Special Service Area Number 9 Remains Intact

Residents of the Willow Ponds subdivision will continue to pay into Special Service Area Number 9 (SSA 9) despite clear evidence it has a number of flaws. 

“The most responsible approach is an integrated approach (to deal with storm water management), with the village’s current financial issues, I don’t think this is the time to get rid of this SSA,” said Suzanne Branding, mayor.

The ordinance before trustees on Tuesday night was crafted to repeal the prior ordinance that created SSA 9 in 2000. 

Trustees Jeff Halen, Tom Poynton and Rich Sustich voted to approve the repeal of SSA 9, and Trustees Jim Johnson and Dana Rzeznik voted against it.  Due to ordinances requiring a majority of the Corporate Authority to pass, Branding was required to cast her vote.  

Branding voted ‘nay’ so the repeal of the ordinance didn't pass.

More than a dozen residents who live both in and out of the SSA addressed the board on the issue.

“I have my closing documents and it doesn’t say anything about this assessment. No one gave me a clear answer on what it was for,” said William Birkland, Willow Ponds resident.  

“I have a deep concern over SSA 9.  Although surrounding properties contribute to the wetland they are not sharing with the costs,” said Mike Weber, Willow Ponds resident.

“We would not be challenging this if it was set up fair and equitably,” Weber added.

Another Willow Ponds resident cited the trustees’ words back in April of 2010 around the time discussions about SSA 9 began.

“At the April 5, 2010 meeting, Mayor Branding stated that it (SSA 9) was not fair and the surrounding businesses should share with the cost, said Rick Albright, resident.   

“Trustees Johnson, Rzeznik and Sustich said the same; Trustee Poynton called it a lousy agreement,” Albright added.

“I ask you either fix it or dissolve it.  Sonoma and Mosley Hill and the businesses around Dominick's and the Dairy Queen strip contribute water but do not pay this tax we do,” said Albright.

Two residents who do not live in the SSA 9 expressed strong feelings about its reported faults.

“SSA 9 is grossly flawed in many ways.  All of the flaws handicap and penalize the residents that live there,” said Jim Tarbett, resident.

“What do we do because we (the village) don’t have money?  We are penalizing residents; it is unfair for them to carry the burden of all of the village,” Tarbett added.

“I would like to see that (SSA 9) gotten rid of; those 20 homes should not be paying that bill. The village should give it to park and recreation,” said Dennis Abbott, lifelong resident.  

And unease over possible future obligations for maintenance of the wetland were also brought up.

“I have a concern with a large increase (of the SSA 9 tax) in the future if there are future large problems,” said Aaron Karstens, Willow Ponds subdivision resident. 

Several other residents who live in SSA 9 spoke publically to the board, and their issues all centered around the flaws that have been spoken about publically at board meetings since last spring.

Those include non-contiguity of all properties within the SSA, which is required according to Illinois State statute and the fact that a number of other properties may be contributing water to the wetland but are not paying toward its maintenance.

The final issue has to do with how the fee is assessed.  When it was noticed publically before SSA 9 was formed, it was stated it would be an ad valorum, or property value based, tax.

Instead it was assessed as a flat fee for the 21 residents living in the Willow Ponds subdivision.

A separate issue stemming from the flat fee is that the Willow Ponds professional building, which is also in the SSA, initially paid an amount equal to the Willow Ponds subdivision residents.

When the property was divided into ten separate units, the flat fee was also divided.

The questions remain over whether those commercial properties could be reassessed and begin to each pay the annual $543 flat tax fee paid by Willow Ponds residents.   

“I still stand by that this is a lousy agreement for the Willow Ponds residents.  What is not fair is the way it was administered and the way it was assessed with large properties that are draining large amounts of water into this wetland,” said Poynton. 

“What kind of message are we sending? If the village has done it improperly, you will suffer and it cannot be fixed? Sustich said.    

“Members of the board ran (on a platform) to fix things that were wrong,” said Sustich.  

“There are a lot of flaws to it, but without it this property wouldn’t have been developed,” Poynton added.

“Our judgement should not be impacted by personal or political differences; most importantly we are to follow the law,” said Halen.

“This could open up the door for all SSA residents to look for technical flaws, and it’s $12,000 a year, every year,” said Johnson.

Johnson asked attorney Ruth Schlossberg if there was a way to remedy how the assessments are paid, from a flat tax to an ad valorem tax.  

“You’ve missed the December 2010 deadline for an ad valorem tax, but it can be levied that way in the future,” said Schlossberg.

“There should be 31 properties instead of 21, including the office complex, then the average resident would pay one-third less, and the business condos would each pay more than $54 they already pay,” said Rzeznik.

“A simple letter to the tax assessor would fix the issue,” said Rzeznik.

And for the foreseeable future, that may be the only relief that residents living in Willow Ponds may see, though the change could not be implemented until December of this year.

“I am not a proponent of SSA’s; I’d like to get rid of them all,” said Branding.   

“But I have to vote nay.  There is a part of the (forthcoming) budget that deals with storm water management and I am pleased about that,” Branding added.

“It sounds like this can be made into a true ad valorem tax, and what we need to do is to move forward as a community,” Branding said.