The Board of Education of Richland School Dist. No. 88A v. The City of Crest Hill

This case presents question as to whether trial court properly granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment in plaintiff’s action that challenged ordinances approved by defendant that established TIF District under Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act (Act). Plaintiff asserted that TIF District was unlawfully composed, where portion of TIF District was not contiguous with remaining portion of TIF District as required by section 11-74.4-4(a) of Act because said portions were separated by 234.9 foot portion of natural gas right-of-way. While trial court found that existence of instant right-of-way was of no legal consequence, Appellate Court found that existence of instant right-of-way precluded establishment of instant TIF District because defendant could not “jump” said right-of-way for purposes of establishing contiguous requirement. Appellate Court also rejected defendant’s claim that term “contiguous” has same meaning under both section 11-74.4-4(a) and section 7-1-1 of Ill. Municipal Code that pertained to annexations.