.

Barsanti Considers Litigation Against Palatine After 'No' Vote on Chickens

The Palatine village council unanimously voted against allowing a chicken coop in the backyard at a residence in the 500 block of Daniels Road. The petitioners are now considering litigation against the village for violation of due process.

The tone was slighly contentious at the village council meeting Monday night, as resident Vanessa Barsati attempted to plead her case so she could install a chicken coop in her backyard at 511 Daniels Road. 

"Previous issues [with a neighbor] have not been resolved, this was tabled with the intention that something might be worked out here," said Aaron Del Mar, District 1 councilman. 

.

Barsanti said Harrison refused to speak with her about her her concerns to try and find a resolution.

"If I am not able to speak to the concerns [of Ann Harrson], you will be violating my due process. I have substantial evidence from realtors, people who own chickens, that Mrs. Harrison's conerns are not valid," Barsanti said. "This is a violation of my procedural due process."

"The public hearing is closed," said Patrick Brankin, village attorney. "Mrs. Barsanti has been afforded her due process rights."

.

During an August committe of the whole meeting of the village council is when Harrison presented her concerns and the village council voted 6-1 against the petition, but allowed it to be tabled until Barsanti and Harrison could come to some sort of consensus on the issue. 

Barsanti said after the meeting Monday, she is weighing her options. 

"I have submitted a preservation notice to the village, it alerts them they must save all evidence regarding this issue," Barsanti said.

I have evidence that Ann Harrison's concerns are not valid, and because I feel I have been denied the opportunity to present that information, I am considering litigation against the village, Barsanti said. 

Stay up-to-date on your local news by signing up for the FREE Palatine Patch Newsletter!

Scott November 14, 2012 at 12:57 PM
Preserve evidence? What 'evidence' is there to preserve?
ChiJaki November 14, 2012 at 01:07 PM
It is amazing what 1 person can stop this from getting approved. I have a strange feeling that there is more then meets the eye behind this. Like maybe someone on the council not wanting the chickens but are using the neighbor as the reason verses being the bad guy.
Scott November 14, 2012 at 02:26 PM
ChiJaki - if you were the objector you might feel differently.
Jim November 14, 2012 at 02:30 PM
Geeze - I didn't get my way......so now I am going to kick my feet on the floor and hold my breath till I turn blue if I don't get what I want! Neighbors dont want it, was not zoned for it, village llstened, and did not go the way you wanted. Time to move on.
Ron November 14, 2012 at 03:50 PM
“More than meets the eye behind this? “ Get a life…
Blargh HereIam November 14, 2012 at 04:50 PM
I would like to clarify - and the Village of Palatine has said this as well: This was for a single resident use on half-acre property. NOT a blanket appeal for backyard hens in Palatine. This was never something that was to allow chickens for the village of Palatine. I went last night to watch, and it was sad that the young lady didn't even get a chance to speak her case. Even if they vote no, your own Local government that you live in and pay taxes for should at least let you say something for yourself.
Frank Reiss November 14, 2012 at 04:52 PM
The concern resident about predatory animals, guess what there are going to be these animals with or without these chickens. Maybe we shouldn't have small dogs and cats they attract coyotes. This is America and if someone wants to raise chickens for food they should be able to. This is where government needs to get their nose out of our business.
Jerry I. November 14, 2012 at 05:04 PM
There is definitely more than meets the eye. I The council member for this district is actually good friends with the objecting neighbor.
Lynn November 14, 2012 at 06:17 PM
I was there last night as well. This isn't just about chickens anymore. We have a local governement making decisions based on there own agenda. The couple was told they would have the opportunity to present additional evidence. Last night they were denied that opportunity. Councilman Kleg told one of our supporters, "it doesn't matter what evidence they would have presented. I never would have voted for it because I just don't think it's right." Others who didn't have an objection didn't stand up for Vanessa's right to be heard. Other members of the town were not given the right to be heard. Is this who we really who we want running our town?
Lynn November 14, 2012 at 06:24 PM
Jerry I., you are right. Scott Lamerand is friends with the opposing neighbor. I believe they even go to the same church. I have seen proof, first hand, of Scott Lamerand telling the couple they would have an opportunity to present additional testimony and evidence at last nights hearing. The tone of the council came across loud and clear. I would suggest really looking at the candidate for this upcoming election. Regardless of what the topic is being brought before them, they are serving the community, not themselves. They are obligated to hear the evidence and make a decision based on the evidence, keeping what is in the best interest of the town as a whole at the forefront.
Ellen November 14, 2012 at 06:44 PM
Your tin foil hat needs adjusting. There are plenty of people in Palatine against this.
Ellen November 14, 2012 at 06:45 PM
As a child, she must have had tantrums in the grocery store until her mommy gave her the candy bar she wanted. ;-)
Ellen November 14, 2012 at 06:49 PM
Single use??? lol How would you deny the next request if this is granted???
Ellen November 14, 2012 at 06:52 PM
In my wildest dreams I can't imagine an egg that would taste good enough to be worth all the trouble this woman has created already. Why not just move if it's that important?
Jerry I. November 14, 2012 at 07:06 PM
Ellen, you are flat out rude, condescending, and frankly, make inappropriate intentionally argumentative comments all over Patch to get a rise out of people. Sometimes I agree with the principles you do, and sometimes I don't, but I never agree with the way you put them forward. People will take you more seriously if you are thoughtful and polite in your comments.
Joe November 14, 2012 at 07:10 PM
I live "in the neighborhood" and can speak to the thought of predatory animals. Yes, chickens will without a doubt draw predatory animals near. The feral cat population in my neighborhood (which is a few streets down) has dramatically reduced recently because of coyote's. One was torn to shreds right in my back yard a couple months ago and found by my children the next morning. My neighbors actually witnessed the attack. They still leave piles of excrement in my back yard from time to time. Add barn yard animals, in pens, to that mix in a populated area and you will have major issues.
Ellen November 14, 2012 at 07:18 PM
The fact that there is an objecting neighbor should be enough. It's not permitted. A neighbor objects to it. Enough.
Scott November 14, 2012 at 07:30 PM
The evidence *was* heard - back in July. And she got to speak again when this was voted on at the committee level. Everyone needs to understand this was voted down at the committee level already weeks ago. Last night was just a chance for the neighbors to try to come to some agreement before the council *as a whole* voted on it. (It may sound weird but thats the way democracy works). It was not to reopen the whole discussion. The petitioner had her due process.
Jerry I. November 14, 2012 at 07:47 PM
What the heck is democratic in allowing one neighbor to drown out the support of twenty others?
Scott November 14, 2012 at 08:06 PM
Jerry - the village is there protect peoples rights (even if you disagree) - regardless of how many people feel the opposite.
Lynn November 14, 2012 at 10:03 PM
"The Illinois Constitution states 'A frequent recurrence to the fundamental principles of civil government is necessary to preserve the blessings of liberty.' The fundamental principles of government are widely recognized as rule of law, representative government, consent of the governed, limited government, and democracy. Democracy is meant to ensure that each citizen has an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives." That did not happen last night and the rights of the people were not protected!!!!!
Jerry I. November 14, 2012 at 10:05 PM
Democracy is rule of government, but it is also rule of the majority. And the majority didn't rule here.
Lynn November 14, 2012 at 10:08 PM
I apparently mispelled Councilman Clegg's name. My appologies.
Lynn November 14, 2012 at 10:21 PM
I have seen copies of the email Scott Lamerand sent to the Barsanti's. Scott stated, "I will be making a motion this evening to untable the petition and place it on the agenda for the October 15th Village Council meeting where a final vote will be taken. Additional testimony can also be submitted at that time, prior to the final vote." The meeting took place last night and the public was not heard. Additional testimony was not allowed to be submitted or heard. All we wanted was a chance to be heard and a decision based on facts, not personal agendas.
Lynn November 14, 2012 at 10:34 PM
Actually, the majority of their neighbors did support it. "Permission for a special use application cannot constitutionally be withheld at the "whim or caprice" of the council or surrounding property owners. 'Mere negative attitudes toward or fear of' a special use is not a permissible bases for denying" thes application. Vanessa and Jason should have been commended for their efforts to support ecofriendly sustainability as this is no longer a fad but a necessity.
Lynn November 14, 2012 at 10:36 PM
Exactly, the community was not allowed to present their evidence or testimony.
Scott November 14, 2012 at 10:40 PM
Jerry - are you saying that Democracy says majority rules when - for example - it comes to issues of religion, free speech, etc? If so, most of what we hold dear would not be allowed since the majority may object (eg, fringe religions, flag burning, etc)
Lynn November 14, 2012 at 11:47 PM
"Democracy is meant to ensure that each citizen has an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives." That did not happen last night and the needs of the people were not protected!!!!! Equal say was not honored when assurances of equal say were made.The councilman and the mayor should be held accountable for their overall bias and actions last night. This is not because the Barsanti's didn't get their way. Cross-examination and additional testimony of the constituents was denied.
ChiTownRunnr November 15, 2012 at 12:16 AM
I suppose this is what happens when lawyers want to keep chickens.
ChiJaki November 15, 2012 at 03:30 AM
I made a comment.. it is my opinion.. There is no need to be rude in comments about my post. 1 neighbor came forth to object the chickens. So this 1 neighbor has this much power? Seems unfair to me. It is just my thought on the matter.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something