Reprinted from Nextdoor post –
Dear Winfield 34 Parents and Guardians,
In the November 19, 2021 Parent Update, I shared that the Winfield 34 Board of Education had filed litigation against the Village of Winfield regarding Winfield TIF 2. Erroneously, I thought this would limit the amount of time and communication I would need to share regarding the TIF. After the letter to the Winfield 34 Community from Village President Carl Sorgatz regarding Town Center Revitalization and the Daily Herald article about the TIF (from which no one at the Daily Herald contacted either myself or the Board of Education), I felt that I needed to share the Board’s perspective. In August, the Winfield 34 Board of Education passed a resolution regarding TIF development. It firmly supports TIF’s for economic development but expresses concerns regarding TIF’s for municipal development. TIF 2 is solely about building the police department/village hall facility. It has nothing to do with economic development. Here’s why:
TIF 1 will generate approximately $6.7 million dollars between now and the last payments made in December of 2028 for the Village if it is left intact (see the TIF 1 only tab).
At the Village’s October 21, 2021 meeting, the Village shared that as of September 30, 2021, TIF 1 had a fund balance of just under $1.6 million dollars (see page 113).
As such, the Village has approximately $8.3 million dollars in available funds from TIF 1 through its completion.
Every property except the one for which the current police station/village hall can be developed. If the proposed police department/village hall is developed, it would include a property swap within the TIF, thus the redevelopment or non-redevelopment does not change the amount of properties available.
The major revenue producing buildings (Parking Structure and Mixed Use Office Building) are already in the process of being built, with the parking structure being nearly complete.
In the proposed Intergovernmental Agreement regarding TIF 2 (that was only passed by the Village of Winfield. The Winfield 34 Board voted against it. Community High School District 94, Winfield Park District, and Winfield Fire Protection District did not vote on it), the Village requests the following funds (see section 1.8 beginning on page 3):
$2 million dollars for economic incentives in TIF 2
$11 million dollars for construction costs of the police station/village hall
$3 million dollars for financing costs of the police station/village hall
$1 million dollars for the public plaza
$1 million dollars for other public infrastructure improvements This means that the Village needs $4 million dollars for everything but the police department/village hall. The $6.7 million dollars generated, $8.3 million dollars available, from TIF 1 is more than adequate to cover everything except building the police station/village hall.
Simply put, in no way does the position of the Winfield 34 Board of Education stand in the way of the economic revitalization of the Winfield Town Center. These are choices by the Village of Winfield and its Board of Trustees. Northwestern Medicine is taking no funds for the development of its portion of the construction (see page 21 of the development agreement). NM-CDH renters would be eligible for the economic incentives which can be clearly provided for in either TIF 1 or TIF 2.
TIF 2 will generate at least $21.7 million dollars (see TIF 1+2 tab). Of that $3 million (13.8%) will go for economic development projects, $15 million (69.1%) will go for municipal development, and the remaining $3.7 million (17.1%) will be given to the other taxing bodies according to the proposed IGA. The Winfield 34 Board of Education has real concerns about this and has been talking about their concerns since May of 2020. The Winfield 34 Board has heard multiple times from Village President Sorgatz that both the school district and fire district can and should go for referendum for municipal projects while the Village should not. The Winfield 34 Board has also reviewed the advisory ballot measures approved by the Village of Winfield community in 2012 which requested Village projects over $1 million receive approval by the voters and in 2021 in which the voters expressed concern regarding these specific municipal expenditures (please note, the village did not actively campaign on this measure). The Winfield 34 Board has specific concerns regarding going against the will of the voters.
There is no question that without the Village of Winfield doing their legally obligated duty to negotiate development agreements with developers that the parking structure for Northwestern Medicine-Central DuPage Hospital would not be on the tax rolls. However, does this entitle them to the entirety of that property tax benefit, is that in the hands of the voters, or in the hands of the municipal governments elected by the voters who have approved these tax rates. If the answer is either the second or third option, the Village of Winfield needs to certainly rethink their approach to TIF 2.
In the end, TIF 2 is all about building the village hall/police department. Nothing more. The Village is upset with the school district that our filing of litigation limits their ability to immediately finance the project. There is work to be done and questions to be figured out. In our Fall Issue of the Tiger Times, Winfield 34 Board President shared his concerns about the brunt of this municipal development being borne by primarily 1/3rd of the Winfield community, specifically the Winfield 34 taxpayers. Please know that the Winfield 34 Board of Education and leadership will continue to be thoughtful and thorough in our work for our students, our school district, and our community. Please feel free to share your thoughts with either our Board of Education or the Village of Winfield. Both of us will be holding meetings in December. December 2nd and 16th for the Village and December 16th for Winfield School District 34. As always, comments made to the school board can be made in person or through our google form.
The Winfield 34 Board of Education and leadership continue to strongly support economic development within our community. Our questions remain regarding how much should be allocated for municipal development without the active support of the voters. Thank you for supporting our students and our schools,
Matt Rich, Ed.D, Superintendent