Green Garden Board Votes to Pursue New Town Hall, Sets December Electorate Vote
Green Garden Township Meeting | November 10, 2025
Article Summary:
The Green Garden Township Board voted 4-1 to formally pursue the construction of a new town hall, scheduling a special electorate meeting for residents to cast a final, binding vote on the project. The decision follows news that Will County has extended the project’s grant deadline and approved a revised, phased construction plan.
New Town Hall Project Key Points:
-
Board Action: The board voted 4-1 to proceed with plans for a new town hall.
-
Electorate Vote: A meeting for all township voters is scheduled for December 4, 2025, to give final approval to the project.
-
Grant Extension: Will County Executive Jennifer Bertino-Tarrant extended the grant completion deadline to October 30, 2026.
-
Revised Plan: The project will be built in two phases, with the grant money used to construct the building’s exterior shell and essential infrastructure first.
The Green Garden Township Board on Monday, November 10, 2025, revived plans to build a new town hall, voting 4-1 to move forward after securing a more favorable timeline from Will County. The decision now rests with township residents, who will make the final determination at a special electorate meeting on December 4.
Supervisor Dean Christofilos announced that he had spoken with Will County Executive Jennifer Bertino-Tarrant, who agreed to extend the grant completion deadline from July 2026 back to the original date of October 30, 2026. The county also gave preliminary approval for a revised scope of work. The new plan proposes using the grant funds for “Phase One”—constructing the exterior building shell, concrete floor, well, septic, basic utilities, and parking lot. “Phase Two,” the interior build-out, would be funded separately by the township at a later date, freeing the project from the grant’s time constraints.
“Changing the scope of work is everything,” said Trustee Wes Shepherd. “Essentially what we want to do is limit the scope of work to a Phase One which is minimal and then Phase Two will come out of pocket.”
Despite the renewed opportunity, the board openly discussed seven significant “hurdles” that must be overcome, including confirming the legal use of the proposed land parcel, securing county permits for a phased project, the potential high cost of a required turn lane, and ensuring ComEd can provide electricity to the site in a timely fashion.
A resident committee, which had been researching the alternative of renovating the current town hall, argued their plan was a “100% guarantee, no risk way” to use the grant funds and recover the $132,000 already spent on designs for the existing building. Max Patrice, a general contractor on the committee, sharply disputed the board’s cost estimates for a new building, stating that a 4,000-square-foot structure built to prevailing wage standards would cost “under $2 million finished,” not the roughly $750,000 total estimated by the board.
Ultimately, the board moved forward with the new hall proposal. Trustee Belinda Deets made the motion, which was seconded by Trustee Monroe Striggow. The motion passed with yes votes from Supervisor Christofilos, Deets, Shepherd, and Striggow. Trustee Ralph Deets voted no.
Latest News Stories
GOP candidates for Illinois governor challenge Pritzker on state finances
Date set for Clintons to appear before House committee
Lawmaker says adopting federal ‘no tax on tips’ would help workers
AGs request probe into climate activists’ influence on Federal Judicial Center
Detroit judge among four charged with exploiting vulnerable adults
Govt. funding bills pass House on razor-thin margins, head to Trump’s desk
DOJ announces more arrests in St. Paul church protest, nine total
WATCH: Dems call for Noem’s impeachment, dismantling DHS
WATCH: Los Angeles area robotics team starts 25th season
Miller: Illinois ‘dragging its feet’ on voter rolls as election nears
Illinois Quick Hits: Pritzker wants to extend pension buyout program
Dems fail in first try to use ‘state sovereignty’ to ‘veto’ ICE