School Board states support of original IGA terms
by Keith Beebe
KANELAND—Kaneland School Board members on Monday voted 7-0 to state their support of the terms included in a proposed Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) between the School District and the village of Elburn.
The IGA would be a 10-year agreement, with land/cash value remaining at its current level. Capital impact fees would continue to follow the Roger Dahlstrom model, with payments prorated at 75 percent. There would be no clause to lower those payments if another municipality reached an agreement containing lower fees.
Superintendent Jeff Schuler said the board’s message was simply meant to inform Elburn that they support the terms of the IGA.
“Since the Elburn Village Board did not approve the IGA last night, their board is going to discuss what they feel they can agree to. The School Board will then have to decide if an IGA makes sense with those terms. Certainly the School District feels strongly about the terms as they are currently written in the proposed IGA,” he said.
Schuler in November 2011 issued a document stating Kaneland’s commitment to the following principles:
• Tables produced through Dahlstrom’s updated study reflect actual costs associated with new growth
• The cost of growth should not be absorbed only by existing residents, and should be paid for by new growth through appropriate impact fees
• Deviation from the current model or reduction in impact fees increases the burden on existing residents
• A quality Kaneland education—one delivered in adequate facilities—is essential to the growth of all eight municipalities served through the current IGA
• A Kaneland education costs the same for all students, regardless of where they reside. Deviation from Dahlstrom’s tables by any municipality impacts the School District’s ability to provide an appropriate education to all its students
Without an IGA in place, municipalities working toward an annexation agreement must determine the amount of land-cash and capital-impact payments collected on behalf of the School District. Schuler said he views the IGA as an agreement between the village and School Board that clearly identifies the cost of growth that will otherwise be shifted to existing residents.
“The IGA ensures that this cost burden is not compromised through the negotiation of the annexation agreement,” he said. “It is written to protect the needs of the village, School District and all existing taxpayers. We feel strongly that the agreement should be approved.”