Residents Seek Answers on Sports Complex Proposal
Lemont Mayor Brian Reaves unveiled $21 million project at village board meeting Monday night.
At the Jan. 28 Lemont Village Board meeting, Mayor Brian Reaves walked over to a pair of display easels and turned over two large posters that had been resting there since the meeting began.
“Today, at this board meeting, we will take action on economic development,” Reaves said, as he unveiled renderings of a $21 million indoor/outdoor sports facility proposed for Lemont’s downtown area.
Reaves projected the Lemont Sports Complex would bring 650,000 visitors to Lemont each year – attracting paying traveling teams and spectators from miles around. He also said the project is on a “fast track,” and he hoped to see ground broken for the facility sometime in March.
Although the mayor’s announcement was heard by a handful of people in attendance at the board meeting, a wider audience throughout the community has greeted the project with varying degrees of reaction – from surprise to shock, support and downright skepticism.
A Lemont Patch story posted on Tuesday prompted more than 200 comments about the proposal, for which the board approved a preliminary bond ordinance Monday night.
“This idea baffles me,” one commenter wrote. “Fast tracking a $21 million project seems reckless at a time when the economy is just starting to come back.”
“We need to draw attention to downtown Lemont,” posted another. “This is the first I have heard of this proposal and I think it’s a great plan …”
Mayor Reaves also added his comments to the story, thanking everyone who had taken the time to express their thoughts on the sports complex – and explaining, among other things, that the sports facility will not be financed by TIF funds or negatively affect residents’ taxes.
“… the bonds that the Village of Lemont issue do not go on your taxes,” Reaves commented. “We abate them every year so that you do not have an increase on the Village portion of your taxes.”
In another post, Reaves invited residents to seek him out if they have questions about the project.
“Also if anyone would like to set up a time and meet with me directly please contact my office at Village Hall and I would be happy to meet and answer any question you may have,” Reaves wrote.
Al Beaudreau seemed to sum up many of the concerns expressed by other commenters on the site, who were surprised to learn of the project and eager to have their questions answered.
“Mr. Reaves: Would it have not been easier to conduct a proper public forum to debate the pros and cons of the proposed project?” Beaudreau wrote. “Instead, the Lemont residents learn of this significant expenditure only weeks before it is implemented and categorized as ‘fast track.’ … Apparently most if not all of the discussion and planning on this project has been in private. That is not the proper forum. This is a public project, affecting all of Lemont's residents, who are on the hook financially if this project/development does not perform. It needs to be fully explained, debated and analyzed, by the residents of Lemont …”
On the other side of the debate, commenter Steve Larek said he sees great potential in the project, which he thinks will be a boon for the village’s downtown area:
“I applaud Mayor Reaves (and former Mayor John Piazza as well) for being bold and innovative in addressing an issue that has vexed the people of Lemont for many years, that being, of course, reinvigorating the downtown area,” Larek wrote in his comments. “This latest proposal will take derelict land and put it to use in a very imaginative way. The potential for a facility like this is tremendous. One example is the annual college showcase for high school lacrosse players, an event that draws people from all over the Midwest. This new facility will be a top candidate to host that event (and similar events like it for other sports), being newly constructed and being easily accessible from all over the area--and close to Midway for visiting coaches and out of town players. There's certainly no guarantees with any new venture, but this idea appears promising …”
Several commenters expressed surprise that they hadn't heard of the $21 million project before - and questioned if and when it had been publicly discussed.
What can the village board legally discuss in closed session?
In a nutshell, the Illinois Open Meetings Act specifies that all meetings of public bodies must be open to the public, but makes 29 exceptions to allow closed meetings for the purposes of discussions of, among other things:
- The purchase or lease of real property for the use of the public body, including meetings held for the purpose of discussing whether a particular parcel should be acquired.
- The setting of a price for sale or lease of property owned by the public body.
- The sale or purchase of securities, investments, or investment contracts ...
- Litigation, when an action against, affecting or on behalf of the particular public body has been filed and when the public body finds that an action is probable or imminent, in which case the basis for the finding shall be recorded and entered into the minutes of the closed meeting.
When was the sports complex project publicly discussed?
In a phone interview with Patch on Wednesday, Mayor Reaves said initial discussions of the project took place more than a year ago in closed session, under pending litigation.
He said the matter was again brought up in a board workshop (Committee of the Whole) in October, when board members discussed plans to lease land from the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District (MWRD) for the proposed sports complex.
Following the interview with Reaves, Patch discovered the Oct. 15 COW meeting agenda lists “discussion of amending MWRD lease for Heritage Quarry Recreation Area” under item 4-F.
Recorded minutes from the Oct. 15 meeting, under “Discussion of MWRD Issues” read as follows:
“There was a discussion on three MWRD issues: The Alley vacation request of property located along Stephen Street, the lease for Safety Village, and the Lease for the Heritage Recreational Area. The Village has a positive relationship with MWRD and these items should be of little concern for the Village. There was no more discussion on the topic. The items would be up for approval at future meetings.”
In an Oct. 22 village board agenda memorandum on the subject “MWRD Lease Amendment – Heritage Quarry Recreation Area,” Village Administrator Ben Wehmeier presented background/history of an amendment to “effectively add parcel 25.01 to this current leasehold, adding 14.5 acres to the Lemont Heritage Quarry Area for a total of 99 acres. This effectively adds this parcel for use of general public as additional open space and passive recreation.”
That same night, the village board approved Resolution R-64-12, the “First Amendment to Lease Agreement Dated November 16, 2000 by and Between the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago and the Village of Lemont (Heritage Quarry Recreation Area).”
What’s next?
Mayor Reaves told Patch on Wednesday that the village plans to release a public statement this week to provide more details on the Lemont Sports Complex project.
A public hearing on the subject is scheduled to precede the village board meeting on Monday, Feb. 11.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
There are plenty of ways to keep up on Lemont news:
Jdog
12:05 pm on Friday, February 1, 2013
Will facility users all need to enter and exit the complex via Stephen Street or will more access roads be built as part of the complex development?
Kirk Neetz
12:05 pm on Friday, February 1, 2013
Not really many nice ways to say how disapointing it is to see another village making major decisions on expenditures of large sums of money without consulting the residents whom they serve. Maybe a great idea to build who really knows. I know this, its a lot easier to spend someone elses money when they give you a 21 million dollar credit card which of couse they will pay, unless it doesnt work out that 650,000 people show up to use it, then of course the residents will pay. Thats how "alternative tax revenue bonds" work. Toyota Park. Saying were told " Lemont discussed leasing the land" is the same thing as telling us we are spending 21 mil, how does" your fired" sound How do you fast track in 30 days a project that 1. should have been presented to homeowners of Lemont and voted on. 2. Begin ground breaking without public bidding of work to be done. I could go on. Shameful the way its being handled because people may vote no. There are several areas of Lemont that would be a lot better choice to build outdoor facilities than this.At a considerable less cost.
Edward Andrysiak
1:31 pm on Friday, February 1, 2013
Kirk...other locations you might suggest would likely involve purchasing land. The Village can lease land from the MWRD at very resonable rates...sometimes a dollar a year! So, a lot of expense to buy land, millions, was eliminated...good move! To boot, the Village will create something more eye appealing as you cross over the bridge into town. The MWRD could have let that property go to lease to someone else for a tank farm or some other ugly use we couldn't fight off.. This was a good protective move by the Village. Additionally this signals some "eye opening" on the part of the Village. They own and or lease so much land in the area that development by a private party is somewhat stimied. For some time I suggested they develop a land use/business and then find an operator and share the profits and land use. The article in the Lemonter indicates the facility will be run by an operator under the Village umbrella...sounds like a release of the facility. More detail on this will follow I am sure. With out that bold move, nothing would ever happen. It is apparent the Village is moving in that direction and that is new and very refreshing. If the business plan proves out...this coulod be a winner! It could ignite better recreation uses of the quarry 100 acre area as well. Be patient and hope for the best.
Ann Paul
1:41 pm on Friday, February 1, 2013
Still need answers yet how much revenue it will bring in? How will this impact other facilities in Lemont that already rely on revenue from renting out their fields for this use? Are we putting competition within our own community for the same services? DId we purchase the land or is it being leased? There is no indication from meeting minutes of the village purchasing this property. Furthermore, according to the Reporter, Mayor Reaves indicated that we still have to do environmental testing. So if this land or any parts of it is contaminated, who is going to foot the bill to clean it up? More questions than answers still remain. I hope this will all be addressed on 2/11..
Marie
2:21 pm on Friday, February 1, 2013
Great comment Kirk. Edward must be a politician or work for the MWRD. The way this has been being handled is extremely disappointing to say the least.
bob ognar
12:05 pm on Friday, February 1, 2013
Thank You Brian for all you hard work
Ginger1397
12:07 pm on Friday, February 1, 2013
Will the Patch be posting the public statement and the date of the public hearing?
Linda Ozbolt
1:02 pm on Friday, February 1, 2013
Yes, Ginger - we will post the village's public statement as soon as it is released. Same goes for the public hearing.
And to all Patch readers, thanks for being so engaged in your community - and for your insightful comments on this story.
Mary Pollard
6:36 pm on Friday, February 1, 2013
Linda, any way we can get a petition going to stop the Patch from allowing fake names. I'm so tired of the ridiculous people hiding behind fake names and taking pot shots and the leaders in this town. Seriously, let me know how many signatures I need to shut down Ann Paul and her multiple personalities. I'll get started tonight.
Andrew
12:07 pm on Friday, February 1, 2013
Is there any way we can get a referendum on this? If so how is that done?
Ann Paul
1:20 pm on Friday, February 1, 2013
Yes Andrew, there is a way. Go to the Village Hall and request a petition. If we collect 785 signature before March 2nd, the village will be mandated to put it up for referendum on the April ballot.
Lemont Citizen
12:04 pm on Tuesday, February 5, 2013
The mayor and village board could do the right thing and arrange for one.
LemontFan
11:28 am on Friday, February 1, 2013
Lemont needs forward thinking ideas like this one to drive visitors to Lemont. There is a reason why our businesses have struggled to succeed: not a large population of citizens in Lemont, lack of visitors because there isn’t a specific reason to visit (as there is in downtown Naperville) and casual thoroughfare traffic (since the Lemont Bridge was built and I-355). I commend the Mayor and all those that participated n the development of the project.
Lisa Chudy
2:57 pm on Thursday, February 7, 2013
You are right about Lemont.
I love old towns and enjoy walking around Lemont, but I noticed that there has to be more to attract visitors here! More revenue, too. I don't know how this town does it. I would like to see Lemont become more of a tourist magnet.
Stop worryinng about the naysayers from other towns , and start building and improving the downtown areas too. ( It is a neat old town and needs more neat people...)
Ann Paul
1:21 pm on Friday, February 1, 2013
Hi Linda,
Any response to earlier question if Patch would consider streaming the public hearing live on 2/11 regarding this issue?
Thanks.
Lisa Bitsky
5:59 pm on Friday, February 1, 2013
Among all the obvious questions asked, I find the answer to whether or not the land is safe to put our children on a little evasive.
"The proposed site was previously used as a marine chemical terminal. Is the site deemed safe after
housing of these chemical terminals?
A. For over a decade, the Village has worked with MWRD to conduct an environmental assessment with a Brownfield
Grant from the IEPA to test, evaluate and study the proper way to remediate the site"
I don't see an answer that yes it is safe.
Edward Andrysiak
10:26 am on Saturday, February 2, 2013
It's bedrock with about a foot of dirt on top of it. In order to put down the concrete required for this project...the dirt will likely be scooped up and huled away to a brownfield. Seems this would be a required part of the building process. We have a lic environmental engineer on the Village Board. I would think this detail has had a lot of attention and a solution is at hand.
n.j.
4:16 pm on Sunday, February 10, 2013
If anyone remembers the referendum to build the CORE, we were told that the plan was to build an OLYMPIC SIZE swimming pool, which would attract major regional swim meets and boost our towns revenue. After the referendum passed, the "olympic size" plan was mysteriously scrapped and now were stuck with a pool only good enough for swimming lessons. Now, this mega complex is still not big enough. Check out the Vernon Hills Sports Complex, as it has 6 basketball courts and 2 indoor soccer fields, plus an outdoor heated golf driving range. This is what it needs in order to attract year round major tournaments and bring in a year round revenue stream. Perhaps the useless Bromberek Park would be a bigger, better sight to build a bigger, better sports complex.
Anthony Demma
6:15 pm on Sunday, February 10, 2013
I think we need to frame this, like all investments, as Risk vs. Reward. Who is taking the risk here and who stands to get the reward? What is the risk and what is the reward? And finally, how do we measure both? I am concerned that the people of Lemont are on the hook for the risk and that even in the event of a successful project, the residence will find the rewards illusive. I am concerned that the bond issuers, contractors and management company, as well as the officials who spearheaded this project will accrue the rewards while having a disproportionally small amount of risk.
Lemont Citizen
8:06 am on Monday, February 25, 2013
Sounds about right. That's why some politicians aspire to that kind of work. They get a blank checkbook funded by unlimited taxpayer money. They get to spend it anyway they like. They get to set up mutually beneficial relationships with service providers. They don't even need to ask taxpayers or have a referendum to spend $21 million on a project we really don't need. Pretty nice work if you can get it.