Wasn’t it the DEMOLITION trustee Steven D.Sebby who said that the grants were “just APPLICATIONS?APPLICATIONS.Nothing more than applications.” Now it is exposed that NO they were REAL GRANTS.The residents of Lombard should know that those were GRANTS issued.
Not just applications.
The readers of this comment board should know that the village board INSTRUCTED the Dupage Theatre Foundation to persue as many grants as was possible.Then the village board votes to demolish the theatre and refuse all of those GRANTS (NOT APPLICATIONS.)
Makes you wonder what is really going on.
The National Park Service says the village of Lomard IS NOT AUTHORIZED to REJECT the $296,000.00 FEDERAL SAVE AMERICA TREASURES GRANT that was AWARDED to the village of Lombard and the Dupage Theatre Foundation.
Only the grantee {THE DUPAGE THEATRE FOUNDATION )can request cancellation of or refuse the grant.
This according to the acting chief of the Historic Preservation Grants Division of the National Park Service Mr. Hamilton Tucker.
This is an astonishing BLUNDER by the village legal dept.
The village board formally refused the $1,000,000.00 Illinois First grant money (some village board members said that money would never come) and then the State of Illinois releases $195 million of grant money.
Compound blunders.“Haste makes waste"
Makes you wonder what is really going on.
Dupe neighbor,
I am not Kevin. So wipe some more EGG off of your face.
When the R.S.C.development and Dupage Theatre restoration funding PRO FORMA ANALYSIS was presented to the village board of trustees it DID include the Illinois grant and the federal grants.
All state and federal grants were always part of the restoration plans.
As a matter of FACT,the village of Lombard and the village board of trustees INSTRUCTED THE Dupage Theatre Foundation to seek and GET
as many grants as was possible.Also the village board approved and released T.I.F. funds for that very purpose.
So you and your anti- theatre preservationists can wipe some more EGG off of your face.
Dupe neighbor,
I am not Kevin. So wipe some more EGG off of your face.
When the R.S.C.development and Dupage Theatre restoration funding PRO FORMA ANALYSIS was presented to the village board of trustees it DID include the Illinois grant and the federal grants.
All state and federal grants were always part of the restoration plans.
As a matter of FACT,the village of Lombard and the village board of trustees INSTRUCTED THE Dupage Theatre Foundation to seek and GET
as many grants as was possible.Also the village board approved and released T.I.F. funds for that very purpose.
So you and your anti- theatre preservationists can wipe some more EGG off of your face.
About the $1,000,000.00 state grant.One should never say never.
Unfortunately, the Lombard village board officially refused all grants.
$1,000,000.00 grant money from the State of Illinois that the Lombard village board refused.Some board members said that the 1,000,000.00 grant probably would NEVER COME.
They should learn to NEVER SAY NEVER.
I hope that the ANTI -PRESERVATIONISTS can wipe wipe the EGG off their faces.
Challenger I am waiting for your response . Will you please show us where I have posted lies,mis-information and other related rhetoric about the R.S.C. DEVELOPMENT and theatre proposal,and the Friends of the Dupage Theatre?
Challenger You are WRONG.If you want to call young adults [TEEN AGERS AGES 13THROUGH 19 little children then you are wrong.]
I will stand by on my statement and repeat that your claim is RIDICULOUS.
As far as the number of supporters at the board meetings I will also stand on my statements.I was present at those board meetings.
I {UNLIKE YOU ) am not AFRAID to attend village board meetings and risk possibly being trashed by your little group of ANTI-PRESERVATIONISTS
and FRIEND haters who hide in the shadows and won’t speak publily and make their presence known.
Challenger says there is only 1200 dollars in donations.
Another RIDICULOUS STATEMENT.Funny how you say there is only 1200 dollars in donations when THE FRIENDS HAVE NEVER MADE THEIR FINANCES PUBLIC.
Isn’t it amazing how the friends sure know how to stretch a dollar.Everything ,all of the signs all of the flyers and descriptions of the R.S.C. PROPOSAL from April till now.All of this on $1200.How ridiculous your statements are.
Challenger I will make a deal with you.You called me a BIG LIAR.
You say I post mis-information,lies and other rhetoric .
I say that YOU (CHALLENGER )post the mis-information,lies and other rhetoric.I CHALLENGE you to show me where I have LIED or POSTED MIS-INFORMATION.
Through the years I have attended many village board meetings
about the Dupage theatre,video taped the board meetings and reviewed
and logged the minutes of those board meetings.
So I know of what I speak.
I will wait your response.
Medlers, one the requirements of the petition [signature drive ] was that the signers MUST SIGN their own name and must put their address and if they are Lombard residents the VOTING DISTRICT that they are in.
Although NOT impossible, I seriously doubt that a 5 ,3 and 2 year old child would be able to meet those requirements.I would also add that they WOULD NOT IN ANY MANNER EVER HAVE BEEN ASKED to sign the petition (signature) drive.
It is a TOTALLY ridiculous statement by “Chalenger” and as far as I am concerned need not be persued as a topic of discussion on that
very basis.
The April 27 2005 board meeting lasted almost if not past midnight when the dupage theatre was discussed ,the follow up SPECIAL village board meeting about the dupage theatre only lasted till almost midnight.
All these plus more were full house standing room only.
Challenger seems to forget these.
Well Challenger I was wrong on the 45,000.It was a type error.I apologize for the type error.At least I can apologize when I am wrong.
Correction.The “friends” collected “4,500” signatures of people that did NOT want the theatre demolished.
Challenger #3 key words . “Nobody supports this place ”
Challenger maybe you can tell us that by asking people at soccer games, restaurants ,bars,church,festivals,block parties,neighbors homes ect.“that nobody supports the this place."
Challenger I have attended the same types public and private gatherings that you have for quite a number of years now and I can tell you that the people that I have talked to at these functions and events for the most part are VERY SUPPORTIVE of the theatre and the "friends” efforts to save and restore the theatre.
Challenger says it is the same 18 people who attend board meetings, appear in the local tabloid ,gather signatures ECT.[Challenger says “TABLOID” because the NEWSPAPER IS FOR PRESERVING the Theatre and donates space to the friends]
Challenger is correct.It is the same 18 people PLUS a WHOLE LOT MORE PEOPLE.There have been numerous village board meetings when there was standing room only ( even past midnight) when the village board was PUBLICLY SCRUTINIZING ,DISECTING ,ANALYZING,DEBATING AND OPINIONATING ON THE Dupage Theatre.
Challenger said when he was asked if he(Challenger) spoke to 1,000
residents.His answer was “ INDIRECTLY,YES,if I (Challenger )get to count children….One ,a woman I (challenger) take the train with,but she changed her mind when she found out it wasn’t going to be a movie theatre."
There are three key words that will show just where Challenger
is on the issue of the restoration of the theatre.
1. Challenger uses the words “INDIRECTLY , YES. ”
2 One, a woman I take to the train.
Challenger says “there is no support for the theatre”.
How can Challenger say there is no suppotr for the theatre by his TOTALL UNSCIENTIFIC POLL?
Let the record show that the “friends” presented to the village board 45,000 names and addresses of support for saving the theatre.
Challenger has presented NO signatures in favor of the theatre demolition.
Challenger why don’t you just find out for yourself what was PUBICLY said by the friends at the board meeting when those petition signatures were presented.I will stand on what I said.
Challenger asks “how much cash did those 4400 contribute."
When those signatures were taken ABSOLUTLY no money was asked.
Only names and addresses and if they lived in Lombard their voting district. Since the question asked to those who signed those petitions was "would you sign a petition to help save the dupage theatre.A building that is on the National register of horistorical buiildings That was voted to be DEMOLISHED.” The 4400 who signed that petition only wanted the theatre to be saved.That is all that was asked of the people who signed.
Again no donations were asked for.
As for the total amout of people that attended the rally, the count of 200 is accurate based on the number of petition signatues collected since, the petition drive was launched at the rally.
About the number of yard signs. I can tell you that I personally put in place 75 signs.
I do believe at a board meeting one trustee said the count was 750
or so.This was the same trustee who initated the vote to demolish.So if you call the friends liars about the 1000 signs and insist that there were only 100 then I guess that you are callling that trustee a liar also.
3 of your mis-truths uncovered.However you will probably keep on calling the friends “liars."
Please Challenger don’t confuse my post name [dupe supporter]
with the post name [dupage dude]and I {dupe supporter ) never said that you were deb dupe,and I never accused you of that.
So it looks like you are left holding the bag of accusations.
Challenger (SIR) Maybe you should scroll up to August 10 and read (for the hard of reading)(Challenger) what Ms.Dynako(A FRIEND)REALLY said.
“The petition(signature)drive WAS MEANT TO INCLUDE ALL THAT WOULD BENEFIT FROM THE THEATRE.THAT INCLUDED KIDS."As far as the Wheaton Grand they contributed about 100 signatures to our cause.Some of those people were Lomardians."
Challenger (SIR )Wasn’t Ms.DYNAKO (A FRIEND )telling you that NOT ALL of those signatures were from Lombard residents?
Challenger, what the friends said PUBLICLY at the board meeting
was that those signatures were gathered at cruise nights and the taste of Lombard.They also said that not all of the signatures were from Lombard residents.The signatures were gathered from people that either live in Lombard or who were spending their time and money in Lombard.
So there you go anti-preservationist,another one of your mis-truths uncovered.
Challenger (SIR)If the 100 signatures gathered at the Wheaton Grand Theatre trouble you then just change your tally to 4400 signatures.I don’t think that the friends would object.
Challenger stated that the Friends said “4500” signatuers all from Lombard but some were not.“ Forgive me (SIR)but you are WRONG.What was publicly said by the Friends was that NO, not all of the signatures were from Lombard residents.That point was made clear from the begining.
What was said was that those signatures came from people who wanted to save an historical building that was on the National register of historical buildings and was voted to be demolished.Be those signatures be from Lombard residents or not. What was also said was that those signatures were gathered in Lombard at the cruise night events and at the taste of Lombard event.That is what was publicly said when those signatures were presented to the board.
Let me repeat (SIR) The friends NEVER said that those signatures were all from Lombard residents.
Challenger I never said that you (challenger) were against condos.
Let me repeat (SIR) for the hard of reading (challenger)
I said that you were against the theatre and against the R.S.C.
proposed development.
Please (SIR) READ first.Don’t let your anger and hatred for the friends get the best of what little good judgement that you have remaining.
You made charges that one of the posters has an agenda.
Please tell us just “WHAT ” is your agenda.It certainly can’t be saving the theatre because from reading all of your posts,all you do is criticize.What positive statements or suggestions have you ever made to those who wanted to save and restore the theatre?
Deb Dupe I have to agree with you on one statement that you made.
“It really doesn’t matter anymore since the 4 trustees voted yes to demolish the theatre and prepare the site for development."
Please make no mistake.I know fully well that the EXECUTION of the theatre is near.
However I find it amusing when you say "those six Lombard residents are not against the theatre.They are simply against the tax funded R.S.C. plan that so fails the village of Lombard residents despite the claims of it being a ” fully “funded plan"
The revisions to the R.S.C. DEVELOPMENT proposal have made the Theatre restoration FULLY FUNDED.This is what the village of Lombard has Publicly stated.Lombard village president Mueller has publicly stated and is on the record as being in favor of using T.I.F. increment funds for the theatre restoraion.
I find it puzzling that those six residents that you suggest are not against the theatre would at least have spoken up and let the trustees know that they would not want the theatre demolished WITHOUT AN ALTERNATIVE PLAN FOR DEVELOPMENT IN PLACE.
That is if they were really interested in saving the theatre.
Any talk of "adaptive reuse "was never mentioned at the meeting BEFORE the vote was taken to demolish the theatre.Any talk about adaptive reuse would be moot after the demolish order was passed.
My belief is that adaptive reuse wouldn’t happen anyway,based on past actions (or lack thereof ) by the village in regards to the old village hall and Lincoln School buildings.It was talked about but it NEVER happened.
Deb Dupe again states mis-information.For the record I will repeat a portion of what I have previously said.Duper Supporter said
“The condo and retail will pay realestate taxes on the assessed fair market value.THEN the YEARLY INCREMENTED INCREASES of those realestate taxes are what will be used for the theatre restoration”.
Deb Dupe stated that when a 9.5 million in TIF is diverted to the theatre T.I.F.until 2024,there is no victory for any other taxing body.The only winner is the theatre.
The only T.I.F. increment that will be used for the theatre restoration are from the theatre properties only.
The obvious WINNER would be the cause of HISTORICAL PRESERVATION.
The obvious winner would be Lombard for taking a positive stand for
Historical preservation.
Deb dupe said “T.I.F. is not a bad thing.Applied correctly it drives development for the public good in our downtown area."
I AGREE 100% with that statement.As a supporter of the theatre I feel that restoring the theatre and using it as a cultural arts center combined with the mixed use (condo and retail)adjacent would certainly be for the public good in our downtown area.
Deb Dupe stated that the Lincoln Square development and T.I.F. AGREEMENT was certainly part of the public discussion and the numbers are there for public scrutiny.
I will have to DISAGREE with that statement because attended board meetings and reviewed village board minutes and all legislative files on the proposed and agreed T.I.F. REBATES ,SALES TAX AND RESTAURANT TAX REBATES to the developer .There was NOT even a mention of a PRO FORMA for discussion.UNLIKE all of the theatre plans that have been PUBLICLY ANALYZED,SCRUTINIZED,DISECTED,DEBATED
and OPINIONATED.
Deb dupe stated "kindly take the T.I.F and tax discussions elsewhere.
Nothing would please me more than not to have any discussions about T.I.F. and taxes on this website.If the mis information
and the mis representation of the facts about the ENTIRE R.S.C.
PROPOSAL on the T.I.F.would stop.
I certainly hope that Deb Dupe extends the statement "kindly take the T.I. F. and tax discussions elsewhere"to the following POST NAMES.
1 CONCERNED TAXPAYER
2 DEB DUPE
3 CHALLENGER
4 MARISA SCHOFF
5 DUPE NEIGHBOR
6 LOMBARD RESIDENT
All of the above are against the theatre and the R.S.C. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.All of the above have posted statements against T.I.F.
increment financing for the theatre but not any other development
or grants that use T.I.F.INCREMENTED FUNDS.
Deb Dupe ,I have NOT implied that the village cut any “undertable deal” as you have said.AlL that I said is that no other development proposal that required the use of T.I.F. FUNDS has been PUBLICLY SCRUTINIZED,DISECTED,DEBATED and OPINIONATED as ALL OF THE THEATRE PROPOSALS. If I am WRONG then please correct me with the proper related facts.
Again Deb Dup makes statements that are at the very least very mis-leading.
As the R.S.C.development proposal was presented , R.S.C.(the developer)
would PURCHASE the south properties and the retail property for development.Once this land is purchased it then ceases to be municipal property and becomes REAL PROPERTY and is put on the tax rolls as assessed real property.The condo and retail will pay realestate taxes on the assessed fair market value.Then the yearly tax incremented increases of those realestate taxes are what will be used for the theatre restoration.The original assessed fair market value of the REAL PROPERTY TAXES ARE STILL COLLECTED AND DISTRIBUTED.
As the village of Lombard and R.S.C. have stated,the estimated total
T.I.F. increment funds that will be generated by the condo and retail development from tax year 2007 through 2023 would be $9,588,734.00. The T.I.F. district extension has to have occured and the condo and retail completed by year 2007.
As I have previously stated the condo and retail development to the west of the theatre in the downtown T.I.F.was funded with T.I.F. INCREMENTED REBATES,sales tax and restaurant tax rebates to the developer for the total length of the T.I.F. district.Also the development was on MUNICIPAL PROPERTY as is the theatre property.
Unfortunately,NO PRO FORMA ANALYSIS of the development was brought forth or made public [uNLIKE all of the theatre proposals which have been PUBICLY SCRUTINIZED,DISECTED, DEBATED and OPINIONATED.]
As far as the $400,000.00 amount of T.I.F.funding rebated to a developer.That T.I.F.rebate of $400,000.00 is to a developer of property in an entirely different T.I.F. district.(St.Charles Rd. East)
In response to Deb Dupe about property taxes being diverted for 18 years:the statement is mis-leading because what is being diverted is just the tax increment increase NOT ALL OF the property taxes.This same procedure was granted to a condo/retail developer just west of the theatre.
T.I.F.fund rebates and retail sales tax rebates and restaurant tax rebates were given to the developer for the life of the T.I.F. district.Again the issue is the same:T.I.F.increment funds from the condo and retail to pay a developer to develope the property.The increase in the property tax (increment only)that will be paid by the condo owners and the retail owners will go to the the developer.
I wish that Deb dupe would explain the difference (if any )between “DEMOLISH AND PREPARE THE SITE FOR DEVELOPMENT” and
“DEMOLISH AND PREPARE THE SITE FOR REDEVELOPMENT."
Deb Dupe say’s "you” friends always miscontrue the truth.
I challenge Deb Dupe to show me where and when I have miscontrued the TRUTH.
For the record, I have not mentioned one word about a convention center or any Yorktown development or any Yorktown redevelopment.
It’s a funny thing about all of those statements being presented about taking 18 years to pay off the bonds to restore the theatre.Quite mis-leading at best.
What was needed was an extension of the exising T.I.F. for 18 years on the Theatre properties ONLY. Just the Theatre properties ONLY.The rest of the properties in the T.I.F. DISTRICT
would NOT be included in the T.I.F. EXTENSION.
The same people who objected to this latest T.I.F. extension for just the theatre property only said nothing when the last main street TIF was extended for the WHOLE downtown T.I.F.district.
Adaptive reuse of history was supposed to happen when condos were built
on Lombard’s OLD village hall and the OLD Lincoln School properties.
Adaptive reuse never happened.But it what was supposed to happen.
About the over abundance of condos.I may have a tendancy to agree because I have seen an explosion of condos in Lombard
However condos, with a mixed use retail,and restaurants and a FULLY FUNDED restored historical theatre on Main St. downtown Lombard.What
can be be wrong with that kind of development?
Time will tell what FINALLY gets developed on the theatre properties.As of right now,for the record,Lombard has said PUBLICLY that there are no plans for the property.Time will tell us if more condos go there and if T.I.F.funds are used to entice developers.
As the theatre foundation and the Village of Lombard has stated “There is no funding gap in the current proposal”.The restoration of the dupage theatre will NOT RAISE PROPERTY TAXES.
There has been no support for a library on the theatre site by any of the village trustees as far as I am aware of.
However none of this makes any difference because as the law now states “to demolish and prepare the site for development.”
I will answer the question this way.I have heard bashing the actions of the trustees who voted for the demolition of the theatre when there was a plan for development of the south property that included the theatre restoration.I have heard of no plan for the demolition site once it is demolished.I have heard that some developers may be interested in the site but no specifics.
That is what is wrong.Demolish without an alternative.Demolish a historical site without any plans for the site.Once it is demolished
who knows what could be considered for the site
Another thing that puzzles me.If the majority of the village board were dissatisfied with the friends or the foundation,the village board could have come to a consenses and requested that a entrely new foundation group of members be installed ,if they really wanted to save the theatre.
To say that the friends were unhappy and would do their best to defeat those who voted to demolish is politics.I defend their actions to work for and support new candidates.
As far as the $1million grant.One should never say never.
It is quite evident that the vote was decided 2x2.
There are 2 ways to count to four.
Challanger I have assumed nothing.
Let me rephase.Do you think that an entirely new group completely void of any old group members would be able to influence the village board to reverse their decision to demolish the theatre and prepare for development?
I find it ironic that when you say that the “friends have burned to many bridges” you don’t mention the BRIDGES that the Village of Lombard burned when they formally refused $1.3 million in federal and state grants awarded to Lombard for the restoration of the theatre.If there is even the slightest possibility of saving the theatre,Lombard blew $1.3 million .
Talk about “BURNING BRIDGES"
That money is gone.Won’t come back.That money won’t even go to another municipiality.That is the bridge that the village trustees burned.Not the "friends”.
Wasn’t it the DEMOLITION trustee Steven D.Sebby who said that the grants were “just APPLICATIONS?APPLICATIONS.Nothing more than applications.” Now it is exposed that NO they were REAL GRANTS.The residents of Lombard should know that those were GRANTS issued.
Not just applications.
The readers of this comment board should know that the village board INSTRUCTED the Dupage Theatre Foundation to persue as many grants as was possible.Then the village board votes to demolish the theatre and refuse all of those GRANTS (NOT APPLICATIONS.)
Makes you wonder what is really going on.
The National Park Service says the village of Lomard IS NOT AUTHORIZED to REJECT the $296,000.00 FEDERAL SAVE AMERICA TREASURES GRANT that was AWARDED to the village of Lombard and the Dupage Theatre Foundation.
Only the grantee {THE DUPAGE THEATRE FOUNDATION )can request cancellation of or refuse the grant.
This according to the acting chief of the Historic Preservation Grants Division of the National Park Service Mr. Hamilton Tucker.
This is an astonishing BLUNDER by the village legal dept.
The village board formally refused the $1,000,000.00 Illinois First grant money (some village board members said that money would never come) and then the State of Illinois releases $195 million of grant money.
Compound blunders.“Haste makes waste"
Makes you wonder what is really going on.
From today’s Daily Herald.
www.dailyherald.com/community/zonestory.asp?id=99032&zone=lom
From today’s Daily Herald
www.dailyherald.com/community/zonestory.asp?id=98964&zone=lom
From today’s Daily Herald.
www.dailyherald.com/community/zonestory.asp?id=98958&zone=nap
From today’s Daily herald.
www.dailyherald.com/community/zone.asp?id=98958&zone=nap
I knew that it was a MISTAKE for Lombard to officailly reject the
Illinois grant of $1,000,000.00 .
My concern about the OFFICIAL rejection of the $1,000,000.00
GRANT money from the State of Illinois was ah the timing.
Dupe neighbor,
I am not Kevin. So wipe some more EGG off of your face.
When the R.S.C.development and Dupage Theatre restoration funding PRO FORMA ANALYSIS was presented to the village board of trustees it DID include the Illinois grant and the federal grants.
All state and federal grants were always part of the restoration plans.
As a matter of FACT,the village of Lombard and the village board of trustees INSTRUCTED THE Dupage Theatre Foundation to seek and GET
as many grants as was possible.Also the village board approved and released T.I.F. funds for that very purpose.
So you and your anti- theatre preservationists can wipe some more EGG off of your face.
Dupe neighbor,
I am not Kevin. So wipe some more EGG off of your face.
When the R.S.C.development and Dupage Theatre restoration funding PRO FORMA ANALYSIS was presented to the village board of trustees it DID include the Illinois grant and the federal grants.
All state and federal grants were always part of the restoration plans.
As a matter of FACT,the village of Lombard and the village board of trustees INSTRUCTED THE Dupage Theatre Foundation to seek and GET
as many grants as was possible.Also the village board approved and released T.I.F. funds for that very purpose.
So you and your anti- theatre preservationists can wipe some more EGG off of your face.
From today’s Daily Daily Herald.
www.dailyherald.com/story.asp?id=98663
About the $1,000,000.00 state grant.One should never say never.
Unfortunately, the Lombard village board officially refused all grants.
$1,000,000.00 grant money from the State of Illinois that the Lombard village board refused.Some board members said that the 1,000,000.00 grant probably would NEVER COME.
They should learn to NEVER SAY NEVER.
I hope that the ANTI -PRESERVATIONISTS can wipe wipe the EGG off their faces.
Challenger I am waiting for your response . Will you please show us where I have posted lies,mis-information and other related rhetoric about the R.S.C. DEVELOPMENT and theatre proposal,and the Friends of the Dupage Theatre?
Challenger You are WRONG.If you want to call young adults [TEEN AGERS AGES 13THROUGH 19 little children then you are wrong.]
I will stand by on my statement and repeat that your claim is RIDICULOUS.
As far as the number of supporters at the board meetings I will also stand on my statements.I was present at those board meetings.
I {UNLIKE YOU ) am not AFRAID to attend village board meetings and risk possibly being trashed by your little group of ANTI-PRESERVATIONISTS
and FRIEND haters who hide in the shadows and won’t speak publily and make their presence known.
Challenger says there is only 1200 dollars in donations.
Another RIDICULOUS STATEMENT.Funny how you say there is only 1200 dollars in donations when THE FRIENDS HAVE NEVER MADE THEIR FINANCES PUBLIC.
Isn’t it amazing how the friends sure know how to stretch a dollar.Everything ,all of the signs all of the flyers and descriptions of the R.S.C. PROPOSAL from April till now.All of this on $1200.How ridiculous your statements are.
Challenger I will make a deal with you.You called me a BIG LIAR.
You say I post mis-information,lies and other rhetoric .
I say that YOU (CHALLENGER )post the mis-information,lies and other rhetoric.I CHALLENGE you to show me where I have LIED or POSTED MIS-INFORMATION.
Through the years I have attended many village board meetings
about the Dupage theatre,video taped the board meetings and reviewed
and logged the minutes of those board meetings.
So I know of what I speak.
I will wait your response.
Medlers, one the requirements of the petition [signature drive ] was that the signers MUST SIGN their own name and must put their address and if they are Lombard residents the VOTING DISTRICT that they are in.
Although NOT impossible, I seriously doubt that a 5 ,3 and 2 year old child would be able to meet those requirements.I would also add that they WOULD NOT IN ANY MANNER EVER HAVE BEEN ASKED to sign the petition (signature) drive.
It is a TOTALLY ridiculous statement by “Chalenger” and as far as I am concerned need not be persued as a topic of discussion on that
very basis.
The April 27 2005 board meeting lasted almost if not past midnight when the dupage theatre was discussed ,the follow up SPECIAL village board meeting about the dupage theatre only lasted till almost midnight.
All these plus more were full house standing room only.
Challenger seems to forget these.
Well Challenger I was wrong on the 45,000.It was a type error.I apologize for the type error.At least I can apologize when I am wrong.
Correction.The “friends” collected “4,500” signatures of people that did NOT want the theatre demolished.
Challenger #3 key words . “Nobody supports this place ”
Challenger maybe you can tell us that by asking people at soccer games, restaurants ,bars,church,festivals,block parties,neighbors homes ect.“that nobody supports the this place."
Challenger I have attended the same types public and private gatherings that you have for quite a number of years now and I can tell you that the people that I have talked to at these functions and events for the most part are VERY SUPPORTIVE of the theatre and the "friends” efforts to save and restore the theatre.
Challenger says it is the same 18 people who attend board meetings, appear in the local tabloid ,gather signatures ECT.[Challenger says “TABLOID” because the NEWSPAPER IS FOR PRESERVING the Theatre and donates space to the friends]
Challenger is correct.It is the same 18 people PLUS a WHOLE LOT MORE PEOPLE.There have been numerous village board meetings when there was standing room only ( even past midnight) when the village board was PUBLICLY SCRUTINIZING ,DISECTING ,ANALYZING,DEBATING AND OPINIONATING ON THE Dupage Theatre.
Challenger said when he was asked if he(Challenger) spoke to 1,000
residents.His answer was “ INDIRECTLY,YES,if I (Challenger )get to count children….One ,a woman I (challenger) take the train with,but she changed her mind when she found out it wasn’t going to be a movie theatre."
There are three key words that will show just where Challenger
is on the issue of the restoration of the theatre.
1. Challenger uses the words “INDIRECTLY , YES. ”
2 One, a woman I take to the train.
Challenger says “there is no support for the theatre”.
How can Challenger say there is no suppotr for the theatre by his TOTALL UNSCIENTIFIC POLL?
Let the record show that the “friends” presented to the village board 45,000 names and addresses of support for saving the theatre.
Challenger has presented NO signatures in favor of the theatre demolition.
Challenger why don’t you just find out for yourself what was PUBICLY said by the friends at the board meeting when those petition signatures were presented.I will stand on what I said.
Challenger asks “how much cash did those 4400 contribute."
When those signatures were taken ABSOLUTLY no money was asked.
Only names and addresses and if they lived in Lombard their voting district. Since the question asked to those who signed those petitions was "would you sign a petition to help save the dupage theatre.A building that is on the National register of horistorical buiildings That was voted to be DEMOLISHED.” The 4400 who signed that petition only wanted the theatre to be saved.That is all that was asked of the people who signed.
Again no donations were asked for.
As for the total amout of people that attended the rally, the count of 200 is accurate based on the number of petition signatues collected since, the petition drive was launched at the rally.
About the number of yard signs. I can tell you that I personally put in place 75 signs.
I do believe at a board meeting one trustee said the count was 750
or so.This was the same trustee who initated the vote to demolish.So if you call the friends liars about the 1000 signs and insist that there were only 100 then I guess that you are callling that trustee a liar also.
3 of your mis-truths uncovered.However you will probably keep on calling the friends “liars."
Please Challenger don’t confuse my post name [dupe supporter]
with the post name [dupage dude]and I {dupe supporter ) never said that you were deb dupe,and I never accused you of that.
So it looks like you are left holding the bag of accusations.
Challenger (SIR) Maybe you should scroll up to August 10 and read (for the hard of reading)(Challenger) what Ms.Dynako(A FRIEND)REALLY said.
“The petition(signature)drive WAS MEANT TO INCLUDE ALL THAT WOULD BENEFIT FROM THE THEATRE.THAT INCLUDED KIDS."As far as the Wheaton Grand they contributed about 100 signatures to our cause.Some of those people were Lomardians."
Challenger (SIR )Wasn’t Ms.DYNAKO (A FRIEND )telling you that NOT ALL of those signatures were from Lombard residents?
Challenger, what the friends said PUBLICLY at the board meeting
was that those signatures were gathered at cruise nights and the taste of Lombard.They also said that not all of the signatures were from Lombard residents.The signatures were gathered from people that either live in Lombard or who were spending their time and money in Lombard.
So there you go anti-preservationist,another one of your mis-truths uncovered.
Challenger (SIR)If the 100 signatures gathered at the Wheaton Grand Theatre trouble you then just change your tally to 4400 signatures.I don’t think that the friends would object.
Challenger stated that the Friends said “4500” signatuers all from Lombard but some were not.“ Forgive me (SIR)but you are WRONG.What was publicly said by the Friends was that NO, not all of the signatures were from Lombard residents.That point was made clear from the begining.
What was said was that those signatures came from people who wanted to save an historical building that was on the National register of historical buildings and was voted to be demolished.Be those signatures be from Lombard residents or not. What was also said was that those signatures were gathered in Lombard at the cruise night events and at the taste of Lombard event.That is what was publicly said when those signatures were presented to the board.
Let me repeat (SIR) The friends NEVER said that those signatures were all from Lombard residents.
Challenger I never said that you (challenger) were against condos.
Let me repeat (SIR) for the hard of reading (challenger)
I said that you were against the theatre and against the R.S.C.
proposed development.
Please (SIR) READ first.Don’t let your anger and hatred for the friends get the best of what little good judgement that you have remaining.
You made charges that one of the posters has an agenda.
Please tell us just “WHAT ” is your agenda.It certainly can’t be saving the theatre because from reading all of your posts,all you do is criticize.What positive statements or suggestions have you ever made to those who wanted to save and restore the theatre?
Deb Dupe I have to agree with you on one statement that you made.
“It really doesn’t matter anymore since the 4 trustees voted yes to demolish the theatre and prepare the site for development."
Please make no mistake.I know fully well that the EXECUTION of the theatre is near.
However I find it amusing when you say "those six Lombard residents are not against the theatre.They are simply against the tax funded R.S.C. plan that so fails the village of Lombard residents despite the claims of it being a ” fully “funded plan"
The revisions to the R.S.C. DEVELOPMENT proposal have made the Theatre restoration FULLY FUNDED.This is what the village of Lombard has Publicly stated.Lombard village president Mueller has publicly stated and is on the record as being in favor of using T.I.F. increment funds for the theatre restoraion.
I find it puzzling that those six residents that you suggest are not against the theatre would at least have spoken up and let the trustees know that they would not want the theatre demolished WITHOUT AN ALTERNATIVE PLAN FOR DEVELOPMENT IN PLACE.
That is if they were really interested in saving the theatre.
Any talk of "adaptive reuse "was never mentioned at the meeting BEFORE the vote was taken to demolish the theatre.Any talk about adaptive reuse would be moot after the demolish order was passed.
My belief is that adaptive reuse wouldn’t happen anyway,based on past actions (or lack thereof ) by the village in regards to the old village hall and Lincoln School buildings.It was talked about but it NEVER happened.
Deb Dupe again states mis-information.For the record I will repeat a portion of what I have previously said.Duper Supporter said
“The condo and retail will pay realestate taxes on the assessed fair market value.THEN the YEARLY INCREMENTED INCREASES of those realestate taxes are what will be used for the theatre restoration”.
Deb Dupe stated that when a 9.5 million in TIF is diverted to the theatre T.I.F.until 2024,there is no victory for any other taxing body.The only winner is the theatre.
The only T.I.F. increment that will be used for the theatre restoration are from the theatre properties only.
The obvious WINNER would be the cause of HISTORICAL PRESERVATION.
The obvious winner would be Lombard for taking a positive stand for
Historical preservation.
Deb dupe said “T.I.F. is not a bad thing.Applied correctly it drives development for the public good in our downtown area."
I AGREE 100% with that statement.As a supporter of the theatre I feel that restoring the theatre and using it as a cultural arts center combined with the mixed use (condo and retail)adjacent would certainly be for the public good in our downtown area.
Deb Dupe stated that the Lincoln Square development and T.I.F. AGREEMENT was certainly part of the public discussion and the numbers are there for public scrutiny.
I will have to DISAGREE with that statement because attended board meetings and reviewed village board minutes and all legislative files on the proposed and agreed T.I.F. REBATES ,SALES TAX AND RESTAURANT TAX REBATES to the developer .There was NOT even a mention of a PRO FORMA for discussion.UNLIKE all of the theatre plans that have been PUBLICLY ANALYZED,SCRUTINIZED,DISECTED,DEBATED
and OPINIONATED.
Deb dupe stated "kindly take the T.I.F and tax discussions elsewhere.
Nothing would please me more than not to have any discussions about T.I.F. and taxes on this website.If the mis information
and the mis representation of the facts about the ENTIRE R.S.C.
PROPOSAL on the T.I.F.would stop.
I certainly hope that Deb Dupe extends the statement "kindly take the T.I. F. and tax discussions elsewhere"to the following POST NAMES.
1 CONCERNED TAXPAYER
2 DEB DUPE
3 CHALLENGER
4 MARISA SCHOFF
5 DUPE NEIGHBOR
6 LOMBARD RESIDENT
All of the above are against the theatre and the R.S.C. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.All of the above have posted statements against T.I.F.
increment financing for the theatre but not any other development
or grants that use T.I.F.INCREMENTED FUNDS.
Deb Dupe ,I have NOT implied that the village cut any “undertable deal” as you have said.AlL that I said is that no other development proposal that required the use of T.I.F. FUNDS has been PUBLICLY SCRUTINIZED,DISECTED,DEBATED and OPINIONATED as ALL OF THE THEATRE PROPOSALS. If I am WRONG then please correct me with the proper related facts.
Again Deb Dup makes statements that are at the very least very mis-leading.
As the R.S.C.development proposal was presented , R.S.C.(the developer)
would PURCHASE the south properties and the retail property for development.Once this land is purchased it then ceases to be municipal property and becomes REAL PROPERTY and is put on the tax rolls as assessed real property.The condo and retail will pay realestate taxes on the assessed fair market value.Then the yearly tax incremented increases of those realestate taxes are what will be used for the theatre restoration.The original assessed fair market value of the REAL PROPERTY TAXES ARE STILL COLLECTED AND DISTRIBUTED.
As the village of Lombard and R.S.C. have stated,the estimated total
T.I.F. increment funds that will be generated by the condo and retail development from tax year 2007 through 2023 would be $9,588,734.00. The T.I.F. district extension has to have occured and the condo and retail completed by year 2007.
As I have previously stated the condo and retail development to the west of the theatre in the downtown T.I.F.was funded with T.I.F. INCREMENTED REBATES,sales tax and restaurant tax rebates to the developer for the total length of the T.I.F. district.Also the development was on MUNICIPAL PROPERTY as is the theatre property.
Unfortunately,NO PRO FORMA ANALYSIS of the development was brought forth or made public [uNLIKE all of the theatre proposals which have been PUBICLY SCRUTINIZED,DISECTED, DEBATED and OPINIONATED.]
As far as the $400,000.00 amount of T.I.F.funding rebated to a developer.That T.I.F.rebate of $400,000.00 is to a developer of property in an entirely different T.I.F. district.(St.Charles Rd. East)
In response to Deb Dupe about property taxes being diverted for 18 years:the statement is mis-leading because what is being diverted is just the tax increment increase NOT ALL OF the property taxes.This same procedure was granted to a condo/retail developer just west of the theatre.
T.I.F.fund rebates and retail sales tax rebates and restaurant tax rebates were given to the developer for the life of the T.I.F. district.Again the issue is the same:T.I.F.increment funds from the condo and retail to pay a developer to develope the property.The increase in the property tax (increment only)that will be paid by the condo owners and the retail owners will go to the the developer.
I wish that Deb dupe would explain the difference (if any )between “DEMOLISH AND PREPARE THE SITE FOR DEVELOPMENT” and
“DEMOLISH AND PREPARE THE SITE FOR REDEVELOPMENT."
Deb Dupe say’s "you” friends always miscontrue the truth.
I challenge Deb Dupe to show me where and when I have miscontrued the TRUTH.
For the record, I have not mentioned one word about a convention center or any Yorktown development or any Yorktown redevelopment.
It’s a funny thing about all of those statements being presented about taking 18 years to pay off the bonds to restore the theatre.Quite mis-leading at best.
What was needed was an extension of the exising T.I.F. for 18 years on the Theatre properties ONLY. Just the Theatre properties ONLY.The rest of the properties in the T.I.F. DISTRICT
would NOT be included in the T.I.F. EXTENSION.
The same people who objected to this latest T.I.F. extension for just the theatre property only said nothing when the last main street TIF was extended for the WHOLE downtown T.I.F.district.
Adaptive reuse of history was supposed to happen when condos were built
on Lombard’s OLD village hall and the OLD Lincoln School properties.
Adaptive reuse never happened.But it what was supposed to happen.
About the over abundance of condos.I may have a tendancy to agree because I have seen an explosion of condos in Lombard
However condos, with a mixed use retail,and restaurants and a FULLY FUNDED restored historical theatre on Main St. downtown Lombard.What
can be be wrong with that kind of development?
Time will tell what FINALLY gets developed on the theatre properties.As of right now,for the record,Lombard has said PUBLICLY that there are no plans for the property.Time will tell us if more condos go there and if T.I.F.funds are used to entice developers.
As the theatre foundation and the Village of Lombard has stated “There is no funding gap in the current proposal”.The restoration of the dupage theatre will NOT RAISE PROPERTY TAXES.
There has been no support for a library on the theatre site by any of the village trustees as far as I am aware of.
However none of this makes any difference because as the law now states “to demolish and prepare the site for development.”
I will answer the question this way.I have heard bashing the actions of the trustees who voted for the demolition of the theatre when there was a plan for development of the south property that included the theatre restoration.I have heard of no plan for the demolition site once it is demolished.I have heard that some developers may be interested in the site but no specifics.
That is what is wrong.Demolish without an alternative.Demolish a historical site without any plans for the site.Once it is demolished
who knows what could be considered for the site
Another thing that puzzles me.If the majority of the village board were dissatisfied with the friends or the foundation,the village board could have come to a consenses and requested that a entrely new foundation group of members be installed ,if they really wanted to save the theatre.
To say that the friends were unhappy and would do their best to defeat those who voted to demolish is politics.I defend their actions to work for and support new candidates.
As far as the $1million grant.One should never say never.
It is quite evident that the vote was decided 2x2.
There are 2 ways to count to four.
Challanger I have assumed nothing.
Let me rephase.Do you think that an entirely new group completely void of any old group members would be able to influence the village board to reverse their decision to demolish the theatre and prepare for development?
I find it ironic that when you say that the “friends have burned to many bridges” you don’t mention the BRIDGES that the Village of Lombard burned when they formally refused $1.3 million in federal and state grants awarded to Lombard for the restoration of the theatre.If there is even the slightest possibility of saving the theatre,Lombard blew $1.3 million .
Talk about “BURNING BRIDGES"
That money is gone.Won’t come back.That money won’t even go to another municipiality.That is the bridge that the village trustees burned.Not the "friends”.