Letter to the Editor: Transparency Versus Opaqueness

At a time when ‘transparency’ is one of the buzzwords  in political discourse, we have a situation with Lexington Homes, the former Applied Composites property, and the Comprehensive Plan Amendment of 2007 that is murky, to say the least.

It is practically a textbook case for how the system should not work. Applied Composites went out of business in 2005.  St. Charles—333 North Sixth Street, LLC  purchased twenty-five plus acres of land, zoned for manufacturing, and several buildings from Applied Composites in August 2006 for $3,825,000. The purchaser immediately took out a mortgage with J.P. Morgan Chase Bank for $6,940,653. That means they got a $3,115,653 tax-free windfall right out of the gate. Who is St. Charles—333North Sixth Street, LLC? The listed representative is Ms. Marilyn Magafas, whose contact email address is at FAPLLC.com. 

Go to www.fapllc.com and you find yourself on the web page of First American Properties, LLC.  The Chairman of the Board of FAPLLC is Ronald J. Benach, who throughout his four decade career in construction has owned 3-H Building Corporation, Lexington Homes, Concord Homes, and Lexington Homes, once again.  By the way, Ms. Magafas is the long-time secretary of Mr. Benach.  So, from the very beginning, Lexington Homes,LLC,  which is one of several entities related to FAPLLC,  has been and is the owner of the property. In August 2006, there is communication between Mr. Rober Hupp,  then Director of Community Development for the City of St. Charles,  and Mr. Charles Hanlon of Land Vision, Inc. about doing a land use recommendation plan for Applied Composites and surrounding properties. 

At the Sept. 11, 2006 Planning and Development Committee meeting Mr. Hupp told the Committee,  “It was determined that with the potential for redevelopment of the former Applied Composites site it would be a good time to do a land use study for the property.”  In recommending Land Vision to do the study, Mr Hupp said, “The consultant being recommended is also being employed by the developer of the site for their Site Plan design…and the developer has agreed to reimburse the City for the cost of the study ($29,457).”  The study was approved by the City Council at its September 18, 2006 meeting.  So, Land Vision was working for both the City and Lexington Homes and  yet it was really only being paid by the developer.  Now, that may not be illegal, but it certainly seems like there would have been a conflict of interest.  It would be almost impossible for any person or agency in that position to do a fair and objective job.

Jay Thomas

23 North 7th Street,  St. Charles