Village of Johnsburg’s dispute with Pistakee Yacht Club
Overview
Due to the actions by the Village of Johnsburg (VOJ) administration and some of its trustees concerning a variance previously granted by community leaders, the Pistakee Yacht Club, a not-for-profit volunteer run organization, is unsure of its future as a sailing and boating club on Pistakee Bay.
The village has indicated their intent to issue fines if boats not owned by the club are kept at the club. The club does not own any boats.
The variance provided for club use of the property in question and the long-standing practice is for members to keep boats at the club.
After failed attempts to come to an understanding on the intent of the variance, the clubs only recourse was to seek a declaratory judgement from the courts on the variance.
How you can help.
Send a note to your trustee and the village president that you do not support their use of tax payer dollars to interfere with the long stand use of the property of a local not-for-profit organization that has been a part of the community since 1897.
Tell VOJ you do not agree that this is a reasonable enforcement of the zoning ordinance.
Use social media to communicate your support for honoring variances and ask your trustees to stop wasting tax dollars disputing a variance.
Background
The Pistakee Yacht Club was founded in 1897 by community members who provided land on Pistakee Bay for the yacht club. Today, the yacht club is a not-for-profit, run by a small group of volunteers, which encourages and enables participation in sailing and boating on the Chain O’ Lakes, by creating a community that supports one another.
In 1970 the owner of 4 residential lots adjacent to the club secured a variance from McHenry County, so that the lots could be used by the club. An ongoing concern was congestion in the neighborhood. Once the variance was granted the lots were then sold to the club for a nominal fee.
Since that time the lots have been used for car, boat and trailer parking, both short- and long-term, in support of club operations.
The variance was recognized during the Sunnyside-Johnsburg merger and has been reflected on the zoning until 2024.
A brief timeline of events
On 03/31/23 the VOJ accepted an anonymous complaint that was factually incorrect, concerning the backlots.
The village did not follow up with the club to determine the accuracy of the complaint.
On 05/04/23 Edwin P. Hettermann, the village president, sent a letter to the club stating that the variance does not support the current club usage of the lots and that the lots needed to be vacated by June 30th 2023 or the village would issue fines between $25 to $500 per day for each item on the lots.
The club requested a meeting with the village and, through meetings and communication, it was determined we could not agree on what the variance allowed.
The only recourse available to the club was to seek a declaratory judgement concerning the variance.
The village countersued delaying the judge making a declaratory judgement on the variance. This turned the simple request into a long-drawn-out legal affair involving expensive discovery.
The village continued taking actions throughout the fall 2023 and winter of 2024.
o The village added individuals as third parties to the lawsuit.
o The village added the original club house property to the lawsuit.
o The village changed the zoning ordinances adding language concerning the removal of variances.
o In a subsequent meeting, the village board voted to remove our variance from the zoning maps. This vote was not unanimous.
o The village requested, through the courts, an inspection of the club’s septic system including surveying of the property and an inspection of boats.
o The village sends a community enforce officer to take pictures on an almost daily basis.
The club again requested a face-to-face meeting which produced a general agreement on the use of the backlots which included short- and long-term parking.
The village took the general agreement and structured it into a contractual agreement which had conditions the club could not afford and would not have the volunteers to implement. The club volunteers would be funding and providing the labor to operate the club while the village would have control of many aspects of the club with associated reporting to the village. The agreement would have nullified the variance.
After this round of negotiations failed, the club amended its declaratory judgement claim to include a wrongful taking claim.
·The village sought dismissal and striking of claims.
The judge denied all but one of the requests and asked the club to replead one count before proceeding with the case.
We are hoping eventually we will get a continuance for the use of our land to operate a sailing and boating club on Pistakee Bay and host the Community Sailing School @ Pistakee.
Today the legal actions have cost the club tens of thousands of dollars we hoped to use on building repairs. We suspect the village is spending as much if not more since they are using outside contractors to complete inspections.
Neighbors have gathered signatures and provided a letter to the trustees showing support for the club, however the Village continues to assert that their actions reflect the need to protect the neighborhood.
