High Bidder's Attorney Has Different Interpretation Of Law In Aurora Lot Sale

Tuesday, August 27, 2019 at 8:08 AM

By Mike Perleberg @mikedup84

The bidding process for a small piece of land could lead to a lawsuit between a city employee and the Aurora Park Board.

Google Maps image

(Aurora, Ind.) - The attorney for an Aurora city employee in a property purchase spat with a candidate for mayor has issued a response threatening legal action against the city.

We told you last week that James Pickett bid $3,000 for an approximately 100x50-foot parcel on Drake Lane. The undevelopable lot is situated under power lines between Pickett’s home and that of city councilman Mark Drury. Drury had also submitted a sealed bid for the lot, but only for $2,000.

Pickett’s attorney, Lane Siekman, wrote to the Aurora Park Board on Friday, August 23 stating that his client has maintained that city lot voluntarily for 25 years. “He takes pride in the appearance of his residence and this purchase is an opportunity for him to continue this maintenance as part of his real estate.”

Drury and his wife told Eagle Country 99.3 last week that they would like to purchase the lot in an effort to make whole a property with historic Civil War ties, which includes their home. Prior to entering the 2019 race for Aurora mayor, Drury identified the lot as being owned by the park board and asked that it be put up for sale.

Aurora city attorney Alan Miller in a statement cited a state law which gives Drury, the lower bidder, the opportunity to submit a second bid even though he now has knowledge of the higher bid. Pickett, meanwhile, would not be permitted to make a second bid.

“After explaining the process to the Board and to those submitting bids, it was clear that no one---including myself to some degree---was happy with the law on this issue,” Miller said.

In his response to the park board and shared with Eagle Country 99.3, Siekman states that Miller is mistakenly interpreting that law.

“The Park Board’s narrow reading of the statute by placing an emphasis on the word ‘other’ clearly provides an unfair advantage to the lowest bidder and in turn limits the potential value to be received by the Park Board. A more equitable position would be to allow both eligible abutting landowners to submit one additional offer,” Siekman wrote.

Siekman states that unless the park board allows Pickett to also submit an additional bid, there could be legal action against the city. He adds that there is nothing in the statute which keeps Pickett, the initial high bidder, from bidding again.

Miller said last week he advised the Aurora Park Board to not sell the property, but the board may not make a decision until next month. Miller has not shared a response to Siekman’s letter.