Paris and Somers approve intergovernmental agreement on I-94 corridor

paris-somers-iga-map

The Paris Town Board and the the Somers Village Board approved an intergovernmental agreement regarding I-94 development at a joint special meeting Thursday in Bristol.

The meeting followed a public hearing on the agreement, which had almost 200 people in attendance. Most of the people who commented were property owners within the corridor of Paris that will be annexed into Somers as part of the agreement. Most of those people objected to the approval of the agreement.

The agreement will have Paris transfer designated land in the town along I-94 into the village of Somers. Villages have easier access to some development tools, such as tax increment financing. Paris and Somers will share revenue from development in the area controlled by the agreement. A commission with representation from both municipalities will govern the development activities within the development corridor. The commission will have no tax powers. The agreement says Paris also will fund two loan pools for Somers to spur development

Both boards approved the agreement unanimously. Likewise, an amendment to change the effective date of the agreement to April 15 instead of May 1 also passed both boards.

Each of the Paris board members spoke before the final vote.

Chairman Virgil Gentz  said, in part:

I wish we could stay in our own little world … the way we move forward is to go along with our friends in the village of Somers.”

Supervisor Ken Monson said, in part:

This agreement is going to be very good for the town … It will allow us to keep our rural character.”

Supervisor Ron Kammerzelt said, in part:

“My job is to look out for the entire town and that’s what I am trying to do.”

Some city officials were present and during the public hearing they all urged the boards to not approve the agreement and instead bring the city into talks. Water and sewer service that would likely be key to any successful large scale development of the property would probably come from the city.

City attorney Ed Antaramian said he was in the audience just to observe, but ended up being the second person to comment at the public hearing. He accused Paris, Somers and Kenosha County of acting in secret conspiracy against the city.

He also warned against putting too much stock in a statement earlier in the meeting from special counsel for the town, village and county that the city should be able to extend sewer and water service across I-94 to the new development corridor. An existing agreement between Somers and the city calls for extension of those services just up to the east side of the I, Somers old boundary.

“They city never had any intention to provide water west of the interstate through Somers,” Antaramian said. The city does provide sewer and water west of I-94 to areas that have been annexed into the city.

Edward St. Peter, general manager of the Kenosha Water Utility, testified that leaving the city out of talks among the municipalities and then seeking water and sewer service is a mistake.

“You’re not going to get it the way it’s going,” St. Peter said. “It’s not going to happen. There has to be a boundary agreement.”

John Holloway, chairman of the Paris Plan Commission, said though he would have preferred it was not necessary, it was time for the town to secure its eastern border and try to tap into the development potential there to enrich the tax base. Many larger property owners north of I-94 were holding land just waiting for development and were prepared to make decisions based on their economic benefit, not necessarily what was good for Paris.

“We had to make these decisions based on what was best for the town,” Holloway said. “We’re at a point where plans needed to be made. We were looking out for what was best for Kenosha County and for our two communities.”

Holloway also commented after the meeting on the urgency of the action, alluding to how Kenosha moved to annex land where a major company expansion was slated for land that was in Paris.

“We would not have done any of this if Kenosha had not been so aggressive,” Holloway said.

Here is a copy of the final draft version of the agreement.

Note: We have more material to report from Thursday’s meeting. Check back for additonal posts.– DH

18 Shares

9 Comments

  1. Bristol Resident says:

    We have had very good success here in Bristol with our intergovernment agreements with both Kenosha and Pleasant Prairie. While I can see Paris and Somers feeling they might get “squeezed” by the city, hence their rush to complete this agreement, one must wonder just exactly where Paris and Somers plan on acquiring the sewer and water services that are critical to the success of this plan. Perhaps Mr. Krueser could advise.

  2. David Krueger says:

    For two years, our representatives schemed behind out backs to take the economic value of our land. They didn’t want us involved in this process because they knew this was a bad deal for us – the people that will eventually vote on this issue.

    Not only did they not want us involved in this process, they mislead us regarding their intentions. The board explained to us that their intentions were all about economic development but everyone clearly understands it’s about protection from economic development.

    Kenosha has already annexed land across the street or in our back yards. We have the option of staring at industrial buildings and knowing our land will be developed next OR staring at an industrial buildings and knowing that our land cannot be next.

    The process for overturning this resolution is simple and 100% in the control of Affected Residents. Within the next 7 days, we need 20% of Affected Residents to sign a petition requiring a vote. On voting day, a simple majority (51% of the votes) will be required to win and only Affected Residents vote.
    * Affected Residents is a defined term meaning those individuals living on land within the proposed Intergovernmental Agreement.

  3. Perplexed In Paris says:

    Let me see if I understand this correctly…according to the agreement, Paris residents get to pay Somers residents $1.25 MILLION per year, and provide them with a $5 million revolving loan fund Both Paris and Somers will share in the tax revenues generated over the years. But that is only AFTER the land is “developed”. So our “meter” to pay Somers starts “running” the minute this deal is inked? We have yet to see who is going to provide sewer and water to this project? It appears both Paris and Somers excluded the city of Kenosha in this agreement, but are counting on them to provide the sewer and water? Am I missing something here? This appears to be a much better deal for the residents of Somers than it does for the residents of Paris.

  4. Resident says:

    Next April when election time comes, I think we should remember how the Town board members treated the residents in the affected area. People in the town don’t want to pay village taxes. And, if someone is saying that they don’t have to, they’re full of it – read the agreement. My taxes will now double because of this agreement. Paris Town Board was not thinking of the residents. How could Mr. Monson say he wants to keep the rural look of the Town? I hope David K. starts passing around that petition very soon – maybe he should start a recall petition too!

  5. Another Paris Resident says:

    With the IGA now approved at the April 7 meeting, and the new date now being April 15, has anyone started the process to try to get a referendum in place? Also, without a referendum, will this agreement still go to vote by the Paris residents?

  6. Another Paris Resident says:

    David Krueger, have you started this process of petition / call for referendum?

  7. Resident of Paris says:

    David Krueger,
    Please direct us on how to stop this!! I’m willing to do foot work to help stop this ,but we need your help on how and where to go.

  8. david krueger says:

    Affected Residents are invited to the Brat Stop on Tuesday April 12, 2016 at 6:30pm. We’ll meet in the back room to discuss a Petition requiring a binding referendum on the question of annexation.

    With your help, we can force a vote. This petition will give everyone time to get educated about what is best for them personally. And you can tell everyone your choice by casting your vote when that day comes.

    In full disclosure, my father-in-law is an affected resident so I’ve been drawn into this process to assist him. For the record, my father-in-law has no intentions of being forced into Somers without a fight.

  9. Northwestern Mike says:

    Who is this David Krueger and who does he work for? Who is his father-in-law?

  • Follow us on

  • Archives