Legal posturing continues in disputed Wal-Mart case
Legal jostling continued Wednesday in the case of a proposed Wal-Mart for Carpentersville and East Dundee's efforts to prevent the company from accessing $4.2 million in special taxing district funding.
East Dundee officials want a judge other than David Akemann assigned to the case; Carpentersville officials disagree.
East Dundee officials hope to block Wal-Mart from receiving funding from a Tax Increment Financing District to help pay for a new store in Carpentersville.
Akemann rejected in 2013 a request from East Dundee to issue a temporary restraining order banning Wal-Mart from using the TIF money to help build its 108,000-square-foot store in Carpentersville, saying the issue was not "ripe" to rule on because Wal-Mart had yet not applied for funding.
Since then, the process has moved forward, with Wal-Mart requesting funding and Wal-Mart signing a contract by a 24-acre site.
In a TIF district, property tax levels are frozen up to 23 years in a "blighted" area. As development or redevelopment occurs, the increased taxes from the land, or "increment," are used to pay for new infrastructure or are given to a company or builder to help defray development costs.
East Dundee officials say state law prohibits towns from poaching neighboring businesses if they are less than 10 miles away; the current and proposed Wal-Mart sites are three miles apart.
Wednesday, East Dundee attorney Richard Gleason argued for a different judge, saying Akemann had not made any substantiative rulings on the case.
"This is a new case," Gleason argued. "There was no decision by the court to approve or disapprove of the use of TIF funds."
Steven Varick, an attorney for Carpentersville, argued that East Dundee should not be allowed to "judge shop" and Akemann had already made several rulings on the case, such as the 2013 ruling that East Dundee lacked standing.
"This is the same case with the same dispute by the same parties," Varick said.
Akemann will decide on Friday or earlier whether to remove himself from the case.
The two sides are due back in court June 17.