Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the LaFox RDA topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Campton Hills board approves LaFox redevelopment agreement despite library and school concerns
Summary
The Village of Campton Hills approved ordinance 26-40, adopting a redevelopment agreement for the LaFox Road TIF district. Library and school officials urged written TIF payment procedures and an independent impact fee; trustees voted to adopt the RDA with one recorded nay.
The Campton Hills Village Board voted to adopt ordinance 26-40, approving a redevelopment agreement by and between the Village and Chodine Construction Company LLC for the LaFox Road Tax Increment Financing (TIF) district.
Library and school officials urged the board to delay or modify the agreement, raising concerns about how TIF reimbursements and developer donations would reach taxing districts. Christine Lazarus, director of the Geneva Public Library, told trustees the project will increase the library's service population "by approximately 10%" and asked that the village "memorialize that process in writing, so there's a clear transparent process and procedure for all parties going forward." Britney Theiss, counsel for the Geneva Library District, reiterated requests for draft RDA language, comparable impact-fee analyses and a mechanism for annual reimbursements under the TIF Act.
Andy Barrett, superintendent of Geneva Community Unit School District 304, said the district negotiated a separate developer donation agreement referenced in the RDA and requested more time for collaboration; he asked the board to table action or direct the village attorney to incorporate the district's previously shared revisions into ordinance 26-40.
Village counsel and staff told trustees the RDA follows statutory priorities under the TIF Act and the Debt Act and that the agreement, as drafted, lays out the flow of increment per state law. Attorney Forte said the RDA does not preclude the developer from later entering a donation agreement with a third-party taxing district and that the language referencing reimbursements is intended to comport with statutory requirements.
The board voted on ordinance 26-40 after extended discussion. Roll call recorded Trustee Hassenberger as the lone nay; other trustees voted aye and the motion passed. Trustees and staff noted additional implementation steps remain, including sanitary district agreements, special service area ordinances and financing arrangements tied to how the developer secures project funding.
The ordinance and subsequent steps will allow the developer to pursue financing and to close on property transactions needed to convey open-space parcels to the forest preserve as previously discussed.
