosanova, and Wehrli connections and who knows how many we don't know about.

So basically because they have connections, a piece of land worth 2.5 million to Dr. Soper and all of us who DON'T have connections, suddenly becomes worth 4.1 million to those who have connections. All they have to do is appear before the city council once or twice, give Brestal 10k or 20k, and the land magically becomes worth 4.1 million.(as long as there is no Napergate Man to call them out)

These are things the Napergate Man discussed and explained in his ads. He obviously explained them much better than I ever can and the residents turned on the Establishment to the tune of voting all his Napergate candidates IN and all their Establishment candidates OUT!

Now that he has been retired for a few years and there is no check or watchdog on "connections" we are back to "business as usual."

Imagine a developer coming and buying your home on 2 acres of land for 750,000 without DISCLOSING they could take it before the City Council next Tuesday and have it divided into 8 lots each worth 250,000. Basically becasue they are connected and you are not, you lose 2,000,000 - 750,000 = $1,500,000. I would be angered if this happened to me. Would you not be angered?

The city has a Master Plan and should stick with it. If they felt this 6 acre lot should be multi-unit, it should have been disclosed on the Master Plan, and Dr. Soper should have been the recipient of the total value of 4.1 million and not the partial value of 2.5 million, with Crestview getting the windfall just for the ASKING from their old buddy boy netwrok!

This rezoning of the Master Plan is done for the benefit of the old boys club. The "Establishment" if you will.

What I see happening is outrageous. The Napergate Man stopped it for a while. Now that he is gone the locomotive is in full gear stampeding over anyone in its path.

If I was a wealthy person, I would rerun all those Napergate Ads so that the residents would all realize what kind of WAX job the council is doing on the them. And I give credit to Mr. Doug Dallmer for calling it as he properly saw it. I agree totally with him. This was a WAX job! I guess you can learn from current residents as well as from historical Napergate Ads.

So I am AGAINST this land being purchased by the Park District. But since there were negotiations going on and I have no power, I would have been more outraged if the Park District ended up buying it for 4.1 million based on multi-unit zoning instead of the 2.5 million based on single family zoning. If the wrongful decision to buy this property was undertaken by the Park District, I would find it very objectionable for the taxpayers to be out an extra 1.6 million because of favors a City Council was doing for a COUSIN DEVELOPER! Need I be more clear!

I hope people understand the unfairness I am describing. I have not read all the approximately 50 Napergate Ads so I am still in the process of learning. Hopefully when I am done, I can explain myself better. Sorry if I am not communicating well but I am trying my hardest!

Thank you!!!

Ameena -

I mostly agree with you.

However, you make the assumption that Dr Soper was unable to rezone the property to his benefit, when in reality, he may have been unwilling to take the chance. We don’t know.

Also, don't forget that we now that that Furstenau was also the beneficiary of the Brestal largess. That can’t be ignored.

Thanks for the clarification Joe.

Ameena, the land is not in a flood plain. A basement that floods occasionally does not make it a flood plain.

I have a hard time buying the Great Conspiracy theory, as I am sure after Jan 30 Crestview will move forward with the project as they planned. I highly doubt they bought the property with the intent of fleecing the residents of Naperville. And please spare me the Napergate rhetoric, I was here during it and have read all your posts regarding it, ad nauseam.

As far as Brestal, I have to wonder how many of the people fighting Crestview live in and shop or work at one of the many projects Brestal has worked on over the years? Many of those projects faced fierce opposition from the surrounding neighbors, yet it didn't seem to bother anyone when they moved into their new house.

Ameena,
The following is from the minutes of the December 5, 2006 City Council meeting on the vote for the change to R3A:

"Boyajian moved that in concurrence with the rezoning of the property from R1A to R3A that Council accept the developer’s proposal that he will not develop the property for a period of six months after the ordinances that are prepared by staff are approved by City Council which will provide the City the opportunity to seek funding options other than the City to keep it open space. Second, Ellingson.
Rosanova moved to amend the motion to state that for the purpose of negotiating the price the underlying zoning of R1A will be utilized in all appraisals. Second, Senger.
VOICE VOTE: Motion declared carried.
ROLL CALL on Boyajian’s motion:
Ayes: Senger, Wehrli, Pradel, Boyajian, Ellingson, Miller, Rosanova.
Nays: Furstenau, Krause.
Motion declared carried."

Notice that Rosanova amended it so the underlying zoning of R1A is to be utilized for all appraisals for the purpose of negotiating price. That means the change to R3A did not affect the price of the property.

Sorry about my subtraction error in my prior post.

2,000,000 - 750,000 = $1,250,000 and NOT $1,500,000.

That is what happens when you write fast and do not review before you post, combined with being tired.

I was an A+ student in Math so that was quite embarrassing...Sorry!

Ameena...

PS. Joe, I saw your latest post as I was correcting mine and you totally understood me...perfectly. Thanks for saying in less words what I was trying to say in an essay. I agree it should be returned to single family as the best solution. But you understood me very well. It was a "rezoning trick" to "stick it" to the taxpayers. Exactly as you said!!! I am impressed!!! I am beginning to like you Joe after you gave me such a hard time about my towing incident. Why did you do that? I am just kidding! I already forgot and forgave and would rather get along with you. After your latest e-mail I think you are more neutral than "establishment" and I am very proud of you. I will have you in my corner shortly.

As you probably figured out, I am a little titled to the Napergate Man's view because he seemed so principled and uncorruptable. I just like that in a person after watching many of our council members on the "take." It really bothers me! I read that correspondence on the other thread you, TB, and Anonymous were having. It just seemed odd after the Napergate Man called them all out on all those Campaign Contributions between the Brestal Law Firm and the council members, they suddenly ceased and desisted immediately. I have to agree with your description about that Anonymous guy as being insightful. I just hate anonymous people. I know we are all anonymous but we know each other in a funny way so when we see each other bloggin we kind of know who we are talking about from out first names or code names. That anonymous guy, T.B.and you were debating, seemed to have some serious knowledge and wanted to be anonymous in more ways than one. But he impressed me even though I don't fully agree with what he was saying. He was very insightful as you said...great description!

Ameena, et. al.,

I owe responses to a number of recent posts. One, The Sun's circulation is currently about 16,200, a lot less than the 22,000 back in the Napergate days but it's stopped declining and is actually up about 1,000 from where it was a year ago. As for the cost of a full-page ad, I'd hate to misquote our ad rates, so let me wait until I get back in the office to check. There may be discounts if you buy more than one ad. And the Rosanova thread, we're just waiting on getting the video together. We want to post that in the thread so people can view it and make up their own minds, but it's unchartered territory for us technologically. I looked at the video of the Dec. 18 meeting on the city's web site, found the Rosanova exchange about 35 minutes into part 1, and we want to get those 2 minutes of video onto our site, so that's the reason for the delay.

T.B.

You said "I think those opposed to the current development plans would have more success getting the city council to reverse the multi-family housing zoning than they will in getting anyone to buy the land for open space."

"Maybe the efforts are mis-directed?"

Perhaps, you understand the workings of the City Council better than I do. But, I have been led to believe that the only way to overturn the zoning ordinance is to have one of the Councilmen who voted for the zoning of the "Ponds" property from single-family to multi-family to ask that the zoning be reconsidered (that is, someone on the minority side of the voting can not bring it up for a revote/change).

Of the 5 Councilmen who voted for the rezoning, one, Mary Ellingston, is no longer a sitting member of the City Council. (In fact, I heard that she has recently moved away from Naperville.) The other four are Rosanova, Pradel, Wehrli, and Boyajian. These four Councilman have consistently voted against all motions that the residents have advocated or supported related to the "Ponds" property and the rezoning. It is highly unlikely that any one of these four would change their mind and ask that the vote be reconsidered so that the zoning of the "Ponds" property could be restored to single-family. It would, I believe, be naive to think that these four Councilmen did not know that that when they voted to rezone the "Ponds" property that Crestview Builders would immediately be able to obtain more profit from the land if they indeed sold it to another public body. If they were really concerned a year ago about keeping this land as open space (as these four have said they did), then they would have stipulated that the rezoning not be done until after an attempt was made to find a willing buyer.

Which one of these four Councilmen do you think would stand opposed to the business interest of local developers when the residents do not agree with the developers?

In the example cited about the Spring Green property, the orginal vote was apparently 9-0 in favor of the developer. Thus, it only took one of the nine to ask for reconsideration, which ultimately led to a reversal with the 7-2 vote overturning the original vote.

Rod R -

I have no idea. I just think it would be easier to sell the zoning change to 9 people than to sell the $$ cost to the community at large.

T.B.

Previously in this blog, Moderator Ted posted the following:

"...if people really want to hold public officials accountable and have a say in policies and laws they need to become more active in the civic process as well...There are opportunities at every school board, park board and city council meeting for people to ask questions of their elected officials...Some people talk about wanting change, but what are they actually doing about it?...We've [the Naperville Sun] got to be fair."

During the past year or so, many people have spoken before some of the governing bodies and have been essentially "ignored." The manner in which these public bodies conduct their public meetings does not provide a forum for the public to have dialogue (in a public setting) with the elected officials. Not very often when a question is posed, by a resident, openly to a public official is there a direct answer.

There was an outpouring of residents related to a number of issues during the past year. Before the City Council, many residents voiced their concerns about the parking decks at Nichols Library (which the taxpayers will wind up paying a lot toward when the proposed benefit to additional parking is mainly to help the peak parking problems that the restaurateurs are causing); they voiced their concerns about allowing the hospital to be able to build a 120 foot high building virtually in the back yards of residents; they voiced their concerns about allowing a 70 foot building to be built on the south bank of the Riverwalk; and they voiced their concerns about the "Ponds of Hobson West" property being rezoned to multi-family. Who listened? When 30 people spoke out against a censure vote of Councilman Furstenau, was there anyone listening?

It should not take an organized group of people to show up and be vocal in order to get something done (or not done) that is in the best interest of the citizens of Naperville. In our society each individual is important and should be treated as so. If only one person speaks up and presents valid assessments, opinions, and arguments, then that person should be treated as if the entire population was standing behind them.

Now, on the other hand, a number of Councilmen have essentially beaten their chest and patted themselves on the back while saying they represent "all the people of the community." Yet, their actions speak louder than words. Councilman Rosanova stated that everyone else in the community was more important than the 8 property owners directly affected by his vote to allow an exception to the new hospital zoning district which would allow the 120 foot high building. Councilman Miller said that as far as he was concerned petitions and polls where not a way to sway his vote. (And, now he wants to be the next Chairman of the Wheatland Republican Party -- how would he represent those people who came to him with a petition? Some people have also recently stated that Councilman Miller may also have aspirations to be the next Mayor of Naperville. If so, how would he feel about future petitioners?)

So, how “if people really want to hold public officials accountable and have a say in policies and laws,” can they accomplish this in the near term and not have to wait until the next election? The Naperville Sun could have been an avenue of enlightenment related to the serving of the best interests of the citizens and exposing how residents have essentially been “ignored.” But, that has not been the case. So where has the Naperville Sun been “fair” to the citizens of Naperville.

During the last school board (District 203) elections in April 2007, the Naperville Sun endorsed three candidates. Some supporters of these candidates apparently did some nasty things prior to the election and I have been told that the Naperville Sun knew about some of the things. But, they did not write about the known things prior to the election. Was that being “fair?”

Over the years, I personally have been active related to a number of issues (as well as related to the “Ponds of Hobson West”). If any one has an interest, i could post some comments about some of these.

The Napergate era was not the only time that grassroots change occurred. During the mid 1980s, ther ewas uproar in the community that resulted in the “anti-establishment” candidates having a majority on the City Council for a two-year period.

NOTE from Ted Slowik, host:

Rod,

We've reported quite extensively in print and on the web about Edward rezoning, library parking deck, and all the other issues you bring up. I think what I'm hearing from you and some others is when a vote doesn't go the way you want, it must be The Sun's fault because it's part of the establishment. Check my comments in the 203 threads. I, along with most people in the community, had no idea during the most recent school board elections that the "for the kids" group of "residents" was solely funded by the teachers' union, because thanks to election laws the group did not have to file campaign donation disclosures until after the election. And 203 supporters criticized me when I described the union's tactics as "deceitful" in that respect. And here we have Dianne McGuire, one of the chief architects of that campaign, running for state representative. I call 'em like I see 'em and I'm not afraid to be anti-establishment. But not every issue where you don't like the result is a conspiracy. And again I remind you and others that right now you're voicing opinions in a forum provided by The Sun.

SNT,

Wow! Nice find on the meeting minutes regarding amendment to use the previous R1 zoning for all pricing.

I love it when we can all work together to uncover fact and cast aside speculations. Thank you!

Ameena,

I think we have very similar 'thirsty and passionate' personalities when it comes to topics that we feel are important. The clashing early on can probably be attributed to this. We won't always agree on everything but I respect your diligence and effort to clear up speculations and find facts. I'm certainly not opposed at all to shifting my opinions as new facts warrant. I look forward to hopefully a new cooperative joint effort in that regard.

Hi

Just to claify what is proposed. Most of the open field on the east side will become the four unit building and the storm water retention pond. On the west side of the field one of the 5 unit buildings will take up some of the field. The other two five unit buildings will stretch across the north property line. The east and west ends of the buildings are 80 feet deep (long? wide?) are located 15 feet from the sidewalks with 25 feet between the two buildings.

As I said earlier, and Rod Randall added later, our original objection and the petition covered rezoning the property from from single family to multifamily. I would have no objection to the 10-12 single family homes that the city staff estimated could be built on the site.

The city provided a one year window to get another buyer. The logical buyer was the Park District.

Crestview paid $2,750,000 for the property per real estate records. Crestview's and the city's appraisal for the property as single family in the summer and fall of 2006 (while zoned as single family) were both in the $3.2 million area. The Park District got an appraisal in Nov 2007 as single family which came in at about $3.3 million. Crestview's Nov 2007 appraisal came in at $5.18 million.

Considering the appraisal process with assumptions, etc. it is almost surprising that 3 different appraisals came in so close at $3.2-3.3 million. Crestview's Nov 2007 at $5.19 is the outlier, and the Park District's letter points out what they consider incorrect techniques/assumptions. I suspect that Crestview will trumpet how generous they are to offer to accept $4.1 million, a million or so discount.

All of this has been via letters, where are the negotiations in good faith?

As many of the contributors have pointed out, even without any hanky panky the process is really stacked against citizen input and impact. Don't confuse us with any facts has been the apparent attitude of the City Council. Drag things out until the heat is off, like the Edward first we will buy then we won't. There certainly appears to be some patterns being developed.

I tried to copy & paste a PDF into this missive but the blog does not support an imbedded PDF. If anyone want a copy of the proposed layout as a PDF give me a call I am in the phone book. I'll try to send it as an email to the moderator.

Doug Dallmer

Rod Randall, Doug Dallmer, Joe, Ameena, TB, and SWN Taxpayer,
You all bring up very good points.

Assuming you are right, that only one of the 5 who voted for the ordinance can ask for the zoning to be reconsidered, you have a battle worse than the Spring Green Napergate Battle.

If Mary Ellingson was around she would be your best chance. She was endorsed by the Napergate Man and worked quietly behind the scenes with the Napergatians. Unfortunately, she is gone!( I recall her having cancer...does anyone know how she is doing. I wish her well).

RJ's criticism of Ameena's Napergate Historical Connections is nonsense. One reason it is very important is it helps to answer your very important question as to who will FLIP!

1. For example one of the 2 council members who would not reverse his position in Spring Green/Napergate was Mayor George Pradel. That was a real shocker because he is known to want to be resident friendly and seems to enjoy his popularity. He even had a very good relationship with the Napergate Man and he still would not budge.

So you can rule out Mayor Pradel unless he has changed.(doubtful) I think the Napergate Mans subsequent deep respect for Mayor Pradel is that he would not FLIP FLOP despite the massive pressure he brought to the council. Of course he was happy, the other 7 flip flopped, but since he is a principled man it is easy to see how he would respect a man who did not flip flop.

2. Wehrli is hopeless! He is not going to go against his FIRST COUSIN. But have you thought about taking it to court because Wehrli had no business voting on his cousin's development project. I think Ameena and Rod would agree with me that the Napergate Man would have probably taken the Council to Federal or County court to overrule this improper behavior of ignoring serious and blatant conflicts of interest.

3. Boyajian is hopeless in my opinion. Don't waste your time here!

4. The only possible wild card is Rosanova especially if he was put to the test maybe with a little SCREAMING by residents at the City Council. He deserted his Napergatian friends after they got him elected. They need to get up there and get in his face. Other residents need to get in his face for daring to vote on a project put forward by his son's legal firm. Of course his son benefits if his law firm does well and is hurt if his law firm does poorly. Partner attorneys reap a percentage of the profits from their law firms. Junior attorneys sometimes get bonuses instead of a percentage of the profits.

There is also a legal angle to Rosanova's vote just like Wehrli's vote. It also could be an opportunity for Rosanova to save face and reincarnate himself. He may do it because he knows he is in big time trouble and does not want to face the serious consequences of his improper actions. I think he is your best shot and your voices should be raised loud and made clear in speaking to him. I suspect there is a 50% chance he will buckle under intense PRESSURE and SCREAMIIIIIIIINNNNNNNNGGGGGGGG!

Is he going to dare tell the residents not to SCREAM after the Host puts a link to his SCREAMING on this blog. It would put him in an awkward and hypocritical situation to make an issue of SCREAMING. So I recommend screaming at him and if you wish, Wehrli, but you will waste your voice and energy screaming at Wehrli. He is way to ESTABLISHMENT and will not flip flop 100%.(I would like input from Michelle B on this one...where have you been lately...we miss you)

If the residents demanded this be put up for a vote again, or they suggest taking it to court for the conflict of interest violations and non-disclosure, I think the Council would buckle and reconsider it as in Spring Green. They buckled big time in Spring Green. They had their hands full with Napergate Man litigation before, during and after. They have their hands full with Furstenau litigation at the moment with residents upset over the legal costs.

One has to wonder if the city council is ready for another legal battle to reverse this vote over conflict of interest issues. They would lose this case and be embarrassed at a great cost. They don't want another Napergate Fiasco so I suspect they would buckle under INTENSE pressure provided by a FULL HOUSE in City Hall during a COUNCIL MEETING. But as Ameena says from her historical study at the library about Napergate Ads, the residents must make lots of noise...lots of noise...and more noise!

If you are wrong about the fact that only one of the "Yes voters" can ask for reconsideration, than obviously the case would become much easier. I suggest somebody from your subdivision call Council Member Douglas Krause. He has a lot of knowledge and experience and will have the right answer.

The battle for Ponds of Hobson West has to be led by the residents of the adjoining subdivisions not by the Napergate Man and his supporters. They need to mobilize. They will have more emotion and energy since it involves them directly.

Many people don't realize that the leadership for this Spring Green battle was rooted in one subdivision which later spread to the entire City of Naperville in a form of solidarity.

I know the Napegate Man, Activist Donna Rogers, Attorney Rick Strawbridge and other talented leaders were all from the same subdivision that bordered this property. I believe they were all from the Pembroke Commons Subdivision fighting for the rights and value of their subdivision homes. Their hearts were in what they were doing. That makes a huge difference when fighting these near impossible battles. This same group successfully led the battle of South West GATE which was just 2 blocks away on Naper Blvd. and 75st.

I do not see a similar grassroots campaign coming out of the residents of the Ponds of Hobson West. Both the moderator and Ameena laid out how a grassroots movement develops and takes place. So either the nearby residents are going to have to step up to the plate or the cause will be lost. It seems to me the residents are way to passive in their battle...to soft spoken. I see no emotion coming out of Mr. Randall or Mr. Dallmer who I believe live near the property from their blogs. I see more emotion coming out of Ameena and the Napergatians who are I am guessing are from a different region of Naperville.

Have you ever seen a football team win a game without being psyched up and emotional. I have not! You can not beat City Hall if you do not get psyched up and emotional. The Napergate Ads were very emotional and successfully rallied people to demonstrations and council meetings at City Hall.

I am playing Devil's Advocate here only to be helpful. When 1100 people signed a petition against this Pond's development, did anyone bother getting their e-mail addresses. If you had, you could with one stroke of the button on a computer ask them to show up for a Council Meeting. I would think 25% of them or so would show up which would almost fill chambers up.

I was on the Napergate Man's e-mail list that he started with his in-store petition in the early 90s. Yes, he was getting people's e-mail addresses 12 years ago. If we are not getting them today, why are we not getting them? We must get them! It is a cheap way to advertise. Much cheaper than Napergate Style Ads!

I did not subscribe to the Naperville Sun in the Napergate ERA but that is how I found out about these rallies, demonstrations and city councils. I read his Napergate Ads on his Napergate Web site free of charge! And he would make sure he fired e-mails 3 days in a row to make sure no one forgot about a council meeting or a rally!!! He still would have had half his supporters without his Napergate ADs reaching 22,000 subscribers and 60,000 readers.(Thanks to the host for verifying those numbers. I was curious too!)

So yes Napergate Style ADs will not be as effective since the population may have risen from 100k to 145k while the Naperville Sun circulation declined from 22k to 16.2K. So you could say the Naperville Sun went from a penetration of 22% to one of only 11%. This is obviously a substantial decline. I an honestly surprised!

Thanks to the host's help we now know, Napergate Style Ads will only be 50% as effective as in the Napergate ERA. But we have to step it out in other areas. I know we probably only have 200 or so bloggers but one day soon I think the number will easily be 10 times that. But the 16,200 Sun circulation is still 81 times more powerful than the bloggin. So as many said the print newspaper is still very powerful even though it lost half of its effectiveness since the Napergate Era. But times change and we have to change with the times and adjust where we can.

In summary I think Ameena and the Host made very much sense regarding getting a grassroots movement going. As the host has said before the Naperville Sun is no longer a community paper like in the Napergate Era. The Napergate Man had little to no support from the Naperville Sun. At one point I recall when the battle escalated to very high levels, the Sun did run an editorial asking for a TRUCE of sorts between the Napergate Man and the City of Naperville. But the Sun is now claiming they will support a grassroots movement so here we have an edge today that the Napergate Man did not have in those days.

We need to take advantage of what we have to work with now. We can't worry about what the Napergate Man had in a different ERA. He obviously had tons of weapons and used them all.

We have tons of weapons but the difference is that we are not using them, and that is why we are losing these battles to City Hall. I hope we can change the tide, learn from what the Napergate Man did, adjust to the times and move forward full thrust. We can not dwell on the past!

******************************************************************

Host or Moderator,

I hate to ask poor Ameena to go to the library again. But I think it is very relevant to find out from those Napergate Ads in your newspaper who besides Mayor George Pradel did not flip in that Spring Green/Napergate battle. If we find out who that council member was/is and he is still on the Council, I would suggest he or she would be wasted energy.

And for all those who can not see the connections, relevance and help Ameena is bringing with her research of Napergate, I don't know what to say! But I suspect Mr. Randall, Mr. Dallmer and other Ponds of Hobson West residents need to know in the worse way who that other candidate that would not flip on Spring Green/Napergate zoning issue was. I would say with certainty he/she would also not flip on the Ponds issue and that would save them a lot of time
allowing them to devote and focus their energies on the most likely candidate to flip.

If anyone can help identify this council member besides the host or moderator, I would appreciate that help that very much. Thank you all for your diversified opinions! You are all contributing in your own positive ways and doing a great job! I would like to commend Joe in particular lately for being much less argumentative and much more productive. People I guess do change!

NOTE from Ted Slowik, host:

Excuse me while I shamelessy offer this testimonial as to the power of print, from Rick Klau's blog;

http://www.rklau.com/tins/

We sold the house
Posted by Rick Klau
at January 11, 2008

Anyone following me on Twitter saw my update yesterday that Robin and I have signed paperwork on an offer we received Tuesday night. We’re elated. But there’s some backstory that’s interesting to share.
Apparently the editor of the Naperville Sun still reads my blog, and when he saw my post about the house still being on the market (and the requisite price drop), he had a reporter give m a call. Paige and I chatted for a while on my drive back from San Diego, and she had a photographer head over to the house. The result? A front page treatment in the Business section (and an abridged version of the article which ran in the next day’s Chicago Sun-Times). The print version had a big picture of our house, and included our address.
Coincidence? I don’t think so. Two offers came in that night, both from locals who were familiar with the neighborhood. Eight months on the market, and the two offers came in the same day we got a ton of attention in the local paper. John Harper, a Realtor out here in California, wondered whether newspapers sell houses and remarked that the trend is for Realtors to shift much of their marketing budget to online sources away from offline sources. One example doesn’t make a trend, but I think the results in my case speak for themselves: Craigslist, Zillow, Trulia, realtor.com – none of them produced our buyer. Interesting.
(Separate lesson learned: when a journalist asks for your wife’s age, politely decline to answer. I have it on good authority that that would have been a wise move. Ah well. Next time.)
So… Naperville Sun: you’ve been very good to me. You endorsed me when I ran for local office in Naperville. After I moved, you helped sell my house. To Tim and Paige, I raise a glass from a few thousand miles away. Let me know how I can return the favors.

Mr. Rod Randall,
Reagarding your statement,

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
It should not take an organized group of people to show up and be vocal in order to get something done (or not done) that is in the best interest of the citizens of Naperville. In our society each individual is important and should be treated as so. If only one person speaks up and presents valid assessments, opinions, and arguments, then that person should be treated as if the entire population was standing behind them.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

You are really fantasizing here! The Napergate Man could have done nothing by himself. He was obviously very talented, knowledgeable, a skilled businessman, had a Master's Degree, and possibly wealthy to be able to run a 100 full page Napergate Ads. I suspect he even tried your tactics before he changed course due to failure!

I think Marshall, Ameena and Host Ted are giving you the formula to bring back the success of the Napergate Era wich you are aware of and mentioned. The formula worked! Your formula with all due respect has been tested and does not work! The city council could care less about one resident or 30 speaking in front of them. They need to know there is a grassroots movement ready to uproot them. The Napergate Man created that grassroots movement and showed them that he can not only uproot them in elections but bring judgments against them in court. Thus they succumbed in Spring Green and lost 4 seats on the council that year because of their dumber than dumb decision.

Yes, they were scared to death of his grassroots movement and reversed their vote from 9-0 to 2-7. They were not afraid of him individually. They were afraid of his 3500+ supporters who were growing exponentially at the time, before they reversed themselves on the vote, to stop the runaway locomotive he was building to ram City Hall. They saw the writing on the wall before it came and stopped the locomotive barely in the nick of time. They knew the power of 3500+ voters. The rest is history!

Ameena and Marshall,
I was not from that front line Pembroke Commons Subdivision. I am from Huntington Estates which borders it and our beautiful pool would have had an eyesore to look at because of this Brestal Shopping Center(initially gas station if you can believe that!).

All you said about the Napergate Man and what he did was right on target. When our subdivision saw what Pembroke Commons Subdivision was doing all of us joined them full force. I recall our Huntington Estates Subdivision newsletter was used to support the battle and the Napergate Man. While I agree that all the main leaders were from Pembroke Commons, our subdivision sent as many people as Pembroke Commons to the City Council Meetings and Rallies. That needs to be noted and proper credit needs to be given where it is due!

I just wanted the bloggers to know it was not only Pembroke Commons facing this battle alone. And in fairness to others we were later joined by at least 10 other subdivisions in and around Hobson, Naper Blvd. and 75th St. But Pembroke Commons and Huntington Estates both led the war on City Hall. I am very proud of my subdivision and had to set the record straight and give credit where credit was due.

However, those Napergate Ads were instrumental in our success and really motivated everyone to get out and do something.

I wish the Ponds of Hobson West residents success in their battle and would be happy to appear at any announced rally or City Council meeting as I totally sympathize with their similar ordeal. As the bloggers noted...it is the WAX job of WAX jobs. Apparently the lesson the Napergate Man taught the City Council has already been forgotten 9 years later. How sad and disgusting!!! We just can not stand still in the face of such horrific corrupition being repeated!

Yes, your battle is very similar to the Spring Green/Napergate battle with many similarities and much relevance as Ameena has been pointing out with her thorough and relentless library research which has been very accurate except for leaving out our Huntington Estates Subdivision. Thank you for allowing me to give my subdivision members a well deserved plug on your blogs, Mr. Host and Mr. Moderator!

As stated before, I don't think the City, or Park District should buy the property at all, but just a quick clarification...

Back in 2006, in order to allow the City time to find other funding options to keep the land open space, Kathy West, representing the builder at the December 5, 2006 City Council meeting, said Crestview Builders had agreed to negotiate the price of the Hobson Ponds land based on the 2006 appraised value under R1A zoning. Councilman Rosanova put that in the amended motion. If Doug Dallmer's assertion that the builder has not been negotiating on that basis, then the property owners have not been negotiating "in good faith" as they promised.

Rod Randall - Our elected officials were elected to make informed decisions on our behalf. We don't want them to be inappropriately swayed by special interest groups, or outspoken individuals with their own self-serving agendas. We don't want our elected officials to work on behalf of small groups of beneficiaries to the DETRIMENT of the rest of the community. Of course we want them to receive input from various sources in order to formulate their decisions, but not to be easily misled from their primary goal to serve the best interests of the entire city of Naperville. Fortunately, we have a smart Mayor, and the majority of our Council members are intellegent, and stay well informed of the facts before they make knowledgeable decisions. With that knowledge, they can assimilate appropiate facts presented by the public into their decision-making process. Public input is very important, even if it doesn't always impact change.

Your example that speakers who opposed Furstenau's censure did not change the outcome of the vote is a good one. The speakers showed they were not informed about the actual details, and reasons for the censure. None of them rebutted the facts of the case. When each Councilman explained the reasons for their vote, many of them acknowledged the comments made by the speakers, but they voted based on the pertinent facts in question. They were listening, but the testimony the speakers presented did not change the reasons for their decisions.

To Huntington Estates Lady: You're most welcome. Kudos to all the Naperville citizen/bloggers who want to make their voices heard on these important issues that will determine the future of Naperville for years to come.

"RJ's criticism of Ameena's Napergate Historical Connections is nonsense. One reason it is very important is it helps to answer your very important question as to who will FLIP!"
_______________________________________________________________________________________________

You all seem to be stuck in a time warp with this Napergate thing. That was then, this is now. Most of you can talk the talk, but no one seems to want to spend any of their own money and start a similar campaign. You just are waiting for the Knight with the big check book to show up and save the day. It is real easy, and inexpensive to sit behind a keyboard and rally the troops, but unfortunately your efforts are falling on deaf ears.

It also is a little late now. You all had a year to get someone to "FLIP" and pull off a taxpayer funded land grab, yet you waited till the last minute and accomplished nothing. I suppose you all thought with 1000 signatures on a petition that this was a done deal, but it doesn't appear to be working out for you. I would have thought after reading all your posts regarding the Napergate Man, you all would have figured out that it actually takes someone stepping up to the plate to get something done.

If by chance in 17 short days you all can get things changed it will be a miracle, but I wouldn't count on it. Let this be a lesson, next time don't wait for someone else to save the day, get moving early and get more support than just a few of your neighbors and their friends.

Southwest Naperville Taxpayer wrote:
"Our elected officials were elected to make informed decisions on our behalf. We don't want them to be inappropriately swayed by special interest groups, or outspoken individuals with their own self-serving agendas. We don't want our elected officials to work on behalf of small groups of beneficiaries to the DETRIMENT of the rest of the community."
_______________________________________________________________

Thank you Sir, I couldn't have put it better.

Hey SNT,
You sound like you are trying to do a wax job with your below unintelligent statement:

"Of course we want them to receive input from various sources in order to formulate their decisions, but not to be easily misled from their primary goal to serve the best interests of the entire city of Naperville. Fortunately, we have a smart Mayor, and the majority of our Council members are intellegent, and stay well informed of the facts before they make knowledgeable decisions."

I beg to differ with you. In Spring Green a small group initially tried to suggest the right thing to the Council. If they are so studious, smart, intelligent and knowledgeable, why did the make the wrong decision. They voted 9-0 to initially put a gas station in the middle of a residential subdivision.

They changed their decision to 7-2 "against," not because they knew right from wrong, but because nearly the entire city turned against them led by this Napergte Man. If they had a clue of what they were doing such a terrible decision would not have been made in the first place.

I suspect they were initially rubber stamping a project brought forward by their developer buddy attorney who was feeding them campaign contributions. Do you really believe if these campaign contributions were not true, the Naperville Sun would allow them to be published in NAPERGATE ADS and subject themselves to libel and slanderous suits. I think not!

So don't give me this hogwash about their intelligence. If these campaign contributions were ethical they would have continued. The were stopped when the Napergate Ads exposed them. They were not being beholden to the residents but to the developers who gave them GREEN DOLLARS to give up SPRING GREEN to a CONCRETE GAS SMELLING STATION RIGHT NEXT TO THEIR HOMES.

A recent check by a poster named Anonymous indicated that the city council learned a lesson from Napergate and verified there are no such CAMPAIGN contributions anymore. However, now they operate differently!

We have a former council man named Kevin Gallaher being hired by the Brestal Law Firm for all his PRIOR votes that favored the law firm. We have the the Brestal Law Firm hiring Rosanavo's son in a blatant conflict of interest. We have one of the biggest developers in town having their cousin on the city council ruling favorably on their family projects. Does this smell like a skunk?

WHERE ARE YOU NAPERGATE MAN??? WE NEED YOUR HELP AGAIN!!!

"For example one of the 2 council members who would not reverse his position in Spring Green/Napergate was Mayor George Pradel. That was a real shocker because he is known to want to be resident friendly and seems to enjoy his popularity. He even had a very good relationship with the Napergate Man and he still would not budge."

The Mayor is a straw man for the developers. The mayor slaps backs and goes along with every opportunity to be visible. But, in the end, he is going to vote with developers ahead of residents, and on the most part says nothing of his reasoning. It is rare that he speaks publicly on substantive issues, whether at council meetings, at his thousands of public appearances a year, and even when running for office. Can anybody point to where he has taken a stand on a controversial issue and justified it? Unless, of course, it is a canned "It protects the kids" or "It's about public safety." Platitudes do not substitute for serious thought.

Can anyone explain to me how Marshall suddenly computed that the Naperville Sun is only half as effective or only has half the penetration of the Napergate Era.

I just find that astonsihing and hard to believe.

If what he is saying is true, I would have to agree with the bloggers who have stated Napergate Style Ads to help the Ponds of Hobson West residents may not be as effective.

OK, I will admit this has become a soap opera and the suspense is killing me.

Can anyone tell who that other Council Member besides Mayor Pradel that the Napergate Man and his supporters could not get to flip flop during that Spring GATE/GREEN battle.

It is the 64,000 dollar question and I won't be able to sleep tonight unless someone answers it. I admit I have become a blog addict of sorts. It beats watching soap operas on TVs.

But the plot eventually unravels in a soap opera series.

Will the bloggers please tell me who did not flip along with Mayor Pradel during that historic Napergate Battle. I simply need and want to know. Thanks!!!

Hi Bloggers,
Just got back from a short vacation. Spent all night reading this thread and found it very interesting, informative and above all noticed Joe mellowed down a bit.

I agree and disagree with RJ's post:

1. I disagree with him that it is NOT important to understand the historical significance about Napergate on our Council and City politics. I think the Napergate Era was very important and it was the only time the residents had a say in developments in town. Before and after that NAPERGATE ERA, the Brestal Law Firm was and is currently running the show.

2. However, I agree with RJ that the Ponds of Hobson West residents fell asleep behind the wheel. I don't know who they are waiting for to fight THEIR battle. RJ states,

"I would have thought after reading all your posts regarding the Napergate Man, you all would have figured out that it actually takes someone stepping up to the plate to get something done. You just are waiting for the Knight with the big check book to show up and save the day."

People like the Napergate Man who are willing to put the effort, time and money he did, in fighting City Hall pop up once a century or two. So as RJ states, they need to organize some grassroots, develop some ordinary leaders, and forget about a Knight in Shining Armor coming to rescue them in the 11th hour be it the Napergate Man or another Knight!

The Napergate Man never came in the 11th hour. He made a ton of mistakes in the early 1980's while fighting quietly as an individual. He learned from his mistakes! It took him a decade to get established and figure what and how one can beat City Hall. He was not a Magic Man! Just a relentless worker with leadership and organizational skills developed from the personal experiences of being on the front line of so many council and legal battles.

But if people are willing to mobilize, he did make the next battle much easier. His formula for success is well documented and it seems everywhere....in the libraries, in the courts, in City Hall, in his Napergate ads, in newspapaer articles, and low and behold now even on these Sun Blogs. What is lacking as RJ says, is someone to EXECUTE the formula again. You can not win with thoughts or bloggin.... RJ, I believe is saying you must EXECUTE as the Napergate Man did....with some ACTION!

The Napergate Man EXECUTED. It seems like no one in Naperville presently wants to step it up and try to EXECUTE as he did. Why? I simply don't know! We all know the saying "You can't beat City Hall" so if anyone thinks beating City Hall is easy, they must be from another planet.

Mr. Randall's remarks that you should be able to go to City Hall and they should just listen to you if you make sense, are dream and fantasy type remarks...just won't happen Mr. Randall. I don't mean to disrespect you!

It seems like Ameena, Marshall, and the Host/Moderator have pretty much laid out how the Napergate Man won his wars against City Hall. We all know the formuala now...but is anyone in town willing to step up and EXECUTE his formula that worked over and over again. That is the pending unaswered question!

Joe,

I was impressed with this particular remark you made to RJ....

"I think what Ameena meant was that the rezoned denser area is now more 'valuable' due to the new zoning than it was. This new inflated value is what the Park District would pay for the land now. If the rezoning would not have happened the land would not be 'as valuable' and the Park District would probably not have to pay as much to acquire it. So, it was the re-zoning trick of Council that will 'stick it to the taxpayers' if the PD buys the land at the now inflated price (due to the re-zoning)."

I honestly thought those were the words of a Napergatian. I had to look to make sure it was YOU! I guess this Napergate Man and his Napergatian followers seem to have struck a cord with you to make such a GREAT STATEMENT. I am suddenly very impressed with your new found logic...really impressed! Thanks for those GREAT REMARKS...they were RIGHT on the MONEY!

Doug Dallmer,
Your waxing remarks were also right on target. I never heard that expression before but I absolutely loved it.

Rest of the Bloggers,
I have never seen a better thread with so much logical discussion and so little hostility. This thread was so educuational and I agree with all who said this Ponds of Hobson West battle has so much resemblance to the Spring Green/Napergate Battle. Just so eerily similar it is frightening! The only difference is the residents are not organized and mobilized. I would hate to believe that one person like the Napergate Man could be the sole difference....the X factor if you will! I hope that is not the case and we can see some quick action from the Ponds of Hobson West residents before the clock runs out.

Hi Sue,
Since I screwed up on my previous math problem despite being an A+ student let me see if I can help explain how Marshall came to his conclusion that Naperville Sun penetration declined in half using math and try to redeem myself.

The moderator stated the Sun circulation in the Napergate Era was 22,000. Currently he stated it is 16,200 after dipping to as low 15,200 last year.

Marshall estimates the population of Naperville as 100,000 in the Napergate Era. He now estimates the population at 145,000.

So if you divided the 100,000 Napergate Era residents by 22,000 Sun circulation at the time you would have 22% subscribtion rate but more like a 60,000 readership rate as more than one person reads each Naperville Sun.(Take the kids out of the population and it seems like all adults were reading the Naperville Sun in that Era.)

And if you divided 145,000 current residents by the current Sun cirulation of 16,200 you get an 11% subscription rate.

So I guess if the subscription rate declined from 22% to 11%, Marshall is right and Napergate Style ads would only be half as effective as in the Napergate Era.

Why the decline?
1. The number one reason is the exponential growth of the internet even though the internet was very strong in those days as many people read the Napergate Ads on the internet and e-mailed instead of blogged.

2. I suspect many people bought the Naperville Sun in those days because they enjoyed those Napergate Ads. No one knew what the Napergate guy was going to dig up with his next ad and it seems like Napervillians anxiously awaited the next edition of the Sun to read the latest mud dug up in the Napergate Ads.

3. Just as controversy has kept us bloggin, in those days the controversial Napergate Ads kept the newspaper selling strong. I suspect the "old establishment community" Naperville Sun did not care for the Napergate Man, but it turns out their worst enemy was their best friend when it came to high circulation numbers. Freedom of the Press does pay in more ways than one!!! My 2 cents worth this early morning. Have a Good Morning ye all!!!

“If these campaign contributions were ethical they would have continued. The[y] were stopped when the Napergate Ads exposed them.”

Nikki –

Sorry to say, but the campaign contributions did continue after the Napergate ads. Following is a sample of those who contributed to Furstenau’s state campaign, which I had previously listed on another thread:

5995 Development Inc.
BBM Incorporated – Dwight Yackley’s development co.
Willard Brestal – of the Brestal law firm
Calamos Properties Development LLC
Edward Management
Harp Krug Venture LLC – developers of Freedom Commons
Kimball Hill Homes
Steve Carr Builders Inc.
Physician's Owned LLC - developers of Naperville Crossing

These can be found at the State Board of Elections at www.elections.state.il.us.

I didn't check the campaign disclosures for the other council members, but I doubt the results would be much different.

T.B.

And the Rosanova thread, we're just waiting on getting the video together. We want to post that in the thread so people can view it and make up their own minds, but it's unchartered territory for us technologically. I looked at the video of the Dec. 18 meeting on the city's web site, found the Rosanova exchange about 35 minutes into part 1, and we want to get those 2 minutes of video onto our site, so that's the reason for the delay.

Posted by: Ted Slowik, host | January 13, 2008 10:27 AM

I just hope you don't make it about the "yelling" as opposed to whether Rosanova should even be participating in agenda items submitted by his son's employer. Will the question also be posited in the paper? The blogs are all fine and good, but unless the question is raised in the paper, most people won't even know there is an issue.

To the several bloggers who suggested that I was fanaticizing about my point that a lone individual should be able to carry a great deal of weight when addressing the City Council, that was my point about "how" it should happen. That is not how I have participated in a number of issues over the years. Unfortunately it does take "mob-like" action where a lot of people scream and shout and let politicians understand that the many involved will likely hold them "accountable" at future elections. In December 2006, when a group of residents met with Councilman Mary Ellingston, she said that I was threatening her when I made the comment that "she should understand that there could be consequences to her position to favor rezoning the Ponds property to multi-family." I was careful to not say she would get our support in the mayoral primary if she voted our way (that would be like a bribe). Instead I reminded her she was accountable for her actions. Perhaps, she did not understand the distinction. By the way, she probably lost her bid because of the reduced number of votes she got in the two precincts near the Ponds.

In the early 1970s, I moved into the Green Acres subdivision and became involved with the "fight" against Brestal and Metropolitan Structures to prevent the 10,000 person development being proposed on the Clarke Farm. I became the President of the Green Acres Homeowners Association and carried the fight forward. A small number of us formed the Naperville Area Homeowners Association (it has "area" in the name because Green Acres is not part of the City of Naperville). Lou Jerman and I became its first co-chairman. We had active people from all over the City (which at that time had about 25,000 residents, give or take a few. Two of the original members latter became City Council members (Jim Newkirk and Peg Price). We didn't win by just a "lone" voice speaking. We believed that a strong association of subdivision Presidents would provide the avenue to get residents informed and to also stand up to "City Hall" when the wishes of the large majority of citizens were being ignored. We had input on a lot of issues before the City Council in the early 1970s. We were not only a "watchdog" group but also actively stood up for the residents. However, I am sad to say that the organization today seems too "professional" and, instead of rallying the troops, it now has a once a month meeting with the City to hear about this or that. However, it is my understanding (I was not there) that at a recent meeting the Homeowners Confederation was vocal in its strong opposition to the Water Street proposal. It was said to me that Boyajian made a remark that it was only 31 people there at the meeting so the opposition didn't matter (or words to that effect).

A number of us were also actively involved with stopping a third shooting trap from being places at the Gun Club as well as discouraging the City from placing at what is now the Garden Plots site a large storage and maintenance facility.

In 1983, I put my hat in the ring for the City Council. However, unknown to me at the time, my employer had a division that was the auditor for the City, and because it would have been an appearance of a conflict of interest, I had to step aside. But, my name was still on the ballot so I had to tell people not to vote for me as well as placing ads in the Naperville Sun asking people not to vote for me.

In the mid-1980s, two very large issues were the Nezley property (where now two large apartment/condo buildings are located just northwest of Naperville Central High School (at Aurora ave and West St.) and the location of the "new” City Call and Police Station buildings. We had meetings of hundreds of people. Where as the city fathers wanted to place both the Police Headquarters and City Hall on the current City Hall site, citizens were able to at least get the Police Headquarters to become located on its current site (by the way, for those of you so determined not to spend a taxpayer dollar, the City already owned at that point in time the site on west Aurora Avenue). To build City Hall on its current site, the city took through eminent domain proceedings the homes of a number of elderly residents. Many people at that time felt that the City Hall site and surrounding properties south of the Riverwalk area would have been a perfect place for small shops to complement the Naperville Settlement. But, the lawyers won out as they wanted to continue to walk to City Hall from their downtown offices.

The downtown business interests won out on the Netzley property (15 acres along the Riverwalk). The merchants thought that the people residing in the apartment building would walk the (about) half mile to downtown to shop there.

When a vacancy opened on the Park District Board came open, I submitted my resume. Two of us were interviewed. One of the “establishment,” Al Rubin (a very good man by the way), was selected over me. (Probably because I had been vocal at a number of Park District Board meetings and was more likely to become involved with how the Park District was operating and listen more to what the residents actually wanted.) I also ran for a two-year term for the Park District Board position and lost (that’s politics, I was told that the evening before the election that phones at one or more realtor offices were made available to my opposition to get out the vote for him). In fact, it was better that I lost as I could spend more time with the kids.

I have coached little league and Pony league baseball, coached 7-8 grade boys soccer, was actively involved with a boy scout troop for ten years and ran their summer camping program for seven years, served as the Cubmaster for a group of boys, been Vice-President at one time of the Naperville Soccer Association and an assistant coach with girls teams, President of the Evening Kiwanis Club, served on the Administrative Board of my church, served as President of the Board of a parent-owned, parent-operated Montessori school, etc., etc. So, I know what leadership is about and that just talking does not accomplish much of anything.

I was very active in the successful campaign to elect Toby Hayer to the City Council in the mid-1980s. Back then, newspapers ads really helped get out the message.

In the past several years, I have again become somewhat involved again in that I have spoken often before the City Council and the Park District, as well as several times befor the District 203 School Board. In fact, a year ago, I asked the School Board whether there were any safety issues at Naperville Central High School. They emphatically said no. I explained that the high school that I went to (and have served as the President of its newly formed alumni association) in the inner City of Chicago, had celebrated its Centennial year of the school building in 1999 and that the building change little from when I was there in the late 1950s. I told them that the school in the recent years has had more National Merit Scholars than Naperville Central (as well as having hundreds of fewer students); I was able to drive home my point that the “best” facilities do not necessarily produce better academic achievements. Of course, a number of months latter, during school tours to support building of a new high school, a number of safety issues were being pointed out that could have been taken care of by doing normal maintenance.

I am the person that upset Rosanova and Wehrli at the City Council meeting last December. And, to answer one blogger, I was not “cowered.” It’s just that I am apparently more polite than those two when speaking too others.

My prior posts on this blog have been to inform those who have been making comments related to the original posting. The posting itself was very inadequate and give no clue about what the real issues were. In that regard, I hope that I have helped people understand what was really going on related to “Pondgate.” Thanks Ameena for coining that term. It is very appropriate.

My last comment here is that the Naperville Sun would not very likely do any “investigative” or in-depth reporting about this. And that may be due to the wife of an editor of the Naperville Sun being a partner with Brestal’s law firm.

I have been retired now for more than six years. Mr. Dallmer is also retired. It's time for those of you who are younger (and have more at stake about the future of this community) to become involved and to lead efforts to protect the interests of all the residents of this community.

To view Crestview's proposed site plan for the townhouses go to the link below:

http://www.napervoice.com/NAPERDOCS/08011401site.pdf

Doug Dallmer

To Rod Randall: You know, Rod, I was tempted to take your last post and junk it but decided to post it anyway. You say a lot of things in that post. Let me say this:

If I recall the Council meeting correctly - and I watched it on TV - you raised the issue about Rosanova and Wehrli and got an earful from those guys because you had no backup for what you were saying. That's in the legal category of "hearsay" and that's why Rosanove and Wehrli responded as they did. How can you possibly blame someone for getting upset when you call them out in a public venue with accusations that you didn't have any factual basis for i.e. documentation etc.? It's also my recollection regarding the "politeness" issue that both Rosanova and Wehrli publicly apologized to you and you did the same for them. So are you saying here that apolgies don't count...or have you just forgotten that aspect of the story?

Secondly, you mention the relationship between one of our editors and the position his wife holds. I can assure you - and plenty of others will assure you - that if you read the Sun, that relationship i.e. husband and wife has never influenced our coverage of any city issue. Not one iota. Again, it seems you're playing the "hearsay" game again. Solet me ask you this question as well: Since you publicly apolgized to Rosanova and Wehrli over your earlier "hearsay" allegations don't you now owe the Sun an apology in kid. Or, as I stated earlier, do apologies mean nothing to you?

Rod R -

Judging by your very lengthy posts, I find it hard to believe you have never held public office.

T.B.

Jim Lynch,

Why in the world would you even think to junk my last post? What is so offending to you? My lanquage? My style? My content? What is your beef? Why are you so adamant about defending Councilman Rosanova and Councilman Wehrli? They can do that themselves!!

In the other blog I asked you to be specific about your complaints about me as to unsubstantiated accusations. Again, you have not been specific.

Now to your points.

There was only one thing that I said in my public forum presentation that I heard from someone else ("heresay" as you call it). And that was the point that a Councilman's son had worked on a matter that had come before the City Council. Now, I can honestly say that I personally do not know whether that is true or not. (Indeed it still might be true). My apology to Councilman Rosanova was that I "may" have been misinformed about that point.

Also, I made that point about the son because the City Attorney said that the son would not be working on any matter that came before the City Council and that was the City Attorney's reason given in the opinion as to why the Councilman would not be in coflict in voting on those matters. Is there anything factually wrong about this statement.

I made no other unsubstantiated statements. I said why I believed that both Councilmen should have recused themselves from voting on an issue. I said that one Councilman had a son that worked for the law firm that represented the petitioner. (I do have documentation about that.) Was that heresay? Is there no back up for that statement? I said that the other Councilman's cousin was the owner of the petitioner. (I have documentation about that as well.) Was that not factual? I then stated two quotes that the Councilman made: one when he was a Plan Commissioner and the other when he was a Councilman. (I have documentation about thease statements as well.) Were these not factual?

So stop saying that I could not back up what I said. I did apologize for that item in which the information given to me could have been incorrect.

Coucilman Wehrli had no reason to be upset with me. I did not accuse him of having any personal financial interest in the outcome of his vote. And, as I said that evening, conflict of interest is more that just about "legalities."

You missed the point about my entire presentation. It was about what is and what is not conflict of interest. In the two examples I cited, I purposely named no Councilman's names, no law firm name's, nor the name of the petitioner.

It appears that you do not agree with me about my examples. I have no problem with that.

Now would you say there was a conflict of interest if ten young ladies were trying out for five cheerling positions and five mothers of five of the young ladies judged the tryout and then selected their own daughters as the new cheerleaders? See my point. Direct financial interest is not the only case of conflict of interest.

Now as to Rosanavo's apology. I did not see what was occurring while I was walking up to the podium for my second presentation that evening as my eyes were on where I was walking (the steps, etc.). I have since been told by people that were there that evening and others who watched on TV that Councilman's Rosanova's apology may not have been sincere. Now there was a break in the City Council meeting between the time of my first presentation and my second presentation. Apparently, just before the apology, the Acting City Manager caught the attention of the City Attorney who in turn got Councilman Rosanova's attention. Was that the cue that he should make his apology? During the break was he advised to make the apology? I don't know; but, others have speculated that this was the case.

Not as to the politeness comment. Were the two Councilmen polite towards me at the end of my first presentation? I can's say one way or the other since I was walking back to my seat and was not paying any attention to them. People who were there and those who watched on TV have said to me that their actions were anything but polite. I was responding, related to the politeness comment, to the blogger who said that he felt that I was "cowered" by the two Councilmen.

What is the "heresay" about the editor and his wife, the attorney. That's factual. I stated, my "opinopn" as to why I feel that the Naperville Sun would not do investigative reporing about the Brestal firm. You may not agree with my opinion; but, that is not "heresay."

I did not say that there has been influence in your coverage because of the editor and the position his laywer wife has. You mentioned that. I only brought up the possiblity that it could occur. A fine distiction. But, nevertheless, a difference between what you inferred and what I said. I certainly whould be the first to apoligize should the Naaperville Sun do a full, in-depth reporting of many of the things that have been said about the Brestal firm and how it influences what happens.

Rod: It's getting a little tedious but, simply put, you seem to be stringing together a lot of circumstantial elements to support your conclusions. Besides, much of what you say regarding Rosanova and, even the Sun, is common knowledge. The fact that we have never been called out over your stated conflict of interest accusation is testimony to that. Indeed, you'd be all over us. Plus, I don't see how you can rely on the impressions of people watching TV to arrive at conclusions that someone was giving a nod to someone else etc. etc. And how do you distinguish a "sincere" apology from an "insincere" one. Just becaue I call them as I see them doesn't mean I'm defending anyone, either. If you've got some kind of legit case to make, bring it to us or to the public instead of resorting to speculative conclusions based on body language. I'll give you credit for one thing, though. You're a pretty good rabble-rouser.

Mr. Moderator,
Can we get back to subject of the PondsGate case? I think a few people have asked the question regarding who was that second council member besides Mayor Pradel that the Napergate Man and his numerous supporters could not flip at the Spring Green Council Meeting.(That is the 9-0 vote that became 2-7 not to build a gas station or shopping center in the middle of a residential subdivision)

I think that is a relevant question since the Ponds of Hobson West people need to know the weakest link in the chain of the 5 council members who voted for the high density zoning proposal.

This council member may or may not still be on the council. That is the first thing we need to know.

I believe if you are sincere about helping get a grassroots organization going (or at least be in the back of the bus) you need to give an assist here. The information is at your fingertips.

Ameena mentioned a Napergate XXXVI ad dated Feb. 10, 1999 so maybe the answer can be found in this ad or in your articles shortly after this ad.(possibly before if it was delayed as most advertising is) I beleive you stated the Naperville Sun covered that event so there must have been an article on that apparently Big Battle

Thanks for your help,
Cindy
PS. I would also like to see if this Napergate XXXVI ad can be posted in readable format so some of us can get a better clue as to what is happening and the correlations blogger are talking about between SpringGate and PondsGate.

Mr. Rod Randall,
I am curious if you have ever crossed paths with the Napergate Man since you have been so active in the past.

Were you involved at all in his Spring Gate and SW Gate struggles? If so what lessons did you learn from those battles in beating City Hall.

If not and you have read about them, do you think a change of your tactics may work in fighting City Hall?

You seem to have a good agenda and be a caring man. Have you thought of changing some of your tactics and possibly adopting some of the Napergate guy's tactics which seemed to have worked better than yours.

I think the Ponds of Hobson West people are runnning out of time to formulate a new strategy. They just need to adopt the winning formula that took pace in the Spring Green/Napergate battle, go with it and see where it gets them.

As many noted 10 people with 5 speakers will not sway this very stubborn City Council.

Bloggers,

Many of you are asking who was the Council Member who voted with Mayor Pradel for Spring Green commercialization in that very final vote. I thought it would be an easy answer but it is not. I suspect from reading the section of the Napergate Ad that pertained to Spring Green it may have been Rosanova. But I am not 100% sure, because I just learned last night at the library that Spring Green involved many flip flopping votes including at least 4 different votes before the City Council and 2 votes before the Plan Commission. It was a very historic and long battle that lasted many years.

You could say it was a battle of will power between Attorney Bill Brestal and the Napergate Man that was finally won by the Napergate Man due to the huge grassroots movement he had organized. The only reason the Napergate Man was able to accomplish what he did was that he had 3500 hard core supporters and possibly a few thousand soft core silent supporters who he acquired from his 100 or so Napergate Ads that were distributed to 22,000 weekly subscibers in addition to many newstand and box customers. His supporters were voters and the City Council saw the writing on the wall in their FINAL REVERSAL VOTE of 7-2 against a Commercial Development on Spring Green.

HERE ARE SOME HISTORICAL FACTS:

1. Initially the city council voted 9-0 to put a GAS STATION or Plaza in Spring Green. I was not able to determine the date of this vote, yet! Give me some time!

2. On November 4, 1997 UNDER heavy pressure from the Napergate Man with residents from 2 subdivisions backing him up and council chambers full to almost capacity, the City Council reversed their vote and went against the Sring Green commercial development by a 7-2 vote.

3. On January 19, 1999 when resistance was low(the Napergate Man and his troops did not show up at that meeting) and the residents thought all the waters were mild and clear, the City Council reversed itself for a second time and voted 5-3 for the Spring Green Commercial development with almost no residents in attendance at that City Council meeting.

4. Apparently when the Napergate Man found out, he rallied his troops again and literally invaded City Hall on Feb.16, 1999 with the support of residents from 12 subdivisions instead of 2. He was accompanied by an overflow crowd and numerous residents were unable to gain entrance. The residents led by the Napergate Man, Activist Donna Rogers and Attorny Richard Strawbrige pressured the City Council to yet one more time reverse its vote for the 3rd time. The outrage and uproar at that meeting was so great the City Council overturned itself yet again, with another stunning 7-2 and final vote against the Spring Green Commercial Development/Gas Station.

5. Finally just for the historians amongst the bloggers, the Plan Commission had voted twice for it to remain residential before it ever reached the City Council for some REVERSE WAXING as Mr. Dallmer refers to it. Could not agree more with his insightful term!

For the record all my information is being derived from the Naperville Sun and Napergate Ads at the library. I learned that the Napergate Ads were so controversial that they were reviewed by local attorneys for both the Sun and the Napergate Man before any were published. The Naperville Sun got tons of heat for running these Napergate ads but the Sun at one point assured its readers that the ads were not only being checked and reviewed locally but sent to it corportate headquarters in California for further review for accuracy and to insure there was no libel or slander in them. At the time the Naperville Sun was owned by a California company called Copley Newspapers. I do not know who owns the Sun now but it may be different ownership.

Based on the review of these ad by all parties and their respective attorneys, I believe the Napergate ads were very factual as they had always been put under a microspcope before publication. One Napergate ad that I could not find thru numerical sequence, the librarian indicated was never published in the newspaper. She believes the Sun rejected it for content that may have been to controversial and inflamatory. Legend has it according to her, that the Napergate Man printed 20,000 copies of the ad the Sun would not publish and distributed it hand to hand thru his 3500 army of supporters to every corner of Naperville including heavy distribution at City Hall, until they were thrown out of the public building. The librarian stated she has no way of getting this missing ad as they only archive the Naperville Sun and not Napergate Ads. So the only Napergate Ads that are in the library are only the ones published in the Sun. The ones distributed on the street are nowhere to be found unless they can be found in a basement or attic in some residence somewhere.

I hope this will shed some light as to what it takes to beat City Hall. It takes persistance and perseverence and until we get some leadership like the Napergate Man we will not succeed Unfortuantely!

Liebert,

I never crossed paths with the Napergate guy nor was I involved with the Spring Gate and SW Gate struggles. I have never met him.

We do apparently have something in common. I can often be seen walking my little white dog. In fact, I am the guy who fills up the doggie poop bag when I walk with cigarette butts, bottle caps, candy wrappers, styrofoam peanuts and any other debris that crosses my path.

During the my 1900s, my work caused me to be out of town a lot. So, during that period of time, I made attempts to attend both high school and college events (Marching Illini, soccer gasmes, flag meets, etc.) in which my kids were participating.

Moderator Ted,

I do not go back and read my postings. So, I missed the following note you added to the end of my posting on January 13. Someone else brought it to my attention.

"NOTE from Ted Slowik, host:

Rod,

We've reported quite extensively in print and on the web about Edward rezoning, library parking deck, and all the other issues you bring up. I think what I'm hearing from you and some others is when a vote doesn't go the way you want, it must be The Sun's fault because it's part of the establishment. Check my comments in the 203 threads. I, along with most people in the community, had no idea during the most recent school board elections that the "for the kids" group of "residents" was solely funded by the teachers' union, because thanks to election laws the group did not have to file campaign donation disclosures until after the election. And 203 supporters criticized me when I described the union's tactics as "deceitful" in that respect. And here we have Dianne McGuire, one of the chief architects of that campaign, running for state representative. I call 'em like I see 'em and I'm not afraid to be anti-establishment. But not every issue where you don't like the result is a conspiracy. And again I remind you and others that right now you're voicing opinions in a forum provided by The Sun."

Ted, I been told that the Naperville Sun was aware before the election that a slanderous telephone survey was being conducted against the Taxpayer Coalition that included three people running for the Distict 203 School Board. While that is "heresay" to me, I can give you the name of a person I know who received such a call. Also, I can provide a name of someone who said that the Naperville Sun was aware of this before the election. Also, the Naperville Sun had to be aware of the "charges" made in the mailings sent out by PURE. Also, the Naperville Sun must have been aware of the original postings on the QE203 wedsite prior to the election. Unless, of course there was no curiosity at the Naperville Sun when just before the election signs where place in high traffic areas around Naperville referring to the QE203 website.

By the way, I have never claimed that there are conspiracies going on. That is your term and speculation.

Related to Edward Hospital and the recent zoning ordinance and the "exemption," I would say that perhaps there has not been some in-depth" reporting about things that have happened that the public should be made aware. For instance, at the end of the last City Council meeting on January 2 when the ordinance related to the zoning was brought before the City Council, some interesting things occurred. In December, the City Council had directed staff to prepare the final ordinance based on the discussion that evening. The ordinace presented to the City Council on January 2 had a number of changes that were not discussed nor authorized by the City Council. Who caused the City Staff to make such changes? Why did the City Attorney, who is responsible for reviewing all ordinances, allow such changes to be made? One change was said to be recommended by residents (the one that would have allowed sound barrier fencing to be placed on residents property instead of the hospital property). I find it difficult to believe that any resident would have asked for that. Did the City Staff dream that up? Or, did someone outside the City Staff come up with that change; perhaps, hospital personnel or the law firm of Brestal's?
Now, has this type of thing happened in the past? Has the City Staff involved been officially reprimanded? Has the City Attorney been reprimanded? And, where is the Nasperville Sun reporting? It is my understanding that there are other things that occurred that some in-depth reporting could have exposed related to the Edward Hospital zoning ordinance process.

I personally was not aware that the teachers' union was the sole funding source of the so-called residents' group until after the D203 election. You seem to throw around a lot of heresay you pick up from dubious sources. Like the way Rosanova asked for specifics about the claim that his son was directly involved in a project before the council. What was that project again? Oh, right. We don't know. Because it's not true. Believe me, we hear a lot of the same rumors you do and we're just as curious a bunch as most of you, and we check out all the juicy rumors we hear and you know what? A lot of things you hear aren't true. That, my friend, is why you don't read about them in The Sun. Given your track record of throwing around unsubstantiated allegations, I place very little credence in your remarks about the Edward rezoning. I would imagine what really happened is that the city staff followed council's directions from the December meeting and prepared the ordinance for approval at the Jan. 2 meeting. You offer no evidence to the contrary. Show me the specifics--minutes from the December meeting that contradict what's in the actual ordinance approved on Jan. 2. Then maybe I'll start to think you have a shred of credibility.

P.S. Just to show how wrong you are, according to the minutes and agendas on the city's Web site, the council discussed changes to the Edward zoning and directed staff to prepare the final ordinance on Dec. 4, and on Dec. 18 the final ordinance was adopted. Nothing about Edward happened on Jan. 2.

Ted,

I have to aplogize to you. I had the dates wrong. Where I said January 2, 2008, it should have been at the end of the December 18, 2007 City Council meeting where the hospital zoning ordinance was brought up for discussion and vote. Watch the video tape of the meeting!! Beginning with the first speaker on the topic starting just after the one hour point in the meeting. The first speaker brings up a number of changes that were made that were not directed by the City Council. Follow the discussion. Around the 1:12:30 point on the tape, Councilman Furstenau directly states that changes made were not authorized by the City Council at the prior meeting. He mentions a number of items as being identified by Councilman Fieseler as being "changed.".

Can I now have my credibility restored? I do not have a practice of throwing around unsubstaniated allegations.

Rod R -

I think it is well documented that nobody knew the teacher's union was financing the "so-called residents' group" (as Ted put it) until after the election because the campaign disclosure forms did not have to filed until after the election was over.

Instead of venting your anger at Ted and The Sun, why not direct some at the teacher's union?

As you pointed out, you have never said there are conspiracies about, but I don't think Ted was wrong to use that word since you definitely insinuated there were conspiracies involving every decision you disagree with. Everything you take issue with seems to involve the city staff, hospital staff, Brestal law firm, or all of the above.

Your insanely long rants are...well, insane.

T.B.

Rod,

Apology accepted, I'll try to check out video of meeting. But if council members questioned it, what was staff's response? Sounds like the council had every opportunity to table the vote if there was anything inappropriate they didn't like about the document. Again, I fail to see how this is evidence of anything out of the ordinary.

Ameena,
I read your histroical facts I am posting again below.

HERE ARE SOME HISTORICAL FACTS:

1. Initially the city council voted 9-0 to put a GAS STATION or Plaza in Spring Green. I was not able to determine the date of this vote, yet! Give me some time!

2. On November 4, 1997 UNDER heavy pressure from the Napergate Man with residents from 2 subdivisions backing him up and council chambers full to almost capacity, the City Council reversed their vote and went against the Sring Green commercial development by a 7-2 vote.

3. On January 19, 1999 when resistance was low(the Napergate Man and his troops did not show up at that meeting) and the residents thought all the waters were mild and clear, the City Council reversed itself for a second time and voted 5-3 for the Spring Green Commercial development with almost no residents in attendance at that City Council meeting.

4. Apparently when the Napergate Man found out, he rallied his troops again and literally invaded City Hall on Feb.16, 1999 with the support of residents from 12 subdivisions instead of 2. He was accompanied by an overflow crowd and numerous residents were unable to gain entrance. The residents led by the Napergate Man, Activist Donna Rogers and Attorny Richard Strawbrige pressured the City Council to yet one more time reverse its vote for the 3rd time. The outrage and uproar at that meeting was so great the City Council overturned itself yet again, with another stunning 7-2 and final vote against the Spring Green Commercial Development/Gas Station.

5. Finally just for the historians amongst the bloggers, the Plan Commission had voted twice for it to remain residential before it ever reached the City Council for some REVERSE WAXING as Mr. Dallmer refers to it. Could not agree more with his insightful term!
******************************************************************

I have been reading these blogs for months. Everyone says there was one single flip flop. You are saying there were 6 total votes by two city bodies and 3 flip flops??????????????

Why is your version different than everyone else's version? How can you substantiate your version besides thru Napergate Ads?

You are almost asking us to believe anything you write but yet it all sounds so unreal that council members could be gymnasts of this nature. I have never heard of council member that could perform summersaults in such a manner in any town let alone Naperville.

I hope you, someone else, or the Moderator can show us some evidence that what you are saying has substance. Until than I have my seriously raised doubts!

Mr. Rod Randall,
Thanks for clarifying your relationship with the Napergate Man. I was not aware you were out of politics for that long and suspected you might be one of his lieutenants in addition to Donna Rogers and Rick Strawbridge as you seem heavily involved in town politics and development issues. Kudos to you for your deep involvement in the post Napergate Era!! I would also have taken care of the kids in the Napergate Era as a priority as you did.

Well I hope one day you can walk your white dog and run into the Napergate Man walking his white dog and join forces to continue this battle against City Hall and the Brestal Law Firm.

I guess you both have another thing in common...you are both retired. Of course you from work and he from politics...maybe that is not quite the same kind of retirment but nevertheless it is retirement.

But on a serious note, you seem to be a man full of energy that needs to devote it more efficiently.

It appears your blogs are very informative. But again they are only reaching 200 people or less in all of Naperville.

It seems the Napergate Man was able to reach at least 22,000 thru his Napergate ads which puts you at a serious disadvantage.

In fairness to you, it was easier for him to have a grassroots movement when he was reaching 110 times more people. So those who are criticising you are unjust in their criticism. No one should be required to spend the kind of money the Napergate Man spent on those ads. He did that voluntarily! That should not be a standard, residents should be held to. It just seems an unfair standard as it is impossible to meet, mostly because of those dynamic Napergate Ads in an ERA where newsprint was twice as powerful as it is today. So even if one did have the financial ability to take full page ads, he/she could never meet that standard due to changing times of different ERAS.

Anyway, having said that you, others and I have to find a way to start a grassroots movement that may be less expensive.

As the moderator or host hinted, without a grassroots movement nothing will happen.

I guess you and the Napergate Man have something else in common. Before he rans his ads in the Napergate Era of the 90s, he was also struggling and no one was listening to him either!

But he overcame and I believe you, others and I will also eventually overcome. Let us just stick with it and keep banging until the council listens.

Good Luck to you and I love all of your posts when you stay on the issues!

PS.(However, I think the posts where you and the moderator are arguing are counter-productive as they seem the least informative of all your posts and get us off subject. We really need to stay on subject and not be distracted. I suspect the Napergate Man remained focused and we also have to remain focused!)

T. B.
You seem to be trying to confuse the bloggers and in particular the Napergatians, with your below remarks which seem to be contradictory, but actually are not!

******************************************************************
“If these campaign contributions were ethical they would have continued. The[y] were stopped when the Napergate Ads exposed them.”

Nikki –

Sorry to say, but the campaign contributions did continue after the Napergate ads. Following is a sample of those who contributed to Furstenau’s state campaign, which I had previously listed on another thread:

T. B. -
******************************************************************

You are fully aware that this is a deliberate attempt on your part to confuse the Napergatians and create dissent in their ranks.

It has been verified over and over again that the Napergate Man did in fact stop the contributions from Brestal Law Firms to the City Council Members.

The Napergate Man to the best of my belief and recollection was never invovled in state politics. The contributions you mention are from developers to state candidates for state office. Nothing to do with Naperville city council members, city politics, or local development controlled by Naperville.

If Brestal made a contribution to Furstenau, it is because he wanted him out of city politics and into state politics. He was a thorn in getting each of his projects approved so I am surprised Mr. Brestal did not give Furstenau a 100k to help him win state office and get him out of his hair. If Furstena accepted such a contribution, it was because he believed he would win his State Office and not be returning to City Hall. No one runs in an election with the belief he will lose. Let us not forget Furstenau spent over 54k of his own money to help increase the chances of winning state office. Furstenau was determined to win and had no plans of returning to City Hall. So where is the conflict of interest? Did Furstenau change and become pro-Brestal after the contribution for state? No, the last I checked he is still the top dissenter on all of Brestal's Projects.

In summary you mixed apples and oranges in order to sow confusion and slander and libel Mr. Furstenau. Mr. Napergate disclosed in his ads who was on the take with these contributions. I believe according to Ameena who I deem a very reliable source of factual information, they were Council Members McCrane(passed away), Gallaher(now incredibly works for Brestal) and the infamous Rosanova who got his son a job with the Brestal Law Firm.

Mr. Furstenau was not mentioned as accepting contributions by Mr. Napergate while on City Council. Mr. Napergate endorsed both Rosanova and Furstenau. He did not hesitate to disown Rosanova when he learned of his betrayal in accepting campaign contributions from the Brestal Law Firm. Do you think for a second, Mr. Napergate would not have disowned Furstenau if he did likewise to Rosanova? I think you know the answer to that question which would be quite obvious to any blogger with any common sense.

Mr. Napergate did not have to disown McCrane or Gallaher as he never endorsed them. He actually asked residents not to vote for them and gave them near Zero Ratings!

So Mr. T.B., let us keep our facts straight. Anyone who knew the Napergate Man or did a historical study of his work as Ameena has, knows he would never support anyone who accepted campaign contributions from Bill Brestal or his development firm in his CAPACITY as a city council member or candidate for city council.

His last 10 ads were focused on attacking the Brestal Development Projects and how they were being approved based on connections instead of desirability.

If one was to believe you, one would have to beleive Mr. Napergate was just pumping him money in Napergate Ads for the fun of it....for the hypocrisy of it....for the sarcasm of it!!! I seriously doubt that was the case! I beleive he was passionate in his fight against City Hall and the Brestal Law Firm.

I have yet to meet a resident who felt his battle was a phoney battle. You are the first with your attempt to plant a seed by hoping residents would not know the difference between a city and state contribution!

You have failed miserably! Please try to do better next time and study your facts in order that you present them on this forum in a credible and believable manner.

Nikki –

I’m not trying to confuse anyone—you or the Napergatians. So your assertion that I am “fully aware” of doing so is laughable. I’m just looking for an answer or an opinion from the Napergatians on this DF funding issue.

You said that “It has been verified over and over again that the Napergate Man did in fact stop the contributions from Brestal Law Firms to the City Council Members.” Yet there is a factual basis in campaign disclosures that Brestal and developers gave money to Furstenau for DF’s state campaign. I provided the web site. Did you bother to look?

You stated that “If Brestal made a contribution to Furstenau, it is because he wanted him out of city politics and into state politics.” First of all, Brestal did give money to DF. It’s a fact and there’s no “if” involved here. Next, I make no assumptions about why Brestal or the developers gave the money or why DF accepted it. I find it odd how you seem to know just what Brestal is thinking….

You then stated that “If one was to believe you, one would have to beleive Mr. Napergate was just pumping him money in Napergate Ads for the fun of it....for the hypocrisy of it....for the sarcasm of it!!! I seriously doubt that was the case! I beleive he was passionate in his fight against City Hall and the Brestal Law Firm. I have yet to meet a resident who felt his battle was a phoney battle.”

I made no statements and implied nothing about the Napergate Man. I never said he fought a “phoney battle” and never passed judgement on what he did. I was merely asking what the Napergatians thought about DF doing much the same NOW that Rosanova had done in the PAST. Perhaps with the Napergate Man retired and his ad campaign so far in the past, DF thought it was safe to accept the “tainted” money now. Who knows?

So what you’re saying is that it is OK for DF to accept Brestal money for the state campaign but not his city council campaigns? If that’s your opinion, just come out and say it. It sounds to me like you’re trying to rationalize your continued support for DF in light of the money he took from Brestal and developers. Obviously, part of your defense is to vigorously attack me instead of reviewing the donations on the State’s web site.

By the way, I never hid the fact that the donations were for DF’s state run and not for city council. I don’t draw a distinction. Money is money. Rosanova was/is bad for accepting the money, but DF isn’t? Who cares which campaign it was for? Your logic is that if it was for a city council run they were “on the take” (your words), but for a state campaign anything goes?

Please tell me I have it wrong because that answer sounds fairly hypocritical.

"You have failed miserably! Please try to do better next time and study your facts in order that you present them on this forum in a credible and believable manner.” I think this is the best thing you wrote, I just happen to think it more aptly applies to you.

T.B.

TED SLOWIK, HOST,

I KNOW THIS QUESTION HAS BEEN ASKED BY MANY BUT I DO NOT BELIEVE I HAVE SEEN A DEFINITIVE ANSWER.

WHO WAS OTHER COUNCIL MEMBER WHO REFUSED TO FLIP FLOP ON THE FINAL SPRING GREEN/NAPERGATE VOTE BESIDES THE MAYOR?

COULD YOU PLEASE HELP US OUT SINCE YOU HAVE ACCESS TO OLD EDITIONS OF THE SUN?

THE ANSWER COULD HELP THE PONDS OF HOBSON WEST RESIDENTS WHO ARE LOOKING FOR A COUNCIL MEMBER WHO WOULD HAVE THE MOST LIKELIHOOD OF OPENING THE CASE AGAIN.

PS.I am not yelling or screming at you. Just realized I accidentally had my caps on and do not feel like retyping. Sorry!

NOTE from Ted Slowik, host:

Marybeth,

I'm looking through electronic archives.

Here's one story:

Newspaper: SUN PUBLICATIONS
Date: 02/19/1999
Day of Week: Friday
Edition: NAPERVILLE SUN | LIS
Section: NEWS
Page: 4
Headline: Spring Green opposition: `The fight is not over'
Byline: Britt Carson / STAFF WRITER

THE VOTE
Here is how Naperville City Council members voted on the Spring Green development at Hobson Road and Naper Boulevard.

Mayor George Pradel: Yes.
Peg Price: Yes.
Jim Siddall: Yes.
John Rosanova: Yes.
Kevin Gallaher: Yes.
Sam Macrane: Yes.
Gary von Behren: No.
Mary Ellingson: No.
Doug Krause: No.
*****

SPRING[0] GREEN[0] AMENDMENTS
As part of its approval, the council attached the following requirements to
the Spring[0] Green[0] development:

[] The beauty salon and day spa shall not exceed 8,000 square feet and
feature no more than 22 stations.
[] The developer can build 11 single-family homes on the property, not 13
as originally planned.
[] Ten office-building parking spaces will remain green space and may be
paved only if deemed necessary in the future.
[] The developer must have six of the 11 homes under roof before beginning
construction on the office building. The six houses must be built on every
other lot.

*****

Despite approval from Naperville's City Council this week, residents
opposed to the development said they will continue to fight it.

For at least three years, residents have opposed attempts to develop 6.3
acres at the northwest corner of Hobson Road and Naper Boulevard. Tuesday,
the council narrowly agreed to annex and rezone the land to allow 11
single-family homes and a one-story office building. The commercial
building will house a beauty salon and day spa and a dental office.

"The fight is not over," Donna Rogers said.

As their last line of defense, residents hope to challenge the annexation
with a referendum on the April 2000 election ballot.

The residents need 1,600 signatures from registered Naperville voters by
March 18. The council's decision is final after 30 days.

Jim Tamm, assistant executive director of the DuPage County Elections
Commission, said the deadline to put a referendum on the ballot for the
April 13 election was Jan. 25.

Using a referendum to fight an annexation is not unprecedented, Tamm said.

"Every once in a while we see a referendum on an annexation," Tamm said.

Six City Council members -- the minimum needed to approve an annexation --
voted in favor of an amended version of Spring[0] Green[0]. Councilman Mary
Ellingson, Gary von Behren and Doug Krause voted against the proposal.

Krause said the office building lacked adequate parking for the amount of
daily customers the salon would handle. Krause said he observed a smaller
salon that used more parking than Spring[0] Green[0] is proposing.

"There are not enough parking spaces," Krause said. "The building was a
quarter of the size, and 47 parking spots were taken, and the gravel lot
around the corner was full."

Bob Kallien, community development director, said Spring[0] Green's[0] number of
parking spots is within the city's suggested amount for a beauty salon or
day spa.

The council amended the proposal to include 10 land-banked parking spaces
that can be used at a later time. Krause made a motion for 30 land-banked
spaces, but his motion was denied.

The development will include a 10-foot-deep detention basin, which
residents said would be a safety hazard to children in the neighborhood.
The detention basin will be enclosed by a 4 1/2 -foot-high fence.

"This proposal does not consider public safety. It only invites tragedy,"
Rogers said. "This will become a drowning pit."

Resident Cathy Allen said the detention pond is an invitation for disaster.

"This is an extremely unsafe situation," Allen said. "This will become a
whirlpool with heavy rains, and we will have a death."

Dave Barber, director of public works, said the detention basin is unusual.
City Manager Peter Burchard said the proposal is only a preliminary design
and can be changed if staff thinks something is inappropriate.

"We might request they put a top on it," Burchard said. "There could be a
problem if it just sat there open in a residential area."

Mike van Poucke, attorney for developer Richard Marker, said that with only
11 houses instead of 13, more land will be available for a detention area.

"We might be able to break it up into a couple detention ponds or make the
original basin less deep and a little larger," van Poucke said.

He said the proposal was a compromise. The residential street originally
proposed to extend through to Naper Boulevard will instead be a cul-de-sac,
accessible only from Hobson Road.

"This project has been put to the test beyond any other project that has
come before council," van Poucke said. "We have made a lot of changes and
believe it now passes the test."

Rick Strawbridge said the amendments are an improvement but not good
enough.

"If you start with the assumption that it is going to be approved, then
this is the best deal the residents could expect to get," Strawbridge said.
"However, there are still lingering concerns that have not been resolved."

The three councilman who voted against the proposal weren't satisfied with
the amended proposal, either.

"No means no," Ellingson said. "From the beginning the city's planning
policy has been well-known, and this does not follow the comprehensive
plan."

Gary von Behren agreed.

"It clearly needs to be understood this is not an appropriate site," von
Behren said. "We are starting a precedent by supporting this zoning change,
which at all costs needs to be avoided."

During the meeting, about 100 residents stood up to show their oppositionto the proposal.

Van Poucke said it will take three to six months before architects and
engineers submit the project's final plat for approval.

Here's another:

Newspaper: SUN PUBLICATIONS
Date: 01/22/1999
Day of Week: Friday
Edition: NAPERVILLE SUN
Section: NEWS
Page: 1
Headline: Battle cry; Residents continue fight against Spring Green
Byline: Britt Carson / STAFF WRITER
PhotoBy: Scott Panella / Staff photographer
Caption: Cathy Allen stands firm on opposing Spring Green, a residential and office development proposed for land at Naper Boulevard and Hobson Road. Opponents of the project posted the sign on a fence along Hobson Road.


THE VOTE
The Naperville City Council voted on the question: Should the Spring[0] Green[0]
proposal be sent back to the Department of Community Development to work on
the annexation request and final details of the plan?

Yes
Mayor George Pradel
Sam Macrane
Peg Price
Kevin Gallaher
John Rosanova

No
Mary Ellingson
Gary von Behren
Doug Krause

(Council member Jim Siddall was absent.)
*****

A group of Naperville residents feels as if it's fighting a losing battle.

For more than three years, residents have opposed plans to commercially
develop land at the corner of Hobson Road and Naper Boulevard.

At first they were successful, convincing DuPage County authorities to
reject a gas station proposed for the unincorporated site. And they
persuaded Naperville officials twice to turn down a proposal to build homes
and an office building on the property.

Now one of Naperville's most heated land-use debates could be nearing City
Council approval. The council this week, by a vote of 5-3, sent the
proposal back to Department of Community Development staff to review
details about the final plat and annexation agreement.

The decision upset residents who want the council to approve nothing other
than single-family homes or other non-commercial use of the site.

"We bought our property under the pretense the surrounding area was zoned
R1A," said Cathy Allen, president of the Pembrooke Homeowners Association.
"The city owes that much to us."

Developer Richard Marker wants to build 13 single-family homes and an
office building on 6 acres at the northwest corner of the busy
intersection. The proposal asks Naperville to annex the land and rezone it
to allow the office building.

However, the residents are fighting to keep the site's low-density zoning
for single-family homes. Their weapons have included purchasing full-page
ads in a local newspaper, posting signs along Hobson Road and turning out
by the hundreds at meetings to oppose the development.

"We stay in contact with each other and with different people in the city
to keep abreast of the issues," Allen said.

About 80 residents attended Tuesday's City Council meeting. Pinned to many
of their shirts were pictures of an office building with a red mark through
it.

City Council candidate Dick Furstenau said the proposal hasn't changed.

"I feel like the movie "Groundhog Day," where Bill Murray lives the same
day over and over and over," Furstenau said. "There is an end to that
movie, but I am not sure when this is going to end."

Residents are concerned about safety, and how the development might
increase traffic at an already-busy intersection.

"I am afraid people will die at this intersection," said Rich Weyand. "The
real tragedy is, it's completely unnecessary."

Councilman John Rosanova said the developer has done his best to make the
building blend in with its surroundings.

"I think this is a good compromise," Rosanova said. "This is as close as we
can get to residential use."

Councilman Doug Krause disagreed.

"By funneling all that traffic onto Hobson Road, it is an accident waiting
to happen," Krause said.

Allen said the Spring[0] Green[0] proposal the City Council rejected last year
had 11 single-family homes and a two-story office building covering 10,000
square feet. The revised proposal is for 13 homes and a one-story,
12,000-square-foot office building.

"It does appear a majority of the council has voted in favor of higher
density," Allen said.

Councilman Sam Macrane suggested the developer move the access from the
office building onto Hobson Road, and that the street serving the homes end
in a cul-de-sac instead of continuing through to Naper Boulevard.

Michael Van Poucke, an attorney representing Marker, said the cul-de-sac
could be worked into the final plans.

"The proposed development is not in harmony with the environment," said
resident Joseph Drago. "The development is not common sense, the land
should be developed residentially."

Councilwoman Mary Ellingson agreed.

"My decision is simple," Ellingson said. "This is basically the same
proposal for commercial use we denied."

Kevin Lynch, one of several homeowners whose properties abut the land,
filed a formal protest with the city. Councilman Gary von Behren, who voted
against the proposal, said the protest means that six council votes will be
needed to approve the rezoning request. In a separate vote, six votes also
will be needed to approve the annexation agreement, but all annexations
require six positive votes.

In response to the proposed gas station, in 1996 the City Council passed a
resolution recommending commercial development be limited to areas south of
Hobson Road along Naper Boulevard in order to preserve the unique character
along Hobson Road.

"The intent of the resolution is to keep commercial development between
75th Street and Hobson Road," said resident Rick Strawbridge. "Many
residents are concerned this is going to lead to further commercial
development along Hobson Road."

Many residents are getting frustrated and feel as if their voices aren't
being heard.

"Spring[0] Green[0] has crossed the line which was previously protected by the
City Council in allowing commercial development there," Strawbridge said.

Von Behren agreed.

"The residents have to come first," the council member said. "If the City
Council is not the spokesperson for them, then who is?"

And this story by your's truly says Peg Price was the one who voted along with Pradel:

Newspaper: SUN PUBLICATIONS
Date: 06/07/1998
Day of Week: Sunday
Edition: NAPERVILLE SUN
Section: NEWS
Page: 7
Headline: Residents challenge Spring Green's revival
Byline: Ted Slowik / STAFF WRITER


Some sharp-eyed Naperville residents are challenging a developer's attempt
to present a revised proposal directly to the City Council and bypassing
reviews by staff and the Plan Commission.

Richard Marker's plan to turn a bucolic farm at the northwest corner of
Hobson Road and Naper Boulevard into 13 homes and an office building was
rejected by the council last November.

Last month, Willard Brestal, Marker's attorney, requested the council
schedule a public hearing on a revised version of the proposed development
known as Spring[0] Green[0].

However, members of the grassroots group Naperville Zoning and Planning
Organization say the request should be heard by the Plan Commission first.

"There is no place in the city's zoning code where it says the council can
re-hear a proposal once it's taken final action on it," said Rich Weyand of
ZAP. "The case is closed, and if the developer wants to bring it back it
should be assigned a new case number before the Plan Commission."

Peg Price, a council member and former Plan Commission member, said city
attorney Mike Roth is investigating the issue. Roth and other city
department heads were at a retreat Friday and could not be reached for
comment.

Voting on a motion made by Gary von Behren, the council rejected the plan
7-2, with Price and Mayor George Pradel in the minority. Whether a revised
plan can come directly back to the council "depends on how Gary's motion
was worded," Price said.

Von Behren said Friday he wants the Plan Commission to review the revised
annexation agreement before the council considers it.

"That way the residents have a chance to have their say, and the Plan
Commission can provide information for the council to consider," vonBehren
said.

Brestal is recovering from nonemergency heart surgery this week and was
unavailable for comment.

When he asked for the new hearing, Brestal said the Spring[0] Green[0] plan had
been significantly changed. The request still is for the city to annex the
6-acre site and rezone the parcel to allow homes and an office building.

However, Brestal said the new proposal is for a one-story,
12,000-square-foot office building that is 40 percent smaller than the
two-story version that was rejected. The lot sizes of the homes have been
increased to an average of 10,500 square feet, and a stormwater retention
area has been relocated closer to the intersection.

Neighboring residents still oppose any plan for office or retail uses on
the north side of Hobson Road.

"By sidestepping the process, the developers can be very aggressive and
back off one step at a time," Weyand said. "This is the way the council has
done things in the past. Our point is, `Where in the zoning ordinance does
it say you can do this?'"

T.B.,
I understand your points. But you ignored my points!

1.A contribution to a State Representative heading to Springfield is different than a contribution to a City Council Member about to vote on Brestal's Projects.

2.I did check and all contributions from the Brestal Law Firm to City Council members as their capacity as City Council Members and they did stop after the Napergate ads shamelessly exposed them.

3.I did verify that in fact Bill Brestal did donate $2000 dollars to Dick Furstenau for his STATE CAMPAIGN.(not city)

4.Dick Furstenau believed he was going to win and Bill Brestal hoped he would win.

5.Bill Brestal hates Dick Furstenau and hoped the money would help him win as it would get rid of him.

6.But I agree there is a problem since Dick Furstenau lost and is back on the council voting on Brestal's developments.

7.I do not believe Fursteanu can be bought for $2000 dollars but I suspect Rosanova can be bought for $2000 dollars.

8.I do NOT believe Furstenau accepted the money because he believed the Napergate Man was not watching.(How would I know if the Napergate Man is watching or not watching?)

9.I am NOT a Napergatian and never met the Napergate Man. However, he seems to be a man who was looking out for the best interest of the powerless residents in their struggles against City Hall.

10.Finally, if I were the Napergate Man or a Napergatian, I would demand DF return this money to Bill Brestal immediately as it has become a major conflict of interest or at least has that "appearance," since he lost the state election and is back voting for or against Brestal's numerous developments.

I believe my answer is fair and satifactory and you read it carefully before you attack me again, T.B.!!

Nikki,

If DF was at the state level and Brestal and developers gave him money to 'go away' then isn't it true that at the state level DF could vote on key issues that would hit to the core of their business ANYWHERE they operated in the state of Illinois and not just within the city limits of Naperville?

What I can not understand is why a law firm or developer would pay to put a man that supposedly loathes them or that they supposedly loath into a position of having more power over them.

Help us out with that one, please.

Joe,
It is simple!

Brestal doesn't care how much power he has or does not have!

Brestal just does not want him having direct voting power on his development projects that are usually developer friendly and resident hostile. As a State Representative he would have 0 direct power and almost nil indirect power over Brestal's projects. That is a no brainer!

In Springfield he has no vote on Brestal's projects. In City Hall he does! That should make sense to you unless you want to slice and dice like you did in the old days. You have been getting many complements on these blogs since you stopping slicing and dicing. I hope you do not go back to your old ways!!!

The Napergate Man retired, activist Donna Rogers moved out of town, and Furstenau was the last step or major hurdle to return to the "business as usual" rubber stamping that ruled before the Napergate Era.

The establishment is aching to get back to "business as usual."

But I see some resistance developing. Just read that long blog on the 75th St. site. That person seemed to have learned something from Mr. Napergate and he seems determined to lead his subdivision which will be the new front line.

I just checked the map on city's web site for subdivisions and I see what this person is talking about.

You will have Fox Run and Market Meadows shopping centers north of The Meadows. You will have SW GATE II PLAZA east of The Meadows. And you will have SW GATE I PLAZA west of The Meadows.

These residents did not buy their homes to live in a peninsula surrounded by commercial development! What a nightmare for these poor residents? But it seems like they were endoctrinated by Mr. Napergate during their first battle as they had been involved in both the SWGATE and SPRING GREEN GATE battles of the Napergate Age. I suspect they will be organized and lead the charge this time since it is their subdivison on 2 front lines. They are being attacked from 2 sides at once! I think because of their experience with the Napergate battles, they will not be caught sleeping like the residents of the Ponds of Hobson West. Pembroke Commons led Napergate World War I. The Meadows must step up and be the leader in Napergate World War II.

They are in an area noted for reciprocal subdivision help and I see all those who battled in Spring Green stepping it up for their neighbors in S. W. Gate. Those guys according to Ameena's review of Napergate ads have worked closely together and I suspect they will stop Brestal in his tracks once again. This Brestal guy does not take NO for an answer. He just waited for the leaders to retire or relocate and he is back putting plazas in everyone's back yard but his OWN!

OK, Joe I hope I answered your question. Just trust me this time he will not have any power to vote on Brestal's projects if he was elected to be a State Representative. Do you think he would be able to call any of the other council members who censured him and influence their vote??? Common Joe, we all know you are one of the most intelligent bloggers on these sites, so don't play dumb again! That is what got you in trouble before you reincarnated yourself the last week. It looks like you are slippin back the slippery slope.........to being the old JOE!!!

Nikki, calm down and don't pop a cork just because someone disagrees with you. Let me explain because I think you have some confusion about the operating capacity I am talking about.

As a state rep, he can directly manipulate laws and requirements that could impact *ALL* of Brestal's workings. You are thinking small time client projects within a city. I am talking about having the ability to directly vote on things that impact their entire operating business as a whole within the state of Illinois beyond the scope of Naperville. A state mandate here and an additional tax or disclosure requirement there can have a very huge impact on all of their operations. I certainly wouldn't put an annoying gnat into a position of power over my whole business. As a councilman he is ONE guy who often gets outvoted anyway. This basically makes him irrelevant in their eyes. As a state rep he has the power to mingle and manipulate State Law that govern how their entire business works and what taxes they pay. I don't buy the "to get rid of him" rationale because that makes him more of a threat to Brestal's livelihood at the state level. Now, send him to Washington and that's a different story. There, I would buy into the "to get rid of him" thought process because the decisions there are not as impacting directly back home like a state law would be.

Back on the topic:

At the latest (Jan. 15, 2008) City Council meeting five speakers talked about the "Ponds of Hobson West" property during the Open Forum near the beginning of the meeting. On the video on the Naperville City Council website, one can watch what they had to say beginning at the 30:25 (thirty minutes, twenty-five seconds) mark of Part I of the video.

The first of these speakers, Doug Dallmer discussed the "value" of the property and then questioned whether "good-faith" negotiations are taking place. The City, he said, had an appraisal made in the fall of 2006 that was in the $3.0 million to $3.3 million range. (Doug said the City has rejected his Freedom of Information request for this appraisal. Now, why would the City refuse to give out this information?) The Park District had the property appraised in November 2007; this appraisal was $3.27 million.

It is also known that the Crestview Builders purchased the property in early 2004 for $2.7 million. They had an appraisal in 2006 that was for $3.3 million. (So, in a booming market, the value of the land value went up $0.6 million over a two-year period.) Mr. Dallmer stated that Crestview Builders said they had a recent appraisal of the property that valued the property at $5.18 million, where the property was value as if it was still zoned for single-family. (So, we are led to believe during a down-market, the value went up $1.9 million in a year period.)

For those who believe that the residents need to reunite, I suggest that watching the presentations of Tom O'Hale (starting at indeed 37:10) and Denise O'Hale (starting at 40:30) would be of interest.

It is really sad that after a year with only 13 days left all you people want to do is rehash Napergate. Hope you like your new neghbors.

Host Ted Slowick,
Thanks for your 12 page response to my post. I suspect many bloggers may have missed it as you inserted it my 8:53am after I assume most bloggers read it. I think when you blog in your own posts, bloggers are more likely to observe your blog.

I found it interesting that you were actually a reporter covering that historic battle. I think we found the right source to help poor Ameena out! Thanks much Ted!!!

However in reviewing and trying to reconcile your versions with Ameena, neither of you have arrived at the answer in any conclusive way regarding the flip flop issue and voters.

You mention the first 7-2 in which former Mayor Price and council womam joined Mayor Pradel. That vote was in June of 1998.
I think all the bloggers, Ameena and myself are wondering who that other vote was in the SECOND 7-2 vote that took place in Feb. of 1999. Yes, this battle was vicious, long and probably the worse battle in Naperville History based on what you and Ameena have been posting.

Here are some points:
1. There were 5 City Council votes and 2 Plan Commission votes on this Project with much flip flopping.

2. You missed the second and final 7-2 vote against Spring Green/Napergate for commercialization.

3. Ameena missed a 6-3 vote for Spring Green or commercialization

4. I believe you were both aware of the initial 9-0, the 5-3 votes, and the FIRST 7-2 vote.

5. It seems when the Napergate Man, Activist Donna Rogers, Homeowners President Cathy Allen and Attorney Rick Strawbridge brought along 80-100 residents they lost. When they brought over 300 and filled the hallways they won. Just an observation from reading Ameena and your posts!

6. The Napergatians had 3 of their own(loyal) on the council. Doug Krause, Mary Ellingson, and Gary von Behren. Their 4th candidate was flip flopping all over the place. That is John Rosanova! Your articles indicate that Dick Furstenau was not yet a council men but in the council speaking and supporting his Napergatian buddies. Darlene Senger was not mentioned but I believe she was not a council member but also supporting the Napergatians at the time.

7. I did not know that Mr. Bill Brestal developed heart trouble during these intense battles. First, I heard of that! I guess Ameena has been missing a few items such as heart attacks and at least one vote in her coverage.

8. While I have no clue, but I believe if you research the second 7-2 vote and not the first, I would be willing to bet it was former Mayor Price that held firm with Mayor Pradel. Keep in mind foremer Mayor Priced loathed the Napergate Man and had revoked his liquor license. Thus I can not see her supporting anything that would have to do with the Napergate Man. I am willing to bet you 10 bucks it was Price again and not Rosanova that voted with Mayor Pradel in the final Spring Green/ Napergate 7-2 vote.

9. If my suspicians are accurate, I think we solved the mystery of the leakest link that the Ponds of HW needs to attack. That would be John Rosanova. Apparently before it was all done, the Napergate Man pressured him to return to his roots...at least for a while.

10. In the 6-3 and 5-3 votes for Spring Green, the Napergatians(D.K., G.v.B., M.E.) stuck with the Napergate Man and his troops. But former Napergatian Rosanova flipped to the establishment. It seems though in the very final vote, the Napergate Man got Rosanova to do one final flip for him and his grassroots movement encompassing dozens of subdivisions!

I hope I got it right. It is so confusing but so interesting! And I agree so much can be learned from this classic and historic battle to help other subdvisions win their battles with City Hall.

Note from Ted Slowik, host:

Marybeth,

I'll try to go back into the archive and find that second 7-2 vote.

RJ,
I think you are missing the entire point of the exchanges. Mr. Randall and Mr. Dallmer need to have one of the 5 Council Members who voted for the Pond Gate proposal to agree to put it before the council again. Otherwise it is over! Thus the research into past Napergate Battles such as the infamous Spring Green one which I believe was the toughest battle fought against City Hall in the 175 year history of Naperville.

I think the Napergatians, anti-establishment folks, and Host Ted are trying to help the Pond Gate residents/supporters find the most likely candidate to agree to put it forward again. Thus frantic research has been going on to solve this mystery of who would be the most likely council member to do it based on historical studies. It almost makes sense to me and I see how Spring Gate can be be used to help Ponds Gate. Success sometimes has a way of breeding more success...let us hope this is the case here!

I think they are very close to solving the mystery of who voted with Mayor Pradel on the second 7-2 vote, despite all the enormous pressure Spring Green put on the City Council by the Napergate Man, his powerful full page Napergate ads, the leaders of all the subdivisions and the grassroots movement that seemed to be needed to get this all done. The point being is the person who voted with Mayor Pradel is someone they do not want to approach for help. He/She would be a hopeless waste of time and would probably never do the favor of putting it on again or flip. My suspician is with blogger Marybeth, that it was probably former council member Margaret Price.

If this is the case, it seems Rosanova is the last hope to help Ponds Gate as he has a history of flipping under pressre.

I think the Pond Gate situation is failing because of a lack of a movement. I don't recall anyone using these blogs to invite residents to the last council meeting. 10 people and 5 speakers will not do it. If you read the latest research done by our Host Ted, it seems meetings attended by a 80-100 residents did not have an impact on the council in Spring Green. Napergate ads, 300+ residents before council, dozens of speakers, rallies, etc. finally did the job.

Mr. Dallmer and Mr. Randall don't think it should be this way. I agree with them! But unfortunately the city council members will not change their position based on logic. Only pressure will cause them to change their position either way.

REGARDING NAPERGATE:

My definition of Napergate is the onging battles between City Hall and the residents regarding encroaching commercialization. Spring Gate, Ponds Gate, SW GATE I and SW GATE II are all components of NAPERGATE. Napergate is the battles between the establishment forces vs. the anti-establishment forces also referred to by many as the Napergatians.

I think the confusion is when some people incorrectly refer to the Napergate Era as in pastence on these blogs. There is no pastence! The Napergate battles are brewing currently in 3 locations that I know of. SW GATE I was never solved. Ponds Gate is in full swing! The developer of SW GATE II recently put up a vague sign. They did not indicate on the sign what they have planned which makes me very suspicious that they are trying to pull something quick on the residents before they can organize themselves Napergate Style and fight.

SW GATE I was shelved until the fire simmered down. SW GATE I was a huge Napergate battle and it is not over! It was put on PAUSE! It is starting again very shortly so I disagree with some bloggers who thought wrongfully we are out of the Napergate Era. We are in it full steam with action taking place on many fronts. This is my opinion for whatever it is worth!

***********************************************************************************************

PS. Even if the Napergate Man was around, I do not believe he could change the outcome at this late stage for Ponds Gate. And certainly if it turns out Rosanova is the LAST HOPE after the above research is concluded, he would not be able to help. The Napergate Man accused Rosanova of betrayal and disowned him after he learned of his campaign contributions from Brestal. He blasted him in his Napergate ads! There is apparently no relationship between them or a very hostile one at best. So Mr.Dallmer and Mr. Randall would be much better candidates to approach Rosanova than the Napergate Man! I hope that makes sense!

Joe,
I think Nikki made some very good points and tried to be rational. Even demanding Furstenau return the funds to Brestal!

Your argument with her appears nonsensical. Furstenau's effect from the State is 0 on Brestal's local projects. The State Assembly really has no interest in Brestal's projects. The state has been allowing cities to zone lots commercial or residential pretty much as they please for a 100 years. Do you think Furstenau is going to suddenly change that with his one vote amongst hundreds in the assembly? Do you think the State Assembly will suddenly decide to rule on Naperville issues instead of State issues. You are really off on this one, Joe! Sorry!

In the city council every vote counts! If the Napergate Man ever ran a slate of 4 again and succeeded, the Furstenau vote will be the deciding vote that gives the Napergatians power again.(assuming it was the year Furstenau did not have to run) That is much more likely to happen than Furstenau persuading 300 or 400 State Representatives to pass any kind of resolution to change how a local development attorney operates. They could care less!

Host,
That was a wonderful and informative post regarding Spring Green/Napergate battle. Between you and Ameena we will eventually figure out how those guys in Pembroke Commons mobilized. I just keep thinking it all boiled down to those powerful Napergate ads that reached 22,000 subscribers and possibly 3 times that number in readers! When you call on 60,000 readers to appear and 1% show up you have double the amout you need to fill chambers to capacity plus the hallways outside. . You have peple power! The Napergate Man played the numbers game and succeeded!

I watched the last city council meeting a few minutes ago and it was sad to see only 5 very well mannered speakers. They made their case known to 200 bloggers. Apparently 10 showed up, or less than 5%. That is being generous as I think 5 of those 10 were the regulars on the case like Mr. Dallmer.

I think this is why we are studying the Napergate Man. Sometimes I wonder if it was the huge circulation of the Sun in those days or his articulate and emotional words that did the job....maybe it was a combination!

I guess no one was willing to spend any money on Napergate Style ads from the Ponds of HE Subdivision to save these ponds. One has to assume if the residents are not willing to spend a penny on ads to save these ponds, they really don't care that much about them. Those ads would have exposed the "favorite son" relationship discussed at the meeting which I agreed with. Ads reaching all Napervillians that can vote would have made the City Council members reconsider, due to embarrassment and fear of being voted out of office by the 16,200 readers of the Sun. Most of those readers have the right to vote and are very significant even though less than the Napergate Days. Unfortunately us bloggers are still a very small fraction of a percentage of the totally population and really can't make much of a difference {yet} even though we would like to believe we can!

But I could see the city council saw very weak resistance and was not worried about the group of 5 speakers. If the residents of Hobson West really cared about this development, why did they not show up in large numbers! The message was really sent to the Council that they don't care. It is not an important issue to them! They were not going to buy this park for 4.1-5.38 million dollars so the 5 speakers could have the right to go fishing as Mayor Pradel once did! I thought the speaker that mentioned that was funny but it did not get him anywhere with the council members, of course!

In Spring Green, I bet the Napergate Man and his followers had them sharking in their seats with the numbers they brought forth!

Now Host Ted, is showing Ameena was slightly wrong and there were a total of 7 council votes and not the 6 she has indicated. I guess those Pembroke Commons residents had those council members shaking pretty bad to be changing their votes so many times. Yes, it should not be this way, but unfortunately our city council members only respond to extreme pressure and the fear of being voted out of office. Five or ten residents apparently don't phase them in the least as I witnessed last night watching the latest city council meeting on the Media Gallery! Thanks for the tip to the site, Mr. Randall! The 5 speakers did very well, were informative, but in the end the lack of residents showing interest in the Ponds of Hobson West made the meeting very very DEPRESSING!!!

PS. If someone would have plugged this council meeting on this site and mentioned Pond Gate was up I would have loved to have gone and shown my support for at least a return to single homes. I do believe the group weakened their case for fighting for a park instead of single home zoning. Rather substantially as they lost the support of the rest of the Napervillians who did not want to pay over 5 million dollars for a 6 acre Park they would probably never use.

Just for the record even though the residents in Spring Green loved the beautiful farm with a white fence that held horses, they fought for single family zoning and not to keep the farm and horses. If they fought for the horses, as the Hobson West residents fought for the fish, they would also lost!!! I know I am being a little silly, but I am trying to make a very important POINT! You have to fight not only for the right cause but an attainable cause!

And just to be clear, I think the city council was very improper for changing the zoning from sngle family to multi family and allowing its FAVORITE SON to double the value of the property he bought from Dr. Soper. This helped him reap a windfall profit! It obviously helps to have connections to the Council and the Brestal Law Firm!

Melissa,

Thank you for actually confirming what I had already told Nikki, but you did so in an argumentative way with a strawman argument that had nothing to do with what I said.

If you read my post you would see that I said that at the state level he would not be dealing with projects but instead would be at the level ABOVE all that which regulates their entire structure that their business operates within (State Law). At that level it's not about a rezoning here or a Walgreen's there. It's about what their requirements are to operate as a business. It's about what taxes they pay as a business. It's about what mandates they are required to follow as a business. This is completely outside the scope of who is upset about a townhouse or a shopping center in a single town.

Please don't try to inject a conflict where there isn't one. She is talking local issues, I am talking STATE issues. They are different things and at the STATE level DF would be in a position to vote on things that could be considered UNFAVORABLE and potentially more expensive to their entire business within the State of Illinois.

With DF in Naperville, he could block them all day long. If they step foot into Aurora for a project, DF is irrelevant.

At the state level, DF can bite them no matter what town they operate within by passing legislation that could monetarily impact their bottom line (taxes, fees, regulatory requirements, mandates, etc).

Nikki –

With all due respect, I didn’t ignore your points and I don’t think you understood mine.

I draw no distinction between the money given to DF for his state or city campaigns. With DF’s propensity to lend money to his campaigns (he’s still owed $54K or so from the state campaign), then money given to one campaign frees money for another. Money is fungible. What does it matter which pot it ends up in if it can essentially all be used for anything?

I don’t buy the theory that Brestal gave money to DF so that DF would “go away”. And even if you do buy that argument, why did DF accept the money? Does DF stand by his principles or is he just another politician who is prostituted to campaign money no matter what the source?

If everyone against DF (The Establishment et al) wants DF out of Naperville so badly, why did they “sabotage” his state campaign with the “bogus” arrest instead of hitting the streets to drum up every vote they could find in support of DF?

“I do not believe Fursteanu can be bought for $2000 dollars but I suspect Rosanova can be bought for $2000 dollars.” Why? On what basis do you make this assertion?

“Finally, if I were the Napergate Man or a Napergatian, I would demand DF return this money to Bill Brestal immediately as it has become a major conflict of interest or at least has that "appearance,"” Finally, an answer to my question! I agree.

Lastly, Nikki, I took issue with the end of your post which read “I believe my answer is fair and satifactory and you read it carefully before you attack me again, T.B.!!” You can try to claim victim status here if you would like, but if you look back and read the posts you will see that it was you who attacked me and I merely defended myself.
T.B.

Back on topic-

I have to agree with RJ. Too little, too late. Even if the "weak link" is found, I don't think there's enough time to bring enough pressure for a new vote.

T.B.

Host Ted,
Thanks for all the research on old articles related to Spring Green you have done so far. Any luck on the remaining FINAL VOTE of 7-2?

I tend to agree with many bloggers the situation of Ponds Gate is almost hopeless!

But I think this research you are doing for us on Spring Gate, really shows us how and where the Ponds Gate folks went wrong.

Those who are complaining about learning from Napergate, seem to think these cases are won magically without effort.

The Ponds Gate people remind me of a group who got their Master's Degree in grassrooting by contacting one of those online degree companies. The Napergate Folks seem to have received their degrees from a TOP TEN university after pulling many all nighters and practicing what they learned.

This Ponds Gate scenario shows you how difficult it to take on City Hall. People like RJ who want to battle without doing their homework and research will always FAIL! He reminds me of a soldier who wants to go to IRAQ without going thru the required military training.

There is a lesson to learn from those prior Napergate Battles. A BIG LESSON!

Note from Ted:

Marybeth--sorry, no, not yet. I was swamped Friday, and I won't have access to the electronic archive until I'm back in the office Monday. I won't forget, though.

TB,
Regarding your statement,
" Money is fungible. What does it matter which pot it ends up in if it can essentially all be used for anything?"

Try making this statement to an IRS criminal investigator. See how fast he will have your indicted and jailed! I think you need to be careful in how you choose your words.

I agree with Nikki that there is a significant difference between a campaign contribution made for a state office as opposed to city office. As a former IRS auditor, we were taught the crucial word becomes INTENT. In giving him $2000 dollars for a State Election there was no INTENT for him to vote favorably on Brestal projects. If he gave him $2000 for the City Election, one could see the INTENT being to get him to rule favorably on his projects.

No one could have predicted he would lose with certainty the state elections, so it would be far fetched to say the purpose of this specific contribution was for the sole purpose or INTENT to sway his vote on the city council. It would almost be impossible to prove an alterior INTENT against either Brestal or Furstenau.

Regarding another quote Nikki made and your following remark:
"I do not believe Fursteanu can be bought for $2000 dollars but I suspect Rosanova can be bought for $2000 dollars.” Why? On what basis do you make this assertion?

Assuming the bloggers are credible, it seems that Rosanova changed his loyalties from the Napergate Man to Brestal upon receiving these campaign contributions. Both Ameena and Ted provided evidence from ads and articles! So it may be possible he was "bought" if the articles and ads were not libeling and slandering him. That needs to determined with a high degree of certainty before he could be PRESUMED GUILTY by a Federal Agency that may have some interest in such conflicts of interest cases. I do not have his entire voting record so I can not pre-judge the situation without a thorough review. At this point he would still have the status of PRESUMED INNOCENT but under SUSPICIAN. Usually this will result in an investigation if the appropriate Federal Agency decides to give it priority and has the manpower which is usually lacking. For the record, this is not an IRS matter but an issue that needs to be handled by the United States Attorney's Office for the Northern District of Illinois.

From the numerous Naperville articles I have read in the Sun and Daily Herald, it seems like Furstenau is still questioning all Brestal projects and demanding constant amendments. These are not the actions of someone who was "bought."

I would have to lean very strongly in favor of Nikki's analysis unless someone can provide me evidence to the contrary.

James & Nikki,

Furstenau accepted donations for Citizens for Furstenau in support of his run for state election in 2006 while he held the position of City Councilman for the City of Naperville. He was in a position to make decisions affecting the developers who donated, or Brestal, in his capacity as a Naperville Councilman. At no time did he hold a state position from the time the donations were made, to the date of the election, and thereafter.

An example of Furstenau's behind the scenes actions regarding one of the developer's who made large donations to his state election was one of the developers of Naperville Crossings. I previously posted documentation from Burchard's letter to show some behind the scenes efforts by Furstenau on behalf of that developer.

The following is an excerpt from City Manager Burchard's November 2007 letter:

"3. Over the last two years or more, Councilman Furstenau has had at least 25 conversations and meetings with me and other city staff regarding the development of Naperville Crossings. Typically, the conversations focused on his support for one of the developers of this project and his adamant disagreement with city engineering staff regarding our rejection of the developer's civil engineering plans and related issues such as the infamous dirt pile.

"These accusations culminated in a series of events in May, 2007. In early May, Councilman Furstenau and one of the developers of the project held a series of small meetings with other councilmen to discuss Councilman Furstenau's conclusion that city staff was engaged in an intentional effort to drag their feet and not approve this developer's portion of the project.

"Indeed, in an e-mail to me dated May 8, 2007, Councilman Furstenau made it clear that it was he, and not the developer who "accused the city staff of dragging their feet."

"Once again, when asked by me directly if he had any proof that city staff was "dragging their feet," Councilman Furstenau said "no" and he added that there must be a reason why staff won't approve these plans. Councilman Furstenau refused to acknowledge the professional engineering duty to approve only plans that comply with our standard development practices.

"In addition, according to the developer's engineer, the developer had failed to pay his engineering fees and, therefore, the developer's engineer would not update the plans or certify their accuracy.

"In addition, the developer was in bankruptcy and to my knowledge, had not made a single payment on his development loan with the First National Bank of Naperville. Councilman Furstenau flatly rejected this explanation and continued to explain to me that city staff was at fault and had personal reasons for not approving the developer's plans.

"Indeed, the developer only needed to correct his plans and approval would be automatic.

"Related to the same project, Councilman Furstenau had a meeting with two city employees. One of the city employees is a front-line employee. While pounding his fist on the table, Councilman Furstenau stated to this employee that he was angry and upset that city staff would not go ahead and approve this developer's engineering plans.

"Without providing any evidence, he accused these employees of intentionally rejecting the plans for reasons other than the city's technical requirements. As an aggressive act of intimidation, Councilman Furstenau asked the employee, "How do you like your job?" The employee and a supervisor filed a complaint that the councilman's behavior toward them was "intimidating and constitutes harassment."

"Further, in the course of these discussions, Councilman Furstenau wanted city staff to approve the developer's stormwater management plan. Councilman Furstenau insisted on the approval despite the fact that staff demonstrated that the developer's plans were still substantially deficient and did not meet the legal requirements for stormwater.

"Instead of encouraging the developer to comply with the legal requirements, Councilman Furstenau continuously badgered our engineering team and suggested that we were imposing standards that were too strict on this one developer.

"4. In recent months, the city council deliberated the release of funds in a cash deposit with the city related to Naperville Crossings. A related issue involved setting aside funds from the cash deposit to re-grade an extensive dirt pile.

"During one of the city council discussions, I expressed staff's concerns regarding the unlikely completion of the project in a timely manner. As was discussed at several city council meetings, the two major developers of Naperville Crossings had disagreement regarding which contractor should be hired to complete some of the public improvements and specifically, the re-grading of the dirt pile.

"With the city council's concurrence, staff indicated that there were too many concerns about awarding the contract to either of the contractors recommended by the different developers. In accordance with the city's purchasing practices, and since the city was still holding the cash deposit from the developer, the city council directed staff to seek competitive bids and award a contract based on qualifications and price.

"Clearly, a construction firm experienced in re-grading must be in charge of this project. In this specific case, the two developers of Naperville Crossings had a significant difference of opinion regarding how the dirt pile was created, including an allegation by one of the developers that the other developer had trespassed and illegally buried asphalt underneath the dirt pile, so, logically, the city did not want to have either of the developers or contractors directly involved in the dispute decide which company would re-grade the stockpile of dirt. The city council concurred.

"The day after the city council's decision to competitively bid the project, Councilman Furstenau called a city department director and demanded that the contractor previously rejected by city staff and preferred by one of the developers, be allowed to participate in the bidding process. Councilman Furstenau stated that he would make sure staff had this company's qualifications and he would deliver the RFP to the contractor.

"Although the city council and staff were fully aware that this contractor was not qualified, Councilman Furstenau went directly to staff to forcefully insist that this contractor be invited into the process."

Whether you believe the large donations from the developer to Furstenau's state election campaign influenced Furstenau's behavior as Naperville City Councilman in this situation or not, I find Furstenau's actions on behalf of that developer, as described, reprehensible.

James,

Honestly... if someone wanted to make a campaign advertisement that said DF had previously accepted contributions from a local law firm that regularly brings projects in front of Naperville City Council, and provided the date and the amount... They would not be lying.

Would someone take the time to run a similar advertisement explaining the whole hubbub about 'intent' etc. to counter it? Would anyone even care about the 'INTENT' details in the court of public opinion? I don't think so and that is a liability DF currently has on his books and it will forever be there regardless of what the "INTENT" of the donor happened to be many moons ago.

James, Nikki, Joe, T.B., S.W. Taxpayer, and Host,

I have not researched this issue as I have researched Napergate. So I am going to get into some speculation and maybe you guys can help me get caught up with some facts.

1. You are all assuming that DF was anti-commercial development and was helping this developer because of campaign contributions from Brestal.

2.In studying the Napergate Man, I realized he was not anti-commercial. He was anti-commercial only in residential neighborhoods. Big difference! Since it is widely believed that Furstenau is a student of the Napergate Man or has similar views, I also believe he was not anti-commercial as long as it was not in residential subdivisions or parcels that were previously zoned single family.

3. I think the development being discussed by SW Taxpayer was on Rt. 59 which I do not believe the Napergate Man or DF would oppose for commercialization since that is a big time commercial street from beginning to end it seems.

4. I could be wrong here, but I would be willing to bet the developer DF was attempting to help was not being represented by Brestal. A developer represented by Brestal would not need go to DF for help. He would go directly to Brestal who has 100 times the connections and good relationships with City Staff that DF apparentlly does not have.(Think about that one for a second or two!)

5. If my assumptions are correct which I believe they are even though I will admit I am speculating(can't go to the library or City Hall on everything), DF was not helping this developer because of a contribution from Brestal to DF which seems to be the underlying issue here.

6. My guess is this developer is having a very hard time because he did not retain Brestal which is suppose to be "business as usual" if you want to get a project done in Naperiville.(Again my speculation in order for someone to correct me so we can become factual).

7.I agree with James and Nikki regarding the 2000 dollar contribution to Furstenau and those to Rosanova. I believe Rosanova may have been "bought" as he switched allegiance from the Napergate Man to Brestal for no other apparent reason. DF seems to still be fighting any Brestal commercial project in a residential neighborhood. Rosanova seemed to have added insult to injury, by arranging for his son to obtain employment at the Brestal Law Firm and continuing to vote on Brestal's projects in the affirmative despite adding a "son" connection to his acceptance of campaign contributions.(Yes, I believe as all others he stopped after the Napergate Man caught him with his hands in the cookie jar. I was curious and did check this one out. He exposed him to 22,000 subscribers(60,000) readers of the Sun in one of his Napergate Ads. which I am certain of since I read it in the library very recently)

8. But Nikki is right and DF should return this $2000 contribution because of the "appearance of a conflict of interest" even though there may be no correlation as in the Naperville Crossings case which most likely Brestal is not representing one or both of the developers.

9. It does not surprise me that a developer who does not use Brestal would go bankrupt waiting for approval from City Hall.
This could be a way of informing developers "you need to use our boy Brestal" if you want to get the project approved in City Hall. (In the Napergate ads it was cited that Brestal handled 99% of the projects with a 99% success rate if my memory serves me right.) This could be a project that falls within Brestal's 1% failure rate or it could be a project that falls in Brestal's 1% non-invovlement rate assuming things are the same as in the old Napergate Era.....I suspect the latter!

------------------------------------------------------------------

Host Ted,
I would like to suggest achiving the second District 204 thread, since no one has blogged on it in 4 days. It was very busy and completely died after you installed the newer District 204 thread. The reason behind my suggestion is to keep this Ponds thread on a little longer since we still have some issues we need ironed out. I think most bloggers forget about a post when it leaves the Main Page. I know this is an unusual request because another gal successfully made a request you delete posts that ONLY had one or 2 hits in a week or two. I think that was a great suggestion on her part and I respect you for honorng her wishes which made sense. I am hoping you can take that District 204 post and archive it without deleting it.(It does have a whopping 60 posts but it just simply stalled.)

I guess you could say I know the importance of archiving and not deleting, or else I would have never had an opportunity to learn about the Napergate Era from your long posting a few weeks ago from the Sun archives and my research at the library. If it has to be deleted and can not be archived, I would be against removing it from the Main Page so it could eventually makes its ways into the achives so we can have a historical reference if we ever needed one. (Who ever thought we would have to go revisit the Napergate Man a decade later because of connections to Furstenau, Brestal, and all these GATE development projects he was fighting that suddenly resurfaced with your 75th St thread.)

Yes, I did see this morning you have a new thread about the Napergate Man, and I will eventually be blogging there but I felt we had some unfinished business on this Ponds of Hobson West thread which is becoming like a can of worms. I suppose since we have all gotten off topic compeletly, we could just switch our debates to the new Napergate thread which would probably have more relevance to our discussion as Napergate seems much more of a wide open subject that envelops so much as Marshall pointed out in his last post. I do see his point of Napergate not being an old Era, but more of an ongoing real battle between establishment and anti-establishment forces that seems to have been going on for decades and intensifying with time and especially lately!

Sorry abot the long blog, but when I don't post frequently I get carried away!

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, I should thank Host Ted and Moderator Jim for the excellent job they do and allowing us to express our thoughts freely without any kind of editing or censorship whatsoever. Since I was rambling I figured I better give you guys a well deserved plug.

"People like RJ who want to battle without doing their homework and research will always FAIL!"

And waiting till 10 hours before a final to start researching the subject also results in a high failure rate.

Below is the text of an email I sent to the many hundreds of people on my list. We were able to turn out good attendance at the Planning meetings and the City Council meetings. After the Council voted to rezone it there was some drop off.

I think the 12 month window was a ploy for the heat to go down and it would quietly go away. The fact that this blog is so active shows that the interest in the subject is still active.

HI ALL !!

Acquisition of the property is still in limbo.

All of the key people at the City and Park District should feel pretty sheepish. This week Ms Paula Dulli offered to pay the interest on a $1.6 million loan to make this deal happen. See the stories at:

http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=116241

http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/napervillesun/news/747154,6_1_NA18_PARK_S1.article

I certainly hope this offer gets things off of dead center and the city, park district, and Crestview will sit down and work something out. The definition of the phrase "negotiate in good faith" is really being stretched beyond recognition; I guess it depended on what your definition of "good faith" is.

I do not doubt Ms. Dulli's sincerity, but I believe the correct position of the entities should be "Thank you for your gracious and generous offer but as governmental entities we can arrange the financing ourselves."

I do support Ms. Dulli's offer to head up some sort of fund raising committee such as Friends of the Ponds and I believe that many of you on this list as well as many others in Naperville would make such fund raising a rousing success.

After some pretty intensive testimony in the Jan 2nd & Jan 15th City Council Meetings the council voted to maintain its position of not providing any city funds. Nothing as a partial purchase, intergovernmental deal, a low or no interest loan, land swaps, or any other type of "out-side-the-box" action which will allow the property remain as green space and park land. This position has continued during follow-on informal discussions.

The park district seems to be hanging tough about not paying, or not committing the district, to more than $2.5 million, and apparently do not want a loan of $1.6 million that they have to pay back.

It seem like many of the key city and park people think it should be a park but when it comes to actually stepping up to vote the story changes and the vote fails or a consensus cannot be reached. Politics is flying hot and heavy but there does not appear to be any Political Will to make it happen.

The potential park is not a routine storm water retention basin / open space / neighborhood tot park. The ponds and the fishing make the park, which is within a couple of miles for the city center, a very unique location. The fishing draws people and children from all over the city. Adding parking will result in the park going from being under utilized to being actively used.

I realize that one of the councilmen at one of the last meetings mentioned that the council can't start governing or being swayed by petitions and flurries of emails; but I urge you to ignore that sentiment and send an email to the park commissioners and the city council.

Again feel free to contact the key people.

ron@crestviewbuilders.com

City Council:
millerk@naperville.il.us , furstenaur@naperville.il.us , kraused@naperville.il.us ,
jrosanova@msn.com , sengerd@naperville.il.us , wehrlig@naperville.il.us ,
boyajianj@naperville.il.us , fieselerr@naperville.il.us , mayor@naperville.il.us

Park District:
kjungles@napervilleparks.org, cbrown@napervilleparks.org, rory@napervilleparks.org ,
shart@napervilleparks.org , mtodd@napervilleparks.org, mwright@napervilleparks.org,
aschaffner@napervilleparks.org ,

Doug Dallmer

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
For more information on what is going on in Naperville check out www.napervoice.com

Anonymous,

I did not indicate that the developer of Naperville Crossings was affiliated with Brestal. Like you, I don't know for sure, but it's not pertinent to my points.

The basis for my posting goes back to the fact that the following developers donated to Furstenau's state campaign while Furstenau was a member of Naperville City Council, as posted by T.B in previous blogs:

5995 Development Inc.
BBM Incorporated – Dwight Yackley’s development co.
Willard Brestal – of the Brestal law firm
Calamos Properties Development LLC
Edward Management
Harp Krug Venture LLC – developers of Freedom Commons
Kimball Hill Homes
Steve Carr Builders Inc.
Physicians Owned LLC - developers of Naperville Crossings
These can be found at the State Board of Elections at www.elections.state.il.us. According to the State Board of Elections, Kevin Gallaher also made a donation to Furstenau's state campaign.

T.B's post listing these donors was in response to Ameena's post that stated donations from developers to city councilmen had stopped after the Napergate man exposed them response.

My post was to show that donations from developers, or Brestal (not just Brestal or Brestal developers), can potentially influence a councilman's actions locally, even though the donations were made for a state election campaign. Furstenau held local office at the time of the donations, not state office.

Here are my responses to your specific points:

1. I believe Furstenau might have been trying to push for this developer, and attempt to avoid meeting city requirements, because the DEVELOPER made large contributions to Furstenau's state campaign, not because of Brestal's contribution. I did not assume that Furstenau is anti-commercial.

2. I did not indicate Furstenau is anti-commercial.

3. The Naperville Crossings development is at Rt. 59 & 95th, zoned for commercial development. Not a problem from that standpoint.

4. I would also bet Brestal did not represent that developer, because I'm sure the Brestal law firm helps developers dot their I's and cross their T's to be sure they fulfill city requirements for approval. Furstenau should have made sure the developer for Naperville Crossings was following city guidelines for approval before making accusations against staff.

5. The underlying issue is donations from developers (or their legal representatives)that result in inappropriate actions (i.e. pressuring staff, advising against following city regulations, etc.) by a member of City Council.

6. The same answer as #4. I'm sure the Brestal law firm makes sure developers know the city's requirements, and works to meet those guidelines for approval.

7. I don't necessarily think anyone was "bought", but these kinds of donations can potentially influence actions. One of the problems I see with Furstenau's actions, as described in Burchard's letter, is that he tried to pressure others into taking inappropriate actions in favor of the donor rather than getting to donor to comply with city requirements.

8. I don't think returning the funds to Brestal, or the developers will help Furstenau clear his name at this point. The damage has been done.

9. Maybe it's a good idea for developers to know what they need to do to meet city requirements. If it takes Brestal, or another law firm to help them work through the details, it is advisable to do so. Apparently they shouldn't depend on Furstenau to know the facts.

I hope this clears up some of your speculation.

James –

With all due respect, the argument that money is fungible is made to the government all the time, both in tax cases and other criminal cases. The fact that money if fungible often makes it difficult to trace the true source of funds.

For example, DF loaned substantial personal funds to his state campaign account and many of the loans were repaid (but not all). So when DF is repaid on his loan from the campaign account, is he being repaid with Brestal’s money or John Doe’s money? Money is fungible—there’s no way to know.

Intent or not, Nikki at least agreed with me that there was the appearance of something here that she did not like (or that she believed the Napergate Man would not like).

I guess that unless you’re a mind-reader, intent can never be known but only guessed at. You seemed to agree with that, though you did provide many examples of what you believe to be DF’s intent.

With regard to why you think DF wasn’t “bought” but Rosanova was, I actually like and appreciate your answer. Though I think Nikki is a big girl and can respond for herself.

Anon –

I made no statements regarding DF being bought or being pro-development.

I first posted the campaign donations when the Napergatians brought up the fact that Rosanova was disavowed for his past donations. I just asked what they thought of the donations DF has accepted and was seeking to find an answer for their continued support of DF. I was also curious whether their animus for Rosanova was hypocritical.

T.B.

Hi All !!

*****************************
Posted by: Melissa | January 18, 2008 09:19 AM

I do believe the group weakened their case for fighting for a park instead of single home zoning. Rather substantially as they lost the support of the rest of the Napervillians who did not want to pay over 5 million dollars for a 6 acre Park they would probably never use.
*****************************

Just to clarify things.

We fought Crestview 2 1/2 years about the rezoning from single family to townhouses. The proposed townhouse count went from 29 to 27, to 25, to the final 22. (In one of the council meeting I recollet Mr. Wehrli indicating that the 22 townhouses were less than the more than 30 or so that had been envisioned, a number that never showed up in any proposal.) A couple of Planning cases were defeated. The last, for 22 townhouses, was rejected by the Planning Commission but Crestview decided to take it to the City Council.

All of our work up to the Jan 2, 2007 rezoning meeting was to retain the single family zoning. All of the 1000+ petitions signed by residents specifically stated that they DO NOT approve of the proposed rezoning. We just wanted to stop townhouses. If the rezoning had been rejected we would not be discussing this now.

It was members of the City Council (at meetings late in 2006 and January 2007) who first started to discuss the idea of the property completing a 15 acre park. Many spoke eloquently, including Pradel and Rosanova, about how beautiful the property is and it would be great if it stayed as park / open space.

After all of these crocodile tears from a majority of the City Council they promptly voted to allow 22 townhouses to be built instead of 10 single family houses.

Go figure the logic of that action.

Of course there is no logic just the personal relationship of the developer, the law firm and the council members.

Doug Dallmer

Hi All!!

Goto the site below and vote

www.napervoice.com

Should the Park District buy the Ponds Property?

Yes

No

Ameena, et al:

Well, I spent as much time researching Spring Green in the archives as I could. Confusing, as there were several incarnations of the project: gas station, then office building and homes, then the daycare center. I found this story that seems to indicate Peg Price is the other one along with Pradel who didn't change her vote in a 7-2 decision. I can't say this is the definitive answer you were hoping for but it's the best I can do:

Newspaper:
SUN PUBLICATIONS

Date:
11/07/1997

Day of Week:
Friday

Edition:
NAPERVILLE SUN

Section:
NEWS

Page:
4

Headline:
Back to the drawing board; Residents celebrate as council rejects Spring Green plan

Byline:
Kevin D. Woodward / STAFF WRITER


[Go To First Hit]
Richard Marker was the only person who left Tuesday's City Council meeting
with a disappointed look on his face.

Marker had hoped to gain council approval for Spring[0] Green[0], a mixed-use
development planned for the northwest corner of Hobson Road and Naper
Boulevard. Marker thought his plan for a two-story, 20,000-square-foot
office building with 11 houses bordering it was the best use of the
5.75-acre parcel.

The City Council thought otherwise. Spring[0] Green[0] was voted down 7-2.

Others leaving the meeting, those 100 or so residents who opposed the
project, were much happier.

"I thought this was going to be a 4-4 vote with the mayor deciding," said
Donna Rogers, a resident of the neighborhood and a vocal opponent of
Marker's development.

She had asked the council members to consider how an affirmative vote for
Spring[0] Green[0] would change Naperville. Rogers cautioned that a precedent
would be set if the vote went that way.

Rich Strawbridge also issued a warning. "If you approve this you will
surrender the history of this city to creeping commercialism," he told the
council members.

After the meeting, Strawbridge said the council made the right decision.
"They followed their own resolution and if they stick to that in the future
I think all of Naperville will benefit," he said.

Strawbridge was referring to resolution 96-17, which the council approved
last year. After reviewing plans to build a gasoline station at the same
intersection, the council at that time rejected the proposal based on the
Hobson Road Plan, which limits commercial development to areas south of
Hobson Road.

On Sept. 2, despite a recommendation from the Naperville Plan Commission to
reject Marker's plan, councilmen gave it their preliminary approval. But
after that decision, scores of angry residents demanded to address the
council about the development. Councilmen then reversed their decision and
placed the proposal on the agenda for Oct. 7.

At that meeting, people opposed to the development used most of the
three-hour session to berate council members. Again, the council postponed
a final decision on Spring[0] Green[0] until questions about access to Naper
Boulevard and increasing residential lot sizes could be addressed.

After the meeting, residents continued to lobby councilmen to vote against
the proposal. Some council members said they were unaware of resolution
96-17 until residents brought it to their attention. Mayor George Pradel
said he was in Slovakia visiting Naperville's sister city of Nitra when the
resolution was approved. Councilman John Rosanova, who is serving his first
term, was just elected this spring.

The residents took their protest to the streets Saturday, Nov. 1, when they
held a march on the sidewalk near the parcel. About 200 people showed up to
oppose the Spring[0] Green[0] development.

Some council members said Tuesday that the residents' opposition at times
went too far. Councilman Kevin Gallaher, who said he was uncertain about
his vote prior to the council meeting, said his support for the residents'
viewpoint was difficult to maintain because some people had called his
house and harassed his wife and 6-year-old son.

Councilman James Siddall, who also sided with the residents, said his
decision was not influenced by callers who threatened not to vote for him
if he supported the development. He announced he would likely not seek a
fourth term, but said the decision was not influenced by the telephone
calls.

Pradel and Councilman Peg Price both favored Marker's project. "I feel what
is presented would be a good compromise to that corner," Pradel said. Price
said she supported the plan because she, too, thought it was a good
compromise since the bulk of Spring[0] Green[0] would be residential. About half
of the 5.75 acres would have been devoted to residential lots.

Gallaher reminded residents and fellow council members that the city has no
control over what gets proposed for development at this site or anywhere
else in the city. Residents need to be watchful, like those in the Spring[0]
Green[0] area were this time, and come out to support or oppose future plans,
he said.

After the meeting, Marker had no comment on the vote or alternative plans
for the parcel.

No. That would be allowing government to intervene in our lives where they don't belong--isn't that right smokers? Funny how it's convenient to cross that line when it suits your interests.

Doug Dallmer -

Congrats on getting your referendum idea into the Sun, but I think you're doomed as there aren't enough NIMBYs out there willing to spend more taxpayer money simply for "open space".

Good luck, but I'll be voting "no".

T.B.

Who says that the land will still be available in November, even if there were to be a referendum? Crestview lived up to their part of the bargain by allowing a year for the NIMBY"s to come up with a plan. Then Crestview offered another month on top of the year.

I am sorry, but Crestview has every right to build on the property they own and there isn't anything stopping them. They honored their deal, now it is time for the Save the Ponds people to move on.

There is a lesson to be leaned from all this though, if a group in the future is offered the same deal, they shouldn't sit around rehashing Napergate over and over waiting for someone to do something, then complain when they don't get their way.

Jim Lynch,

I commend you on your editorial in today's paper. Following are a few comments about your editorial (quotes around portions of your editorial):

"I'm referring, of course, to the special call meeting Wednesday night to make a decision on the land between the Ponds of Hobson West."

"The cynic in me would say that the Park District has no interest in buying the land, thus the lack of a quorum at Wednesday night's meeting."

At this meeting only three of the seven Park Commissioners showed up. ("The three who did show were Ron Ory, Suzanne Hart and Andrew Schaffner.")

I believe the residents want the Park Commissioners to be held accountable and want them to express their views publically. The residents have appeared before the Park District Board on the topic of the acquisition of the property known as the "Ponds of Hobson West" for each of the past thirteen months. The Park Board has essentially been publically mum on the issue. Its only been the last several months where brief statements were made by the Park Board President during Park Board Meetings. There has not been any public discussion on the acquisition (or not). The Park Board appears to have been hiding behind the closed doors of their Executive Sessions. Other than recent newspaper quotes, the residents have not had any public feedback as to why Park Commissioners want to (or do not want to) acquire the land. I believe the residents are entitled to know (though a public vote) as to where each Park Commissioner stands on this topic.

"It's a hot-button issue in Naperville and has dragged on for more than a year. A developer owns the land, slated for a townhouse development, and is willing to sell the land to the Park District."

In fact, the attorney for the developer sent a leeter to Park Board on Wednesday (Jan. 30) that stated they believe the land is best suited for remaining open space. And, they would respond to a resonable offer.

"They're about a million and half dollars apart in price and negotiations seem stalled as deadline after deadline has expired and then been extended."

It would seem that a majority of the Park Board deliberately low-balled their offer ($2.5 million) in order to say that they did something while knowing that it would be unacceptable to the developer (to offer him something less than the price the developer paid for it).

The Save Open Space group has expanded its interest to the entire Naperville area. Thus, it wants more park land/open space to be acquired to fit the needs of the residents. There are needs for more ball fields, tennis courts, soccer fields (on the north side of town), and the emerging la crosse sport. Also, family picnic areas are at a premium.

The Save Open Space group has said it will put a referendum on the November 2008 ballot to ask the public for funds to buy additional park land.

Also, the Park Board is in the process in issuing $10 million for capital projects over the next couple of years. It could use a portion of those funds to purchase the land and replinsh it later. The Save Open space group is willing to raise the additional funds required to seal a deal shhould a referendum fail next fall.

"Add into this a volatile and passionate mix of residents who cherish their six sylvan acres..."

During the thirteen months, the residents have addressed the Park District Board with civility. Your word "volatile" would not describe how the residents have addressed the Board.

"In The Sun story Thursday we were treated to meaningless quotes by the three members who showed up as to why they didn't want to speak for their colleagues who didn't make it because, among other things, they had other meetings ... were out of town ... or "couldn't be reached for comment."

"Of these three, Schaffner had a pretty telling remark. Speaking of his colleagues he said: "The fact that we disagree on major policy issues is not the sign of a dysfunctional board - rather it is a sign of healthy debate between the competing priorities of our community needs."

"That sounds like a lot of blather - a bloated, long-winded quote that says nothing except pretty much admit (just by using the word) what a lot of people in the community have been saying for a long time."

I believe as new Park Board Members, Schaffner and Hart would be unwilling to publically criticize fellow Board Members.

"Yes, the park board does appear to be dysfunctional. It did take on this project, and all we've seen is delay after delay. And, now, at a meeting where, ostensibly, something was supposed to get done, the majority of the commissioners couldn't even be bothered to show up."

"I'd call that dysfunctional with a capital D."

As I have attended Board Meetings since the new Board started in May 2007, I would not characterize their public meetings as dysfunctional. They have accomplished a lot the last several months. I can not say how they have acted in their Executive Sessions. On one occassion the Park Board President did storm out of an Executive Session.

Certainly, I agree that not showing up at a special Board meeting may indicate their is an element of dysfunctionality.

"But there is good news. As long as these interminable delays go on, the six acres will remain untouched, and I'll bet I'll drive by that little piece of paradise one fine spring day to see a kid with a fishing pole sitting at the end of the dock.""

The bad news? Naperville loves to trumpet how communicative their governmental leaders and various board members are. And how responsive they are to community input. To a large extent I've found this to be true."

"Except for the park board."

I would agree that they have done a poor job of communicating.