Glen Ellyn, College of DuPage battle over electronic signs

A spat over electronic signs has put a temporary halt to a portion of the College of DuPage's aggressive construction plan and could lead to fines or litigation, Glen Ellyn officials said Wednesday.

The flap comes after village officials told the school in an April letter that their new message signs violate Glen Ellyn's codes.

But school officials say the village has no jurisdiction over COD when it comes to improvements on its own grounds and the signs are necessary to provide sufficient lighting for people who walk the campus at night.

Construction crews poured foundations for some of the signs last weekend, prompting village officials to pass a resolution Monday urging COD leaders to discuss the situation with them. On Tuesday, the village issued a stop-work order, essentially cutting off construction related to the signs.

"If I've got a homeowner doing things not in conformance with the law, there's a point where you try to work things out," Village Manager Steve Jones said. "If it doesn't, you have got to take a stand."

The disagreement has been a long time in the making. In 2007, as College of DuPage began a major part of its construction push, it entered into an intergovernmental agreement with the village. Jones said that agreement gave the school very loose guidelines as it advanced its construction plans.

However, Jones said the college decided unilaterally in December 2008 to rescind that agreement. As a result, the village took the position that all sign codes once again applied to the school.

"We have had College of DuPage tell us they feel local codes do not apply to their campus," Jones said. "We have had both informal and formal discussions with them expressing concerns over this approach."

The school's associate vice president for external relations, Joe Moore, said the school plans to work with the village, despite disagreements on whether Glen Ellyn has the authority to enforce its ordinances.

"College of DuPage has always striven to maintain a cooperative spirit with the village and we will continue to do so moving forward," he said in a statement. "(However,) the college disputes the village's claimed legal authority over improvements we make to our own campus."

The school sits in the middle of several residential neighborhoods on the south end of the village. Jones said the electronic signs would not even be allowed in the village's commercial area on Roosevelt Road.

The village's resolution calls for both sides to enter into negotiations that could lead to a new intergovernmental agreement. Stormwater management, parking and right-of-way considerations also were part of the resolution.

If the school continues to violate its ordinances, the village would seek to levy fines and possibly seek an injunction.

Jones said the school would have to go through the process other residents have to go through, which would include permit applications for zoning variances and public hearings.

"We have sign codes in our town," Jones said. "The school is completely surrounded by residents. Our sign code was put together to protect residential properties and make sure we don't have property value issues."

Village President Mark Pfefferman, who served on COD's board of trustees in the early 1980s, stressed that he hoped to resolve the issue amicably.

"We value the college very much and we think of them in high regard," he said. "We are looking forward to getting past this."

Pfefferman said the preferred resolution starts with both sides sitting down for a discussion.

"When everybody sits down and talks it over, we all want the same thing," he said. "Success is not mutually exclusive."