Plainfield Park Board Reverses Vote on St. John's Lease

Last month, the Plainfield Park District board voted 3-2 against terminating a lease. This time around, the vote was 3-2 in favor of dropping the $1 per year agreement with a Joliet-area church.

On Wednesday, board member Janet Silosky reversed her vote, this time voting in favor of terminating a lease that allows the park district use of a parcel of property at Caton Farm and Drauden roads. The property is owned by St. John Lutheran Church, which eventually plans to build a new church on the site.

The end of the lease effectively halts plans to build a park on the property. In a message posted to Plainfield Patch, board president Peter Hurtado said the project, which would have included two tennis courts, an inline hockey rink, a picnic shelter and two volleyball courts, could have cost up to $1 million. He also claimed the deal would put the park district on the hook for funding part of the church’s building project. Click here to view Hurtado’s statement.

In a response to Hurtado’s post, commissioner Mary Kay Ludemann refuted his claims that the deal would cost the park district that much, along with an assertion that the park district would have to fund half of the church parking lot. Ludemann said the park’s location would provide recreation in a currently underserved section of the district. Click here to read Ludemann’s statement.

Under the lease, St. John’s agreed to deed the property to the park district after the park project was completed, but there was no date stipulated for that transaction to happen. 

Silosky switches sides

Silosky, who recently dropped out of the March 2014 primary race for the 98th District state representative seat, voted with Ludemann and board member Larry Newton last month.

This time, she sided with Hurtado and Peter Steinys.

“Since our last meeting, much information has come to light that might have impacted my decision and warranted further scrutiny,” Silosky said Wednesday, adding she felt the language in the lease was not specific enough and left too much room for interpretation.

“The fact of the matter is, there is no date for the donation of this land and this is really important,” she said. "There is little impetus to donate the land … When I look at a document like this, I really ask myself, ‘Who benefits most?’”

Silosky added, “I know many people feel that this is a great deal. Regardless of what some people think … we’re really trying hard to do what we feel is the right thing.”

Newton saw it a different way.

“We’re essentially slapping a good partner in the face,” he said. “I think it’s a good opportunity squandered.”

Also read:

• Peck Calls Citizens ‘Radicals;’ Resident Ejected from Park Board Meeting
• Plainfield Park Board Split on Plans to Build on Church Property
• Plainfield Park Board Members Sound Off on Park Lease Debate
• Silosky Drops Out of State Rep Race; Bolton Seeks Spot on Ballot