Long Grove trustees split over lease to turn church parking into public spaces; vote outcome disputed

The Long Grove Village Board spent more than three hours debating a proposal to lease the Long Grove Community Church parking lot for public use, a plan staff said would add roughly 170 spaces to the downtown supply.

Village manager Mr. Sparkman told trustees the draft lease would let the village assume all maintenance — resurfacing, snow removal and striping — in exchange for public access and that the church is still reviewing the agreement. "This would add approximately 170 spaces to our existing 402 public parking spaces in the downtown, which would represent about a 42% increase," Sparkman said.

Why it matters

Trustees and residents framed the proposal as a near-term fix to downtown parking pressure from new businesses and festivals, but several trustees said they worried about long-term trade-offs: subsidizing private property, locking the village into a long-term maintenance burden, and whether a 15-year initial lease with three possible five-year renewals was appropriate.

Engineering options and costs

Village engineer Jeff presented two reconstruction strategies and cost estimates. He described a lower-cost option (remove and replace to a 3 3/4-inch asphalt depth) that he said would provide an initial service life of about 15 years; the initial cost for that approach was discussed in the transcript as roughly $176,500 (engineer’s early estimate) and later clarified in the discussion to a 15-year cost near $198,500 when pavement treatments and recommended follow-ups were included. The heavier 5-inch resurfacing option carried a higher upfront bid estimate (about $264,600) but Jeff said it would extend service life beyond 20 years and could reduce long-term replacement cycles. Jeff summarized the later reconciled totals by saying the lifecycle cost to reach 30 years was approximately $570,000 for the thinner option and about $480,000 for the 5-inch option, and he noted those totals depend on whether the lease is extended.

Trustees’ positions and legal/financial questions

Trustee Gayton said, "I love that idea actually," noting near-term demand from new downtown businesses and calling the plan a practical solution. Trustee Harris called the lower-cost option "a great stop gap situation" and said it looked financially reasonable for a shorter initial term. Mayor Bill, who participated remotely, told colleagues he had proposed the idea at a prior workshop and supported testing it as a near-term measure: "I supported putting this on this agenda and putting it through the test to see if the rest of the trustees support it."

Other trustees pressed staff on alternative approaches (straight rental, limited-term rent, building public lots or future parking garages) and on how the village would handle liability. When asked whether the church would contribute financially to the repairs, the board was told the village would be solely responsible for capital work under the draft lease.

Motion and disputed outcome

Trustee Harris moved to approve the 3 3/4-inch resurfacing option; Trustee Gayton seconded. The transcript records a roll-call sequence with votes recorded in the room (Harris: yes; Gayton: yes; Barski: no; (Trustee) Chamille: no; Okconor: no; Tanucci: abstain; President Jacob: yes). After the roll call the meeting contains conflicting statements about passage: one speaker recorded the motion as "passed," while a later exchange among trustees and participants characterized the result as a 3–3 tie (with one abstention) and said the motion did not have a majority. The transcript therefore contains contradictory records of whether the motion carried; the board did not reach a clear, undisputed majority outcome on the record provided.

What’s next

Trustees asked staff to report back with additional information and to confirm the church’s position; several trustees urged exploring short-term rental alternatives while the village’s downtown parking study and consultant work continue. The board left the matter available to return to a future meeting.

Attribution: Quotes and attributions in this article are drawn directly from the meeting transcript and are attributed to speakers recorded there (Jeff [village engineer], Mr. Sparkman [village manager], Mayor Bill, Trustee Gayton, Trustee Harris).