Full speed ahead! Janet Hughes, Hank Olenick and Jim Ladas hate and anger filled tirades do NOT speak for this village!

It sounds like you are the one with the hate filled tirade. Nice example to set for your three kids Paul.

More hate and anger, with a side dose of conspiracy theory.....that's what drives this group!
Why don't you take all of your "evidence" to a legal authority?

Sounds like the village's "Plan B" should of been their "Plan A" from the start. Why potentially burden tax payers on something that should be a private venture to begin with? It's a shame that it had to come to a petition for the village to realize this. If this project continues privately good luck., however the village has lost some credibility if it does. They should of pursued this from the start..

It astounds me to see that the mayor still persists on moving on this project when procedures have been questionable since the beginning. He was ready to break ground this month, yet, when was the notice published for contractor bids and when did the board publically vote on who they were selecting as contractors for a $21M project? These questions no matter what need to be answered.

Could be, but we haven't heard plan B or plan C or plan D. Maybe plan A was better..because everybody puts their worst plan first, don't they?

If you were even vaguely familiar with the project you champion against you would know that the first steps of this project is for MWRD to remove all of the tainted soil down to bedrock. Then the EPA must test and certify the brownfield for its new purpose. It is VOL plan to seek construction bids during the remediation process. It is also inappropriate to seek bids for a project that doesn't have financing. First 60 or so construction days are MWRD.

If you look at the figures in the market study, they don't add up as stated in the proposed figures for the sport complex. I don't see mentioned in the market study the annual cost of the 21 million bond or the lease cost of the property. Something just doesn't look right. There are a lot of assumptions with full funding the first year, and the market study as I understand it is for the complex to be built in phases. Also, the total figure in the study shows a decrease in population of ages between 15 and 54, along with an annual cost of 1.6 million (without paying off bond and lease) and an income of possible 2.9 million the first year. If you add in the annual cost of the 30 year bond and possible lease cost you are left in negative figures. What ever plan is devised, the citizens of Lemont deserve a voice unless this project is privately funded.

If its going to make such a great profit, private investors should be coming out of the woodwork.
Right? If so let's play sports downtown folks.

Again, I strongly encourage all commenters to read and respect our Terms of Use, which can be found at the bottom of this page. Please, let's stick to the subject and refrain from personal attacks.

Victor your math and your assumptions are flawed! You should speak to someone that has some real numbers! That's the problem with this glass completely empty group!

What name calling?

I'm not part of any "group" just expressing "my" personal opinion on a project that "I" believe should be voted on.

Folks,

I wanted to echo Linda's request to refrain from personal attacks. I'd be more interested in hearing whether residents would support the complex if the village secures alternative financing. What type of development would you like to see downtown, if not the sports complex?

Amanda Luevano
Editor, Lemont Patch

Where, outside of a hippy commune, does everyone have a say in every matter? What you are mistaking for democracy is actually anarchy! What is actually practiced is representative democracy where elected officials govern.

Again, when would you want a say on a project, 50mil or100mil or just let your elected officials make all your decisions for your town without any resident input?

As Todd slowly unravels, I propose we keep the dialogue moving without dignifying his comments with a response. This man brings nothing to the table in terms of civil ethic and it’s painfully obvious he has some sort of stake in the game.

Agree 100%

Todd, The problem with your definition of "representative democracy" is that the elected officials are not representing the peoples wishes or needs. They are only representing their own personal goals and tyring to use taxpayer money and village resources to further their personal goals. Officials like that do not belong in office.

From Wikipedia:
Democracy is a form of government in which all eligible citizens have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives. Democracy allows eligible citizens to participate equally—either directly or through elected representatives—in the proposal, development, and creation of laws. It encompasses social, economic and cultural conditions that enable the free and equal practice of political self-determination.

Just in case Todd needs some definition of what a true democracy is.

Now that's democracy!!!!!!

Wikipedia is always a questionable source, as it is a perfect example of anarchy, in that no central authority exists to vouch for the accuracy.
From websters

Anarchism, a political theory holding all forms of governmental authority to be unnecessary and undesirable
And advocating a society based on voluntary cooperation and free association of individuals.

How about those Blackhawks

So, proven wrong you go off topic. Typical behavior of this group.
Still waiting to see one example of this form of democracy where everyone votes on everything.....

Perhaps we, as a village, could come up with a plan to clean up the cesspool that is the I&M Canal. That alone would make visiting our quaint little town much more desirable. Upon completion we could accommodate a sports complex, concert hall, theme park or even a climate controlled bio-dome encompassing the entire community as to avoid these pesky winters…whatever Todd’s heart desires.

Thanks to Amanda for a well written article. The article includes quotes of the mayors comments. I see a common thread that runs thru the mayors comments: the mayor does not care what the taxpayers and voters want, he only cares about what he wants.

The article says: "Lemont Mayor Brian Reaves said he remains committed to the village's proposed $21 million sports complex, despite petitions filed last week to put the project on hold."
------------- So this is Mayor Reaves way of disregarding the Lemont petition signers and telling Lemont citizens that he does not care what they want. The mayor obviously feels that his agendas are more important than representing the taxpayers of Lemont.

The article says: ""A process like we did takes a lot of time and work," Reaves said. "We went through that process, and the democratic process that's out there was in place and was fulfilled. I want to be first to thank the individuals that took the time to make the democratic process work.""
------------------ So the mayor’s idea of a “democratic process” is where decisions are made privately by a few people and the taxpayers have no say. Sounds like Chicago style politics where officials place their personal goals above the voters needs.

The article says: "With the petitions filed and construction on hold, the village will now explore alternative financing options for the complex, Reaves said."
-------------- Again, the mayor tells the citizens that their needs do not matter.

The article quotes mayor Reaves: ""Any good business man—and that's how I always said I would run the village of Lemont, like a business”
-------------– the question is whose business is the village running?

The article says: "Without talking specifics, Reaves said there have been "a lot of outside opportunities" that have presented themselves since the project was announced that could allow the village to move forward with the proposal.
-----------If the mayor thinks building a sports complex on MWRDs property is such a great idea, he should just put together a private venture and leave the village out of this.

Todd,
You said the people voted on the Core project, and the school referendums, why not a major project such as the sport complex? Unless you like what Chicago is doing to the suburbs, Springfield to the state, and Washington to the country, then by all means 6 people should run Lemont. If the majority of people don't like what the politicians are doing, we vote them out of office. This is our only recourse when it comes to Chicago, Illinois and Washington. You sound as if Not Your Way Then The Highway. You don't have to start by slamming those who believe that they have a voice. Your first statement.

I never mentioned the core sir. The core and the 113a referendums were required. A referendum for this project was not required, until the petition drive. You may note the petition was as to the financing of the complex, not the complex itself. That may differ from your view, but isn't that what people signed for in the "democratic process", or should we substitute something different than what was petitioned?
As to Lemont Citizen, the village hosts a canal cleanup day every year! Show up with your 1700 tax concerned citizens and clean to your hearts content for free! . They have been doing it every year.

What I was also hoping to read Reaves say is that he would answer all the lingering questions asked at the public hearing. He wrote them all down. If I recall, he said he would answer them. Not sure, need to go back and see the telecast again. Rather than focus on pushing forward, he should start answering these questions first if he has any chance of this referendum passing next year. Seems to me he has no intention in doing that. His energies are clearly focused on building this complex asap.

At least we know where his priorities lie . . . in his own agenda. No matter what legitimate taxpayer questions are still hovering he is marching forward. As he tries to drum up private funding, I would bet he would answer questions of those investors.

Todd, The petition was to force a referendum so the taxpayers can vote on the project for numerous reasons. Some people signed the petition to force a referendum because they are against the financing of this project. While others signed the petition to force a referendum, in hopes voters would say "no" to it being built all together. It's all in who you ask. There is no blanket answer for all 1600 people. My personal opinion is, if they can build this complex with 100% private funding, I'm all for it. If they can not do that, then I do not want to see it built at all. Whether or not I am going to support this project is completely contingent on the financing sought to build it,

The petition is for exactly what the words on it state. Did you bother to read them before signing?

Truthfully NO because I don't care what 1600 peoples individual reason's are / or the specific wording used is to get it on the ballot. As long as it gets there. I don't want any my taxpayer $ used to build or run that building. So if a referendum forces the village the find other options to pay for it or it shuts the project down all together, I could care less. As long as my money isn't used, the end result to me is irrelevant. Build it privately or don't build it all, either option is fine.

Just wondering..Are you the same people who few years back were against Jewel then Target and all the new developments in this Village? I suppose you were against then and continue to be, and don't shop in those stores. You are making lots of noises again, but fortunately time will show that you are on the wrong side again...and all residents and businesses in Lemont will benefit from growing and moving forward.

Jewel & Target are private companies. If they go bankrupt, I don't have to pay the mortgage on the building after they close. I would 100% support a private company building a sports complex or anything else in downtown Lemont. If it's privately funded..build away!

Don't be so sure it will be on the ballot. All they have to do is change the funding to something different than what the petition states, and the legal intent of petition is fulfilled....not sidestepped...but fulfilled. It's going to be an interesting 13 or so months

The only thing more entertaining than your statements will be the day they come to me, or you, looking for 21 MILLION DOLLARS! That will indeed be a hoot!

Can somebody answer this question please? If this is built and proves to be successful or unsuccessful what effect will this have on me as a tax paying resident of Lemont? I would also be curious to see how the answer would differ depending on the way the funding is selected for this project. Full disclosure and visibility would make this project feel less shady for most of us on the fence. I want more businesses to come here and I understand we need to increase traffic to make Lemont more attractive. I am all for this as long as my cost of living is not affected by this and we aren't taking funds from more important projects.

It seems like a lot of money just so kids can kick a soccer ball around on contaminated dirt and kudos to the Lemont Citizens Committee for slowing this down for further review. As a recent resident to Lemont, this seems to me that this is not for the children but for someone(s) retirement fund (follow the money folks). I’ve also noticed a lot of fields - baseball, soccer or football around town – is there really a need for more? Isn’t there other land that could be used at a lower cost than 21 million?
Todd – if you are an elected official, you need to return the “Dummies Guide: How to alienate your constituents and lose an election” book.
Lemont Citizens Committee – if you want to revitalize downtown Lemont, use that 21 million and tear down that bridge. Hmmm, let’s build a bridge OVER our downtown –that won’t hurt it. That’s right folks, once upon a time you had to drive through Lemont - not over it.

Everyone, I think it's prudent to stop even responding to Todd at all. It's a classic case of what we call among internet denizens of "don't feed the trolls."

His responses are ridiculous, immature, and antagonistic. He's begging for attention and if we don't give it to him, no matter how awful his attempts to egg us on are, he will fade away.

Patch Editors: An "ignore" feature would be useful here. I'm not saying that you yourselves should "block" him but it would be helpful/nice if we as users could on an individual basis. His comments are pollutants to these discussions and the articles they are in response to.

Todd
I for one am afraid of your thought process and hope that you don't have a wife and children.
Your rants and tantrums are childlike.
WOW!!!!

Spencer,
If you don't like the rules here, or the functionality, why don't you start your own site? You can select your own technology, user rules, establish strict identity guidelines, content censoring guidelines....all to suit your tastes!

Can't we all get along as neighbors. Lets get together for some inexpensive pancakes at IHop.

Spencer,
This isn't one of "those" chat rooms! Feel free to direct your attention to those that have policies, buttons or opinions that closely agree with your own! Or you can start your own and call it Utopia!
I don't know why you keep putting your physical stats here and inviting me to meet you, while simultaneously stating I should be ignored..... While your stats are quite impressive, and you have a nice personality, I'm afraid the plumbing is all wrong for me!

From reading your posts it seems like even few of you very active on this forum didn't know what you signed. And logic would say that out of the 1,600 signatures majority didn't have a clue either. Congratulations Mr. Mayor and the Village Board. You have full support of majority of businesses and residents, the only problem is we are not so vocal like few individuals here because we are busy working and running businesses.

We signed a petition to force the sports complex to a referendum, giving the residents a right to vote. It's pretty straight forward.

Todd's comment at 10:25 am on Friday, March 8, 2013

"Victor your math and your assumptions are flawed! You should speak to someone that has some real numbers!"

Todd, It might be possible to do a rough estimate of expenses for this sports complex, but it is not possible to accurately estimate revenue, or even come close. This project guarantees substantial expenses, but has no guarantee of enough income to cover those expenses. That is one of the many things about this project that is a concern. This should be enough of a concern to eliminate the project.

To all involved:

I ran into Paul Chialdikas and Mayor Reaves during the Irish Parade downtown the other day (which I was in!) and between the lengthy conversation I had with Mr. Chialdikas and technical information I was able to glean from correspondence with him, I very strongly believe that our friend Todd is NOT Paul Chialdikas.

Spencer, It may be true that the person posting as Todd is not PC. However, the person posting as Todd shares similar negative sentiments as PC has openly made. Also, Todd obviously knows much more about this project than any person at the citizen level would typically know, including rules and laws that would apply. It is also obvious by Todd's comments that he has a personal stake in the sports complex being built. I would guess that Todd is either a public official, works for one of the Lemont or MWRD government entities, or is one of the contractors slated to build the complex. In any case there exists a conflict of interest that motivates Todd's many negative comments about people who would like an opportunity to vote on whether the complex should be built.