McHenry County Blog

This morning I played photographer’s assistant on Pleasant Valley Road.

I held up the remote controlled flash.

Antonio Olivo is doing a story on things immigration, including the financing of the Lakewood SportsPlex complex with EB-5 “buy a visa” program money that is scheduled to finance the development.

Larry Larson and Al Stenstrom have been researching the financing mechanism and apparently have found something that interested the Tribune to interview them a couple of times and send a photographer to take their photo.

The photographeer had them stand near some signs on Pleasant Valley Road in front of Larson’s magnificent property.

Take a look at his back yard with a dammed up Laughing Creek running through a pond.

He has a covered bridge over one part of the water.

No wonder neighbors to the proposal have signs in front of their homes.

The group even lists how each county board member voted on its web site, “Stop the McHenry County SportsPlex.”

There’s a page addressed to Lakewood residents.

The Tribune photographer was off to the McHenry County Jail to take pictures of the cell blocks were illegal immigrants are housed.

The Alliance for Land, Agriculture and Water has made votes by McHenry County Board members up for election available to the public.

So, if the local newspapers didn’t ask the question you think is important, you might find some direction from actual votes the board members cast in Woodstock.

The weakness, obviously, is that challengers aren’t in the matrix.

Yesterday, land use votes were published on McHenry County Blog.

Today the votes on how the Federal Stimulus Bonds should be allocated.

Three projects are tracked,

• Lakewood’s SportsPlex
• the K-Nines Woodstock minor league baseball stadium and
• dredging Wonder Lake

Strangely, the county board members could not find any manufacturing firms who wanted to borrow money with Federal taxpayers subsidzing 25% of the interest.

Previously on the McHenry County Board, Nick Provenzano and John Jung were not serving when these votes were taken.

As I waiting for the Saufen und Spiel Parade to start I saw the sight you see above.

It’s another “we’re putting you back to work” sign, compliments of President Barack Obama and Illinois Democrats who want to waste money on signs that could be spent on highways.

Just thought you like to see

YOUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK

The following press release has been received from 8th District Republican candidate for Congress Joe Walsh:

JOE WALSH COMMENTS ON FAILURE OF STIMULUS BILL,

CALLS ON A NEW DIRECTION FOR THE AMERICAN ECONOMY

(Grayslake, IL) - Critics of President Obama’s nearly $1 trillion stimulus program have pointed out that the stimulus has failed to create jobs while wasting taxpayer money. A new analysis of stimulus spending in Illinois’ 8th Congressional District supports that criticism.

According to the Obama Administration’s “Recovery.gov” website, during the past 18 months the stimulus bill has spent more than $226 million in the 8th district to fund 244 projects, while only creating 169.46 jobs.

Joe Walsh, the Republican nominee for the 8th district, commented,

“If you do the math, you see that the Administration has spent more than $1.3 million per stimulus job!  While American families and small businesses are struggling and making tough choices, Washington is wasting their money.

“The stimulus has failed. According to the Obama Administration, this bill created fewer than 10 jobs per month in our district – 80% of those were government jobs. Sadly, this stimulus is a bailout for state and local government that was never designed to help the private sector grow the economy and create jobs.”

Joe Walsh’s opponent, Rep. Melissa Bean, voted for the stimulus bill.

In a February 13, 2009 press release, Rep. Bean promised the stimulus bill would create jobs, saying:

“This bold action is necessary to preserve and create jobs and spending.”

Bean stated taxpayer money would be spent in the right place, saying the bill “puts money where it matters.” In a January 28, 2009 press release, Bean touted the recovery.gov website, saying it constituted a new measure “of accountability and transparency [to] track every dollar of spending….”

Walsh commented on Bean’s empty promises,

“Melissa Bean promised the stimulus bill would create jobs. It didn’t. She promised our money would be well spent. It wasn’t.

“My campaign represents the voices of millions of Americans who believe we need new leadership in Washington.  With the support of the people of the 8th district, we are going to win this campaign.  When we do, we can begin to enact policies to promote private sector job creation – instead of pumping millions of taxpayer dollars into more government jobs.”

You will remember that details about the McHenry County SportsPlex have been dribbling out a little bit at a time. Some residents have been upset enough to distribute a broadside, which I publishes here. (We found it after coming back from a visit to Independence Hall in Philadelphia and Thomas Jefferson’s plantation of Monticello. What appropriate timing.)

I noticed that signs have been prepared as well, but I have only seen this one on Route 47.

As one who has watched public police roll-outs for decades, it seems to me the village should have been done two newsletters ago.

So far, no mention of the SportsPlex has been made in any official publication to residents/taxpayers. Really strange.

I’ll be reading this explanation of the Village official’s viewpoint as I am posting it this Monday morning.

Before I start, I can tell you I want to know who has how much money invested in the SportsPlex and ownership interest in this project, if any of my money as a Lakewood property owner is at risk.  [I've now read the part where the financing for the golf course that cost residents $500 a year for the better part of a decade is said to be nothing like that of the SportsPlex.]

The county board didn’t care to make that public, if anyone knows, even though the Federal stimulus package is involved.

I do not want Lakewood to end up owning a huge building, if the promoters are unsuccessful, so if that is part of the backup plan, something like a demolition bond ought to be included.

First is a cover letter from Village President Erin Smith, who now has enough allies on the board to do anything she can convince them of.

July 14, 2010

Dear Residents:

Erin Smith

During the past several months, there has been some discussion about a sports complex within the vicinity of Illinois Routes 47 and 176.

This includes land that was recently annexed into our community. While no formal proposal has yet been submitted, the Board of Trustees and I believe it is now appropriate to address some of the most frequently asked questions we’ve heard.

I have enclosed a document that provides a summary of the most frequently asked questions. As new questions are received, we will update this document and post an updated version on our Village website at: http://village.lakewood.il.us

We anticipate that the sports complex will be considered at our meeting on July 27, beginning at 6:00 p.m. [no location indicated, but the golf course club house where regular meetings are held, it seems to me, is way too small], and I urge residents to attend the meeting and learn more about this proposal. As always, I encourage you to contact me directly at erin.smith.lakewood@gmail.com or (815) 356-8005 with any questions or concerns regarding this matter.

Sincerely,

Erin Smith, President
Village of Lakewood

Lakewood Sports Complex Frequently Asked Questions

Updated Last on July 9, 2010

1. What is the sports complex and where will it be located?

While no formal submittal has yet been made, we believe that the sports complex will include about 160 acres of land that consists primarily of outdoor sports fields for baseball, softball, and soccer. There will also be an indoor facility of approximately 125,000 to 150,000 square feet. It will include basketball and volleyball courts as well as a restaurant and retail space.

There is also a five (5) acre outlot that is proposed to be developed as a gas station/retail complex.

The exact location of the complex has not been finalized, but it will likely be located on the west side of Route 47, south of the northwest leg of Route 176. The gas station and retail complex will likely be closest to Route 47, with sports fields extending west along Pleasant Valley Road. More information regarding the land and location of buildings and fields will not be available until we see the first formal proposal for a planned unit development (PUD).

2. Will my taxes be raised if the sports complex fails?

It is essential for our residents to understand that the Village of Lakewood will have no responsibility or liability for payments if the sports complex fails.

While references are being made to the Sears Centre or Libertyville Sports Complex, these comparisons are not relevant.

In both of these instances, the facilities were financed using General Obligation or Alternate Revenue Bonds, which require that property taxes are pledged as a revenue source if the enterprise revenues do not cover the debt payment.

This financing model has never been considered for the proposed sports complex in our community. The sports complex financing is entirely private.

3. Is it possible that our taxes will be raised as they were to pay for RedTail Golf Course?

In order to maintain open space and support property values throughout the community, the Village of Lakewood made a decision to purchase and operate RedTail Golf Course using Alternate Revenue Bonds. As the owner, the community is ultimately responsible for the payment of debt if the operating profit cannot cover this obligation. The final payment for RedTail Golf Course will be made in 2011. As stated earlier, the Village of Lakewood will not own, operate, or be responsible for any payment relative to the proposed sports complex.

4. Will there be any economic incentives for the developer?

As all of our residents know, residential and commercial development is at a virtual standstill throughout our country, and it requires creativity and partnerships in order for projects to move forward.

As is often the case when communities are negotiating with commercial developers, we are discussing both a waiver of certain fees we would normally charge for development and a formula for sharing revenues produced by the development.

These are revenues that would otherwise not be available for our community, including:

• sales taxes,
• parking fees,
• entertainment taxes, etc.

We are also willing to partner with the developer to seek grant funding for infrastructure or unique environmental aspects of the project.

No cash contribution from the Village of Lakewood is being considered.

5. Are there any other risks to the Village of Lakewood related to this project?

The Village Staff has and will continue to invest a significant amount of time and resources to supporting the development phase of this project. There is certainly an opportunity cost associated with this time investment, as residents may find that there are days when there is a delay in responding to non-urgent resident requests. We believe that this time investment is worthwhile in the end, as commercial development at this major intersection is essential to maintaining essential services and public infrastructure without a future increase in property taxes.

A second risk is that the project will fail, leaving a vacant building and land behind. This is land that could easily be redeveloped by another land owner in the future. We believe this is an unlikely scenario, as the business plan for the sports complex has been vetted by several independent consultants and financial institutions, including Stern Brothers.

6. Did McHenry County contribute $15 million in financing to this project?

McHenry County received $27.5 million in federal bonding authority for private projects under the $789 billion American Reinvestment and Recovery Act.

The bonds are meant to encourage lending for shove-ready projects by giving investors a 45 percent refund of the federal taxes payable on them.

The McHenry County Board chose to dedicate $18 million of its allocation for this project.

Private investors will choose of their own volition to purchase these bonds, and McHenry County will have no obligation or responsibility for repayment.

7. Has there been an investment of foreign funds into this project?

Another funding source will come from a federal financing program called employment based fifth preference, or EB-5.

The program, created in 1990, offers permanent resident status to foreign investors who fund businesses that create or save jobs.

It is simply a unique investment tool that the developers have identified to help fund their project, and the use of EB-5 funds for this project has no bearing on the deliberations by the Village of Lakewood.

8. What benefit is there for the Village of Lakewood?

The recent annexation of about 565 acres of land was consistent with our boundary agreements with neighboring communities, our Comprehensive Plan, and our Facility Planning Area.

It brought four (4) existing businesses into our community and will help to grow and diversify our limited sales tax base.

The proposed sports complex is also consistent with these underlying documents and has the potential to significantly increase our General Fund revenues. It is also likely that ancillary projects (i.e. restaurants and retail) will develop to support the sports complex.

Finally, the proposed sports complex will be built incorporating best environmental management practices and provide a template for sustainable development within our community.

Not only will it generate new sources of revenue which are essential to our long term sustainability, but it does so by creating a destination that is consistent with our vision for our community.

9. How can I learn more about the proposal?

We anticipate that the proposal will be considered at our meeting on July 27, beginning at 6:00 p.m.

10. Should I be concerned with the statements that were included on a flyer that was placed in my mailbox recently?

Since the flyer was sent anonymously, it’s not possible for us to follow up with the person(s) who have expressed these concerns. Nor is it possible to understand the basis of their misinformation.

= = = = =

Previous articles that might be of interest:

$18 Million Federal Stimulus Request for $40 Million Route 47 & 176 Lakewood Recreational Complex on County Board Finance Committee’s Agenda Tuesday

Concept Drawings of the Proposed McHenry County Sportsplex in Lakewood

May Letter Outlines $5 Million in Direct and Indirect Lakewood Financial Assistance to Sportsplex Developer Lou Tenore

So, You Want to Know More about the Lakewood SportsPlex?

Lakewood Village President Erin Smith Endorses Ken Koehler for County Board

First Electric Newspaper Finds Potential Snag in Lakewood SportsPlex

Chicagoland Foreign Investment Group Sends SportsPlex Investment Letter

Investment Bank Announces Commitment to SportsPlex, If

Thoughts on “Money in the Bank”

Lakewood SportsPlex Proposal Getting Curiouser and Curiouser

Lakewood Gains New Economic Development Tool

Lakewood Seeks to Annex 540 Acres, including Route 176 & 47 Golf Courses & SportsPlex Site

Judge Michael Caldwell Gives Lakewood Green Light to Grow to Route 176

Former Village President, Republican Activist Win Lakewood Trustee Spots

Big Zoning Doings in Lakewood Tuesday Night

Lakewood Annexes Past Route 47 Up to Route 176

Village of Lakewood Summer Newsletter, Anti-SportsPlex Flyer Arrive

Yesterday, McHenry County Blog showed you the letter from the Chicagoland Foreign Investment Group saying that it would raise $27 million “for construction and operation of the (McHenry County SportsPlex” sports facility complex to be constructed in McHenry County.”

That was dated December 1st, but just given to county officials on January 28th.

Today, take a look at a February 5th letter from Stern Brothers & Company.

It says the firm will find “sophisticated investors…in tandem with a sophistical investment letter…”

Then, there are two “if’s.”

• The operating LLC raises $8 million in equity, and
• The project is located in a Targeted Employment Area and CFIG (Chicagoland Foreign Investment Group) commits $27 million in long-term take out financing.

Miyun Cho, Managing Director, signs the letter.

Yesterday we left the Huntley School District’s Financial Advisory Committee meeting after talking about how stunned those attending were to find out that Special Education Director Cheryl Kalkirtz was no longer with District 158.

Controller Mark Altmayer for some reason didn’t think it proper to share the information, even though the Daily Herald had quoted Superintendent John Burkey on the subject in an internet published article.

In the public comment period, parents spoke about their lack of trust, especially when they see services not being delivered to their children.

They expressed their concerns about a revolving door with Special Ed administrators who seem to disagree with top administrators about what is the right approach.

Altmayer explained to the committee that parents had a distrust of special services but not the fiscal department (his area).

Parents then emphatically said they didn’t trust fiscal and wanted the committee to provide oversight regarding how the Federal Stimulus (initial time again, IDEA and IDEA ARRA) money is spent. They seemed to want a check and balance on whether it is being spent on where it is intended, that is, special needs.

Altmayer admitted that it wasn’t the district’s finest moments how “it took 4-5 months to get the IDEA ARRA funding correct.”

Strangely, in one breath, Altmayer cheerfully beamed,

“There is not a ton of issues.”

And, in another breath, Altmayer matter-of-factly referred to how administrators came up with how the Federal Stimulus money should be spent:

“It was pretty much a disaster.”

Here’s the first of a series of article that Pete Gonigam has written for his First Electric Newspaper.

It’s entitled,

FEN Finds Possible Problems for Proposed SportsPlex

You can read about and see the Prairie Grove maraschino cherry processing plant that Lake in the Hills resident and SportsPlex CEO Lou Tenore owns.

The article reports that “at the moment the EB-5 fund owns 65 percent of the company, the Management Group 35 percent. Later on the Management group will end up with a 51 percent interest.”

The intriguing description of tomorrow’s article is

“How Do You Say ‘Sportsplex’ in Farsi?”

The McHenry County Board is poised to vote on whether to allocate $18 million of its $27 million in Federal stimulus money to the Lakewood development.

If you spend some time looking at the most recent detailed board packet that the Huntley School Board kindly posts, you will find some mistakes.

Previously, administrators incorrectly did the math on a list of items on how to spend about $1.7 million of Federal Stimulus ARRA funds for Special Education.

This week, simple math mistakes appear in the list of how the Federal money will be spent on Special Education.

I was glancing down the revised list and saw this item:

Description      Amount
RtI    25 conference @ $200 each.   $3,000

OK, fifth grade math test time.

What is 200 times 25?

The item is on page 8 of the board packet section which has this link (reproduced above with the questionable item at the bottom of the excerpt).

25 times $200 each is $5,000, by the way, not $3,000.

The math carefulness is repeated on page 12.

RtI Conference/ISHA  12X$350   $7,800.00
5 Laser Printers  (5X$400)    $4,500.00

The laser printer line item is at the bottom of the illustration and the RTI is 13 lines higher.

Anyone can make a math error, but couldn’t memo writers check their work as teachers advise students?

English is better, right?

There was a memo on page 6 of 199 to Supt. John Burkey and the board of education members that was dated January 7, 2009.  It’s for the board meeting on the 7th.  The date I pulled the memo was January 6, and it’s  2010.  The mistake about the year is the kind of mistake we all make at the beginning of a new year. The memo was jointly written by three administrators.

The 2nd paragraph aught my eye.

“Proudly, the Office of Special Services has finalized this list.  Having further worked with District Administration (RtI), the Technology Department, District ARRA Committee, Special Education Parent Advisory Committee and a subcommittee of PAC to establish this final product.”

Maybe Huntley’s English teachers can use this with their students to show how the second “sentence” is a phrase and not a sentence. Maybe it will be in sophomore year of high school. I remember my Middletown, New York, English teacher in 1957. She had as her goal teaching us how to write a sentence.

You hear people complain about how students graduate from high school without learning to do math or write complete sentences. When I worked as a cashier at Crystal Lake’s McDonald’s (one with arches and a sign saying 300,000 sold) in the summer of 1960, I added what was bought in my head. Now employees punch pictures.

I wonder why.

And, just in case you are interested in the Read 180 and System 44 expenditures planned, I’ve captured that page above.

Approved unanimously by the McHenry County Finance and Audit Committee this morning, the proposed $40 million McHenry County Sportsplex comes with $5 million worth of strings to Lakewood taxpayers, including $1 million to buy the land on Route 47 and 176.

A May 13th letter from newly-elected Village President Erin Smith to McHenry County Sportsplex entrepreneur Lou Tenore of Lake in the Hills promises a “cash transfer of $1,000,000.00 from the Village to MCS to the extent permitted by law or acquisition by the Village of up to $1,000,000.00 in land for the project.”

This is part of a $5 million assistance package “to support this project in a manner consistent with Illinois law.”

Outlined in the letter are other financial incentives:

“Waiver of Lakewood municipal annexation, platting, permitting, and associated hearing fees as well as reimbursement of Village professional costs up to a total value of $1,000,000.00.“An additional $3,000,000.00 (or greater to the extent that the amount provided if fee waivers [above] totals less than $1,000,000.00) provided through a combination of other sources included, but not limited to:

1. Revenue-sharing agreements or tax rebate agreements
2. Assistance from the Village securing a grant from the Upper Illinois River Development AuthorityOther technical assistance from the Village whether provided directly to the Developer or to the Village
3. Introductions and support by the Village to funders for other grants whether such grants are made directly to the Developer or to the Village
4. Any grants or financial assistance provided to MCS from McHenry County at the request of the Village
5. Property tax abatements, if any, for the parcel
6. USDA technical assistance whether provided directly to the Developer or to the Village
7. Tourism attraction or TAP grants whether provided directly to the Developer or to the Village.

So what, according to the letter, does Lakewood get in return?

To recover the $1 million “advance”

• The village may retain, for its own purposes, its share of the first $1 million in sales tax revenue or amusement tax revenue generated by the project.
• It can also “be satisfied by other cash payments from the Developer.” Listed are a “10% additional charge on all regular admission fees and a 20%s charge on all tournaments fees along with a $1 per vehicle parking fee.” This would be pledged for a ten-year period.
• If the village supplies land, rather than case, the land will be deeded to the developer when the village has recovered the purchase price through sales tax, amusement tax and other fees.

For the $15 million loan he sought authorized by the same Federal Stimulus source, Woodstock minor league baseball promoter Pete Heitman told the New York times that he expected to save $5 million over twenty years.

The letter from Village President Smith says the $5 million in assistance needs to be provided “within 18 months.”

= = = = =

The photo to the right is of Lakewood Village President Erin Smith at a fall “Meet with the Village President” gathering.