Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public commenter alleges corruption in proposed residential zoning changes
Summary
An emailed public comment read into the record accused Forest Park officials of corruption and secrecy in preparing residential zoning amendments, singled out commissioners and raised concerns about a cited 60‑unit project and a land purchase; the council did not respond on the record.
An email from resident Thomas Kovac alleging corruption and secrecy in the village's handling of proposed residential zoning changes was read into the record at the Forest Park Village Council meeting on June 9.
Kovac wrote that "the preparation submission and handling of a proposal to amend the residential zoning code continues to manifest corruption, incompetence, and graft," and he said Commissioner Ryan Niro (as named in the comment) had refused to disclose the developer or location of a 60‑unit apartment project he referenced at a September 2024 meeting. "What are you hiding?" the comment asked. The submission also criticized Commissioner Maria Maxim for supporting higher height and setback changes and raised questions about a park district land purchase and local relationships between officials and business owners.
The clerk read Kovac's email aloud; no council member offered an on‑the‑record response to the allegations during the meeting. The comment named former plan commission chairman Paul Barbahann and referenced an Old Pines Oakleaf site, claimed a park district purchase of that parcel for $1,000,000, and questioned perceived conflicts involving "Tim Gillian" becoming a park district member and local treatment of certain businesses.
The council did not take action on the zoning code itself at the June 9 meeting; the allegations were presented only as public comment. The record shows the email was entered and read during the public comment period and no deliberation or rebuttal followed at that time.
The clerk recorded the comment under public comment; the council then continued to routine business, including adopting several resolutions and listening to administrative and commissioner reports. Any formal consideration of zoning amendments would require placement on a future agenda and follow statutory notice and hearing requirements.
Next steps: The village clerk's reading of the comment places the allegations on the public record; the council did not schedule any immediate follow‑up during the June 9 meeting.
