Residents’ burden for replacing brick street would drop from $7,300 to $2,300 a year
A $1.1 million federal grant could make the difference in whether historic Sixth Street is paved in asphalt or bricks when the road is reconstructed next year.
Prior to a public hearing on a proposed special service area at Tuesday’s board meeting, Village President Tom Cauley said U.S. Rep. Jesus “Chuy” Garcia, who represents Hinsdale, is championing a grant for the sewer work on Sixth as part of a larger infrastructure bill that Congress is likely to approve before the end of the year.
“I’m not sure there’s an appetite for the SSA at $2 million,” he said. “I don’t think there is. But I think there is an appetite for an SSA if the SSA is only for $900,000.”
The village plans to spend $800,000 on bricks as part of the $4.5 million Sixth Street reconstruction project slated for 2025. That amount would cover bricks at intersections and where the street meets Garfield Avenue and County Line Road.
Several residents have asked the village to rebuild the roadway entirely in brick. Trustees agreed to do so if residents would bridge the $2 million gap through an SSA, which would assess Sixth Street residents additional property taxes for the cost.
If the grant comes through and the residents’ burden is reduced from $2 million to $900,000, the village can self-fund the project and avoid $832,000 in interest charges.
With the grant, the average cost to a homeowner in the SSA would drop from $7,262 a year to $2,300 a year per parcel.
Cauley stated the purpose of Monday’s public hearing was to determine the boundaries of the SSA, which includes 39 properties from Garfield to County Line Road with a front, side or back yard that abuts Sixth Street.
Rob D’Arco, who lives at 600 S. County Line Road, said he doesn’t use Sixth Street and asked the board to remove houses that don’t have a driveway on Sixth from the SSA.
He also wondered what will happen when other brick streets in the village require reconstruction.
“Are there any assurances you can give us that those streets will also require an SSA?” D’Arco asked.
“I won’t be village president when those decisions are made,” said Cauley, who is not running for a fifth term in the spring. “I’m pretty sure we’ll treat people consistently.”
Arun Veluchamy, who owns the home at 610 S. Oak St., said he supports the project even though his is one of only eight properties included that is not on Sixth. Veluchamy said as a result of his home’s reassessment last year, he will pay three or four times as much as some other residents.
“I’m all about contributing, but in a fair way,” he said.
Rik Geiersbach, who lives at 512 S. Garfield St., said he believes the village is responsible to pay the entire cost of reconstruction.
“There’s been deferred maintenance on this thing for decades,” Geiersbach said, noting the street was supposed to be completed in 2020, according to the master infrastructure plan. He also noted the village did not create an SSA to replace two blocks of First Street with brick.
Bill Haarlow, a former trustee who has been instrumental in this process, said he understands his neighbors’ frustration at having to pay more for their street when the village has spent 15 years repairing other roads through the master infrastructure plan. He still supports the project and believes an SSA for $900,000 has significant support.
“You’re not hearing from those people this evening,” he said. “They’re not here — I would assume because they are OK with what the village is planning.”
Residents who do not want an SSA have 60 days to oppose it. If residents collect petitions signed by 51 percent of property owners and 51 percent of taxpayers, trustees by law cannot create it. The process is set by state law, and Cauley said the village will assist those who want to oppose plan.
“I’m happy to raise my hand right now and say I’ll lead the petition for opting out,” Geiersbach said. “I’ll pay zero. That’s my statement right now.”
