Campton Hills residents poised to overturn tax levy
The clock is ticking for a group of Campton Hills homeowners to decide whether they support a proposed tax levy to resolve drainage problems that have plagued parts of their subdivision for decades.
As of today, the group of 47 has a little less than two months to prepare a legal petition against the controversial funding mechanism, which would cost them a collective $116,500 over the next 10 years. Otherwise, Kane County and village officials plan to proceed.
Bill Stadelmann, one of the homeowners in the Evening Prairie subdivision, said Wednesday there appears to be enough opposition to overturn the levy. But he and others are waiting to see whether the county will revise its proposed cost-sharing breakdown so the expense is distributed more evenly.
"This is kind of a chess game now," said Stadelmann, one of the most vocal opponents. "It's their move."
As proposed, the tax levy would cost the individual homeowners a wide range of amounts. For example, one Burlington Road resident who lives on 4.8 acres adjacent to a pond would be charged more than $16,000, while the owner of an empty parcel that's about a half an acre would pay only $19.24.
According to the village, the breakdown is based on a complex formula that is supposed to distribute the cost proportionate to the benefit different homeowners would receive because of their location and other environmental factors. The formula was supplied by engineers in the county's water resource management office.
Village President Patsy Smith said the formula was the "most fair" of four that were considered, but she isn't opposed to alternatives if all the homeowners can agree to one that's feasible.
"If you want to get everybody to pay equally, that's great," Smith said. "But when you have people paying only $19.24, why would they choose to do that?"
Of course, the preference among homeowners is to pay nothing. Many of them say that's because they've never directly experienced flooding related to failing drain tiles the tax levy proposes to fix. Others claim it's the county's responsibility because the county OK'd the triangular development between Burlington and Silver Glen roads starting in the 1960s, though land planning regulations weren't as comprehensive then as they are today.
The county has tentatively committed $100,000 toward the project, and the village $10,000. Under the plan, the remaining $116,500 would be paid through the tax levy; property owners would have 10 years to pay their portion.
To quash the deal, more than half of the homeowners and registered voters in the subdivision must sign a petition against it, village attorney Bill Braithwaite said. The deadline to do so is Aug. 2, or 60 days from a public hearing held last week.
Stadelmann said a preliminary petition drive before the hearing yielded signatures from more than 60 percent.
If the unrest isn't resolved, he said, the homeowners will consider filing formal opposition even if that might mean losing the county's financial support.
"I'm willing to take that chance," Stadelmann said. "People don't have this kind of money to throw at a problem that's not theirs."
Paul Schuch, director of the county's water resources department, could not be reached for comment Wednesday, but he has previously defended the county's handling of the development.