Park Board Mulls Whether to Charge New Member in Toilet Incidents

Updated: 2:30 p.m.

Six months before his April 5 election to the Park Board, Mark Roman was observed allegedly filling a portable toilet at Washington Park with water from the park’s fountain.

It was the third such episode in 11 days and it may lead to charges by the Park District, if a majority of sitting members of the board agree. No action was taken at the board’s April 7 meeting due to the absence of Commissioner Janet Barr, who had supported Roman’s candidacy for the board.

Following the meeting, Commissioner Cathy Mahoney said it’s the board’s responsibility to protect the assets of the Park District. None of the commissioners referred to Roman by name in discussing the matter, which also had been briefly discussed at the board’s March 17 meeting.

Regarding Park Board's discussion, "All I have to say, is that the individuals on the board should take the time to open a dictionary and look up the definition of vandalism," Roman said today in an email. "I believe vandalism is defined as damage or defacement of property.

"I don't believe that anything that occurred last year concerning the toilet at Washington Park, meets the definition as no damage or defacement was done," he said.

Roman, whose property abuts the park, in an interview last week described the incidents as “a neighborly dispute between the Park District and myself. That dispute was amicably settled. At this point, it’s pretty much been resolved.”

“I don’t think there’s really any issue in stirring this pot,” he said.

Five Incidents Logged by Park District

The Park District filed three separate  s after the portable toilet at Washington Park was tampered with last October. In an Oct. 4 email obtained by Patch under the Freedom of Information Act, Kevin Rozell, an assistant foreman, informed Todd Reese, director of parks, of the problem.

“The port-o-potty at Washington Park is continuously getting pushed to the far northwest parking space and being filled with liquid one inch from the top of the seat,” he wrote. “It happened three times since the grand opening.”

Rozell said in the email he had filed a police report that day.

On Oct. 11, the portable toilet was again filled and a service sign taped to the door. The district reported the incident to police, who attempted unsuccessfully to obtain fingerprints from the sign.

The Park District also considered putting a surveillance camera on the toilet in the hope of identifying the perpetrator, and met with police to consider how to eliminate the incidents, which had cost the district more than $300 in staff time and servicing costs.

Four days later, a Downers Grove Public Works employee twice observed Roman filling a five-gallon white bucket with water from the park’s fountain and carrying the bucket inside the portable toilet, according to a police report. Later that day, Roman contacted Police Chief Robert Porter at askthechief@downers.us referencing reports on the toilet incidents that appeared in the Downers Grove Reporter, and asking whether filling a portable toilet with water constitutes an illegal act.

When officers interviewed Roman on Oct. 18, he told them, “I can’t speak to you about the toilet other than to say it doesn’t belong here,” according to the police report. The Park District instead should have built a bathroom facility with “real plumbing” when the park was remodeled, Roman told the officers.

However, when asked if he had been pouring water into the toilet, Roman told police “I don’t think I should or will answer that,” according to the report.

Roman also repeatedly told the officers "his strong disagreement about pouring water into the portable toilet as being a crime of any kind and felt that as a taxpayer he felt he has every right to fill his bucket with water from the public fountain and pour that water in the public portable toilet," according to the police report.

On Oct. 18, Roman again contacted Porter via email suggesting, “a simple reply back to my original email might have been slightly more appropriate than sending multiple officers to directly confront me.”

“The Park District has provided a portable toilet for the use of the general public,” Roman wrote in his email to Porter. “If anyone chooses to place water into this toilet they are free to do so. Capacity in the toilet is being provided as a free public good. The fact that the portable toilet has limited capacity to hold water is not and should not be a concern to any individual using that capacity.”

A day later, in an email to Park Board members, Roman complained that he could smell the portable toilet from his home less than 50 feet away and asked them to direct administrators to remove it.

Portable Toilet 'Too Close to Neighbors'

“It the Park District thought it necessary/desirable to have toilet facilities at Washington Park, it had the perfect opportunity to build appropriate toilets to the neighbor(hood) when it was designing the changes to the park during the storm water retention rebuild of the park,” Roman wrote.

“The portable toilet is too close to the neighbors,” Roman said last week. “It’s an eyesore and, depending how the wind blows, you can smell the toilet in the park.”

He told Patch the episode with the toilet contributed to his decision to run for the Park Board. “The Park District didn’t ask the neighbors. I think the Park District has lost touch with its constituency and the neighbors.”

Park District Administrator Dan Cermak said staff members checked the portable toilet for odors, but couldn’t detect any. The district has provided a portable toilet near the park’s softball field for 25 years without complaint, he said. A second toilet was installed on the north end of the parking lot during reconstruction of the park. That toilet was removed to the south side of the lot in conjunction with the park’s Grand Opening because “we didn’t want kids crossing the lot to use it,” Cermak said.

The district opted not to proceed with a permanent restroom facility at the park, which would have cost an estimated $300,000 to $350,000, Cermak said. The decision whether or not to replace the portable toilet this season will be made after the district evaluates park usage patterns, he said.

Cermak said the district attempts to prosecute most incidents of vandalism to portable toilets, although “we’ve never had one like this before.” Incidents typically involve vandals torching and burning down the units, he said.

The decision to press charges is usually handled by staff, Cermak said, adding “the Director of Parks discussed whether to pursue charges.” According to the police report, charges of malicious mischief could have been pressed under village ordinance. The Park District also could issue tickets.

"The Park District was the complainant for the multiple incidents at
Washington Park," said Sgt. Dave Bormann of the Downers Grove Police Dept. "Once an offender was identified, it was up to the Park District to authorize the signing of a Malicious Mischief Village Ordinance against the offender. The Park District advised that they were going to hold off signing a complaint. They were advised by the officer investigating this incident that they have 18 months to sign a complaint."

No Restitution Made

“Once we found out who was doing it and got his promise to stop, we decided that really was our main goal,” Cermak said. No restitution was made for expenses incurred, he said. 

Board President Bob Gelwicks said Cermak had "at some point" informed the Park Board “the situation had occurred and staff was working with the police. I was under the impression we had proceeded and filed charges.”

When Roman filed as a candidate for the Park Board in December, the question came up again, Gelwicks said. But with four out of five Park Board members up for re-election, there were concerns that any enforcement action would appear political, he said. On the other hand, “facts ought to be available to the community when voting.”

“My whole point is this: I think we ought to have a board policy that staff automatically follows through on these incidents, so staff doesn’t subjectively have to decide to file or not each time,” Gelwicks said. 

Gelwicks said the Downers Grove Community Advocates, which had endorsed Roman, Mahoney and himself for the board, were aware of the Washington Park incidents. On March 21, the organization emailed Gelwicks, Mahoney and Fred Gusel—who had been endorsed in 2009 but passed over in favor of Roman this year—about the incident.

“Since time is of the essence, please respond ASAP,” the DGCA instructed in the email, which asked why the incident wasn’t made public, why the Park Board didn’t bring charges, and whether restitution was made.

DGCA President Dan McInerney said he wasn’t aware an email had been sent to the incumbents, but said the group’s board had reviewed and discussed the police reports naming Roman.

“We didn’t feel it would be cause for us to change our endorsement based on reading the incident report and the fact that charges were not filed,” he said. “We really don’t do background checks. We rely on the candidates to provide information.”