New village must put basics ahead of hurried decisions

As the newly formed village of Campton Hills takes its first tentative steps, leaders and residents are already encountering the realities of being an incorporated community.

It is ironic that one of the first big decisions the community may make involves an annexation, an act that when executed by Elgin became the primary force behind the incorporation drive.

Now the village finds itself looking at annexation from the other side. The village is considering the annexation of 500 open acres along the east side of Route 47. Leaders believe doing so would give the village more control over development by St. Charles real estate investor Marvin Vestuto and developers he represents.

Eight of 10 property owners in the 500-acre development area support the annexation. One opposed is Warren Strom. Kane County already holds the rights to his family's property under the county's farmland preservation program and he has said he has no desire to become part of Campton Hills, in part because he expects his taxes will rise.

What he wants may not matter, however. State law says that when a majority of landowners wants annexation, minority holdouts can be forcibly annexed. No one but Kane County could do anything with the Strom property, but it would still pay Campton Hills taxes unless the new town delivers on its proposal to assure he won't pay village taxes if annexed. That may sway him but could aggravate other taxpayers.

There are also cries of "foul" coming from some in Lily Lake. Acting Village President Jesse Heffernan sounds like Campton officials did when Elgin was bearing down on Campton property. He says the annexation idea "goes against everything they rallied to incorporate for."

The new village would like to have a say in how Route 47 -- expected to be the next big development corridor -- develops. It is certainly within its rights, and its responsibilities, for that matter, to attempt to do so. But Vestuto is asking for annexation in a manner we can only term rare, if not bizarre. He proposes the village annex the land for only six months and that land revert to its unincorporated state if no agreement is reached.

The village would be far wiser to spend six months putting together zoning and annexation policies and regulations, which it doesn't have now, and ask Vestuto to return then. It might, as one example, write tax exemptions for preserved farmland into annexation policy, given the value is shared by both parties.

Though many citizens tend to believe municipalities can reject a development proposal just because current residents don't like it, that assumption is false. If it rejects proposals that fall within its zoning guidelines, it is likely to find itself in court. And if it doesn't have policies in place, a court could rule its decisions arbitrary at nearly any time. Neither is healthy for any municipality.

The village would best serve its new community by assuring basic fundamentals of municipal government are in place before it undertakes decisions it will have to live with forever.