“Attorney Scott Richmond, who represents Big Head owner Marco Muniz of Streamwood, had threatened litigation against the city because the city council in September approved a permit for another downtown tattoo parlor, Funky Monkey. But Munizs petition — just like Funky Monkey — met all permit requirements, so Corporation Counsel William Cogley advised council members that a denial would have been grounds for litigation, Kaptain said. And now for some truth, clarification and explanations on what was a near-miss lawsuit against the city of Elgin and yet more shame directed at the integrity of the council. 1. We, as a council, DO pick winners and losers despite the sometimes convenient claims to the contrary. Doing so is one of the lesser-known aspects of this job. (an important note to remember during this 2015 election campaign) The reason we have to is that we are occasionally asked to change our zoning laws to allow businesses to operate in places they are currently barred from. It’s because of this that our decisions are not generally subject to litigation. If there is a threat of litigation it is usually without merit no matter if we approved a similar permit or not. 2. It is deceiving to say that because a business has “met all permit requirements” and “that a denial would have been grounds for litigation,” that we would have been sued. Of course, all permit requirements were met, if they weren’t, we would not have the issue before us to vote on. So, were there “grounds for litigation” in this matter? Yes. Overwhelmingly so. What happened on the last vote weeks ago that forced us to call another “do-over” vote for last night? When councilman Dunne flip-flopped his vote from “yes” to “no” weeks ago on what was to be the final vote he blamed our code department for presenting “a very messy ordinance” that night. That reason, which had nothing to do with the business owner’s petition where he had met all requirements necessary, violated the owner’s rights and made the city open to a trip to the Circuit Court defending ourselves against a rightful action. In other words, the blaming of city staff for their presentation made this new business owner an innocent victim. Crucial to this explanation is the fact that our city attorney stated at that meeting and before the vote was taken that this business would still have to comply with city codes and ordinances regardless what the ordinance approval stated. Common sense? I think so. That’s why council had to put our city tail between our legs and crawl down Do-Over Lane under the bright lights of city hall yesterday. That’s why there will now be three tattoo shops in downtown Elgin. The vote was 6-3 for approval. For the record, I voted against this petition because I do not believe three unique businesses within an easy walking distance of each other in a non-permitted area is healthy for our downtown. Despite my reason, this should have been approved because the votes were there. The first time. Without the risk of exposure of a declaratory judgment against the city of Elgin for a reason that nothing to do with a compliant business owner.
Posted on: Fri, 22 Nov 2013 03:16:20 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015