Winfield District 34 loses appeal in TIF case against village

Two Winfield-area school districts have been dealt another legal setback in their long-running fight with the village over a special taxing district.

Winfield Elementary District 34 filed a lawsuit against the village more than four years ago, challenging the legality of a new tax increment financing district consisting of 51 parcels. West Chicago High School District 94 is also a plaintiff.

But in the latest ruling, an appellate court sided with the village. Third District Appellate Justice Matthew Bertani delivered the opinion with Justices Lance Peterson and John Anderson concurring.

“I would hope the school districts would say at this point, enough is enough. Let’s all move forward here. Do what’s right for the village of Winfield and allow the development of our Town Center to proceed,” Village President Carl Sorgatz said.

The village also released a statement saying that if the TIF district is able to proceed, the village can support a 147-unit apartment development, aid small businesses to help fill vacancies, create a public plaza and construct a “sorely needed” village hall and police station.

“These plans would all be funded without raising property taxes,” it added.

District 34 officials are analyzing the decision. The district said in a statement that the school board plans to meet on Feb. 26 to discuss it and make a determination of potential next steps at that time.

The board remains concerned with “the redirection” of at least $18 million of property tax funds to build a village hall without a referendum question, “believing TIF funds should pervasively be used for economic development within the community,” the district’s statement read in part.

Last week, the appellate court affirmed a DuPage County judge’s decision. In that ruling last year, the judge wrote that the village’s enactment of the TIF district was “not clearly and convincingly wrong” and cannot be held invalid. Among other findings, the judge determined that the TIF district qualifies as a “conservation area.”

The village “was required to find that at least three of the eligibility factors had been met in order to designate an area as a conservation area eligible to receive TIF financing,” the appellate court noted.

“Based on our analysis of the circuit court’s decision, we find no issues of material fact exist regarding three factors,” the opinion stated.

Each of the parcels had been included in another, larger TIF district scheduled to expire in 2027.

“Some, not all, parcels were removed from TIF 1 and placed in TIF 2. TIF 1 still exists separate and apart from the parcels that are now in TIF 2. Thus, TIF 2 is an entirely new TIF district, not an improper extension of TIF 1,” the appellate court said.

According to the opinion, the school districts also have argued that the village created the new TIF district to obtain funds to build a village hall and that the “the underlying goal is inconsistent with the purpose of TIF creation — to facilitate development in an area where assistance is necessary.”

However, the school districts do not provide any authority to indicate that a secondary benefit for the village negates the creation of a TIF district, the appellate court said. The justices “therefore find this argument without merit.”

Winfield officials want to build a village hall and police station in a different location to open up additional space for development near the Metra station and the planned plaza. The existing facility is well over 50 years old, Sorgatz said.

The developer of the planned Winfield Reserve apartment complex, he said, has been “very patient.” The developer also built the Winfield Station apartments.

“Those are key to us being able to bring in those new businesses,” Sorgatz said. “And the sooner we can get that moving, the better it is for our Town Center development.”