Kaneland D302 board plans lawsuit over Sugar Grove TIF district plans

The Kaneland Board of Education has directed its legal counsel to develop a complaint challenging the Sugar Grove I-88 and IL-47 redevelopment project area TIF district.

The Board voted unanimously in favor of fighting back during Monday’s regularly scheduled meeting.

“I’m not happy with the IGAs (intergovernmental agreements) that have been proposed,” Board President Addam Gonzales said. “I’m in no way prepared to agree to anything at this point and I feel we’ve come to a point where we need to make a decision in proceeding one way or another. I think we’re all aware of the costs, the risk and the potential of lost revenues.”

Board Member Bob Mankivsky was offended by what the Village of Sugar Grove proposed.

“Their IGA proposal was insulting,” he said. “It purely puts on us the burden of giving millions of taxpayer money that should be educating our students and giving it to billionaires. Let’s just call it what it is.”

He does not trust the Village of Sugar Grove.

“Quite frankly, I don’t trust a single thing on the basis of what they’ve represented to us,” he said. “Their own words have shown them to be untrustworthy in any respect. Heaven help the folks who live in Sugar Grove.”

These feelings weren’t just from the board, but from the board speaking on behalf of many in the community.

“I think that if anything we’ve had an incredible amount of community support and a lot of community outpouring with this request to support those folks,” board member Aaron Lawler said. “And I think that’s a big use of it, and if I could make a plea to the community, I think it would be helpful if, as we navigate our strategies and see where we are going to go, it would be helpful to have community groups form and perhaps help start raising some funds or doing some mobilization so that we could lean on those groups when this comes to pass.”

Attorney Kevin B. Gordon of Kriha Boucek, the K-12 boutique education law firm that represents schools boards and public school districts like Kaneland, shared procedural details of what will occur now that the board has voted unanimously in support of challenging the TIF in court.

“The next steps would be to develop a complaint, asserting a cause of action and identifying the defects in that TIF that would be filed in Kane County Circuit Court,” Gordon said. “And from there the litigation commences.”

Gordon explained it could take years to get through the circuit court and additional years to get through the appellate court.

“And God help us if somebody appeals to the Supreme Court from there,” he said. “It’ll be an additional amount of time.”

It’s not like the American TV legal drama, Suits, as Gordon explained.

“They would give the lawsuit to some young associate (on Suits) and say ‘Go file this with judge so-and-so and tell him what we want - trial date on Tuesday. That’s not happening,” he said. “It will take an extended period of time to get to a point where the case is even ready for motions for summary judgement, much less a bench trial if that were to come to that.”

It’s about doing what’s best for the district said board member Jennifer Simmons.

“We’ve said it several times,” she said. “Personally, none of us are in agreement with this, but professionally we have to lay it at the feet of our children and our teachers and our administrators and we have to do what’s best for them. The biggest struggle that we have, there is no doubt in our mind that we need to fight this, no doubt, the biggest struggle for us is we are asking for a referendum because we have financial needs and we’ve been told that this could cost us if we go legally, for how long it could be, it could up to $250,000 to $400,000. That’s almost half a million dollars we’re about to spend.”

“I think it’s time to unite,” Gonzalez added. “And do what we can to proceed and fight for our kids.”

Village of Sugar Grove President Jen Konen said she respects the board’s decision but stands by the Village’s decision to approve the project.

“The Village Board took this decision seriously, carefully considering input from residents, stakeholders and other taxing bodies,” she said. “We looked at every perspective, followed the proper process, and did what we truly believe reflects our community’s long-term needs and values. While I respect the Kaneland School Board’s decision and understand their concerns, I stand by the Village Board’s approval of the project. This project creates opportunities for families, children, and local businesses while strengthening our tax base and ensuring long-term, sustainable growth that benefits homeowners and the entire community.”