Village Board Wants to Avoid Litigation Over COD Separation

In a meeting characterized by frustration and unanswered questions, the Glen Ellyn Village Board decided to hold off on any actions in regards to the de-annexation of the College of DuPage.

Village Board President Mark Pfefferman drafted a policy statement on the COD de-annexation. However, because of a lack of specifics, the board decided they will hold another special meeting on June 13 where they might adopt a formal policy statement.

The draft statement said the village would not oppose COD's de-annexation in a legal sense,  even though it believes it "sends the wrong message to the community, particularly the childen, and the college's children."

CRITICIZING AND DEFENDING COD

The majority of Monday’s meeting saw much criticism of COD’s move to de-annex from the village.

Phyllis Sansone, a resident whose property borders the college’s property, said the college has no regard for its neighbors. She complained of the college’s lights being on all the time and the volume of the college’s P.A. system.

There was also a lot of criticism of COD President Robert Breuder, even though Pfefferman insisted that the focus of the meeting was on the process, not any particular person. Still, that did not stop a number of Glen Ellyn residents from expressing their thoughts on the president and his role in the process.

“He wants to become an island there,” Sansone said, “He wants to cut out the democracy of listening to people.”

Ellen Emery, who negotiated the 2011 intergovernmental agreement on behalf of the village, also shared her experiences with working with Breuder and COD. She described it as being a very frustrating experience, as Breuder would not concede or compromise.

“No, no, no. And if you don’t like it, we can go to court every single day,” Emery said, describing the tone COD took.

Although village trustee Carl Henninger invited COD officials to attend the special board meeting, the college said they would not be attending in any official capacity.

A number of citizens did come forward in the college’s defense. One resident, Ken Claus, criticized the village for using the college as a “traffic stop.” And because COD is a multijurisdictional unit, it meets the requirements set by other state agencies.

“I can’t understand why would Glen Ellyn want to get involved as a redundant agency?” Claus said.

THE ‘DEAL BREAKER’

Village board members also sounded off on what their frustrations with the college were. And for the most part, the “deal breaker” seems to be inspections.

Specifically, the village wants “independent, third party inspectors” to check on the four new buildings the college is currently constructing. COD will not allow city inspectors on site.

Both Terry Burghard, interim village manager, and Staci Hulsberg, director of the planning and development department, said COD hires architects to inspect their buildings. However, Burghard and Hulsberg said these architects are trained to look at design, not code.

Hulsberg and Burghard said they have not seen any inspection report from COD, even though the college claims to have never gotten a violation.

“Well if there are no violations, congratulations, then it shouldn’t be a problem to include it [in the intergovernmental agreement],” said village trustee Diane McGinley.

Henninger said later in an interview that it comes down to conflicts of interest.

“All of their cross-checking by companies are beholden to COD,” Henninger said. “Somebody independent needs to review the buildings.”

Village trustee Peter Cooper said it is not a matter of safety. He said that if they felt COD and the village reached a new consensus on an IGA, the first one after COD unilaterally withdrew from a previous IGA in 2008. What happened next is a matter of debate: COD claims the village sideswiped them with additional demands about life, safety, and health regulations. The village, however, maintains that these regulations were always a part of the IGA.

On May 23, COD voted to begin de-annexing from the village and rescinded the IGA it previously approved.

UNANSWERED QUESTIONS

Even with an FAQ sheet and a timeline of events provided by the village, there are numerous questions that no one has the answer to.

While the policy statement crafted by Pfefferman said they will not litigate to stop the college’s de-annexation, Burghard wondered at what point would the village pursue legal action to have independent, third party inspectors examine the new COD buildings.

There is also the matter of costs, which was the subject of a number of questions for Glen Ellyn residents.

And then there's the timeline of the de-annexation itself. COD attorney Kenneth Florey has said that de-annexation could take one to three years. Village attorney Stuart Diamond said it is conceivable, however, for de-annexation to occur in 30 days.