‘I wish there was more unity’: Mundelein, school districts at odds over Ivanhoe Village megaproject

The proposed Ivanhoe Village megaproject in Mundelein will change the local landscape and have substantial ripple effects for the surrounding community, everyone involved agrees.

But how to deal with those effects, including a predicted influx of at least 1,000 students to local school districts, and to what degree developer Wirtz Realty Corporation should pay for them remains uncertain.

Not everyone is pleased with the village of Mundelein’s first official actions on the proposal since the Wirtz property was annexed in late 2022.

At issue is how much money will be generated for school-related expenses through village-imposed impact fees, and whether the developers should contribute more.

Talks between Wirtz and Fremont Elementary District 79 and Mundelein High School District 120 are at an impasse, with both sides blaming the other for the stalemate. The village and school districts also are at odds as to how the breakdown in talks happened.

The give and take surfaced publicly Feb. 24 in front of Mundelein’s village board and has percolated since.

“It’s a tough time. I wish there was more unity,” Mundelein Mayor Steve Lentz said after officials and supporters of districts 79 and 120 addressed the village board.

As proposed, Ivanhoe Village will encompass 772 acres owned by generations of the Wirtz family on Mundelein’s northwest side. To be developed over 25 years, the plan envisions 3,200 housing units of various types, shops, athletic fields, a village center, light industrial buildings and other elements.

“It’s crucial that we engage our community now and take time to get the development plan right,” District 120 school board President Peter Rastrelli said.

Most new grade school students from the development would attend three District 79 schools already near capacity, officials say. Developers should offset a “reasonable portion” of an estimated $150 million in predicted “enrollment growth projects” so taxpayers don’t bear the brunt, the districts contend.

“We will need to build another school. Period,” said Gabriela Whipple, president of the District 79 school board.

Unlike other communities, Mundelein does not have an impact fee ordinance. But it’s expected to enact one at Monday’s village board meeting.

In a second action Monday, the board will consider a “term sheet” that outlines the amount of impact fees from the Wirtz development for school, park and library districts.

The village says it can’t require one-time impact fees to cover school construction costs or operational expenses. Negotiating that is up to the developer and schools, Lentz said.

“State law and (legal) precedent are pretty clear,” he added. “Our hands are tied.”

Districts will reap millions in property taxes from Ivanhoe Village to cover additional costs, such as teacher salaries and bond payments to build facilities, Lentz noted.

But school officials say rules governing impact fees give the village flexibility in determining whether a developer is making a good-faith attempt to negotiate.

Two weeks ago, Wirtz attorney Bruce L. Goldsmith sent a letter to the school districts stating his client declines to engage in further negotiations due to their “complete failure to act in good faith.”

That prompted the districts to ask the village to hold pause the development process. In a letter to the community dated Feb. 21, district leaders also asked residents to attend and comment at village board meetings.

Lentz responded on Facebook and the village website.

It also sparked a public letter to Lentz from four local state legislators accusing the Wirtz Corporation of “disrespectful and unneighborly conduct,” adding it “inappropriately attacked, threatened and insulted” school district leadership.

Lentz said the village respects the legislators’ opinions, but added that the letter is biased in favor of the schools and he wishes the lawmakers had reached out for a full briefing.

“With more information, they likely would not have written that letter,” he said.

This week, he contended the districts refused to present a proposed impact package, wouldn’t negotiate with developers when given a chance, and instead embarked on a publicity campaign to embarrass the Wirtz family into paying more.

District 120 Superintendent Kevin Myers countered, saying that Lentz showed a “complete disregard,” for taxpayers.

The first and only negotiation meeting with Wirtz “ended with handshakes, an agreement to exchange updated information, and a commitment to share financial proposals at the next meeting,” Myers said.

Instead, a Wirtz family attorney accused the district of acting in bad faith, he added.

Despite the controversy, the developer remains confident Ivanhoe Village will be a “positive contributor” to schools and the community for generations to come, according to a Wirtz Realty Corporation spokesperson.