Local Government Law

Plaintiff filed condemnation action against Defendants in 1999, seeking to take 204 acres of land in Naperville. Eight years later, jury found just compensation for taking was $10.725 million, based on fair market value of property in 1999. Court properly entered summary judgment for Plaintiff in finding that Plaintiff engaged in good-faith negotiations, as Plaintiff was not required to immediately offer the full amount of the highest appraisal it received, and its failure to do so does not show lack of good faith. Landowner cannot be denied just compensation on ground of his or her "fault" for length of condemnation proceeding absent abusive litigation tactics interfering with court's functioning. Remanded for court to hear evidence on whether jury's verdict provided just compensation, i.e. value of property on date of taking

(Court opinion corrected 5/1/10.) Court properly characterized Lake Shore Associates as large entity with substantial profits and assets, which allowed it to easily absorb loss of its pre-development expenditures of $272,022.18. Purchase price of property is a factor that may be considered in determining substantiality, but only those expenditures made in good-faith reliance on prior zoning classification are included in this determination. Because property here was bought 26 years before zoning classification was enacted, its purchase was not in reliance on classification, thus purchase price was properly excluded from consideration. Request for writ of mandamus was properly denied, as Lake Shore Associates' pre-development expenditures were not sufficiently substantial, and it thus had no vested right to develop property per zoning classification.

(Modified Upon Denial of Rehearing filed 4/22/10.) City had rezoned property from multifamily to single family, and had given notice by publication, in strict compliance with statutory notice requirements of Section 11-13-2 of Illinois Municipal Code. Notice provision was unconstitutional as applied to these plaintiffs, because City failed to give notice which was reasonably calculated to inform them; sending notice via mail would have been possible and inexpensive, as plaintiffs had received assessment notices and property tax bills for 23 years. Holding, which is "as applied to plaintiffs", does not affect continuing validity of use of publication notice under Section 11-13-2. (Dissent filed.)

Grain company and oil company filed declaratory judgment action challenging constitutionality of County School Facility Occupation Tax Law in Counties Code, which allows county governments to impose 1% sales tax for school facility use, and validity of two county ordinances that authorized imposition of the 1% sales tax in Williamson County. Plaintiff corporations met common law requirements for standing, as claim of injury is distinct and palpable, is fairly traceable to Defendants' actions, and is substantially likely to be prevented or redressed by grant of relief requested. Corporations do not lack standing by fact that they may pass school facility tax on to their customers, as it does not negate effect of tax upon them. Section 11-301 of Code of Civil Procedure does not preclude corporations, which are corporate citizens, from filing actions under that Section.

Court granted summary judgment in favor of Village upon Petitioners' (from subdivision) petition to disconnect from village. Under Munipical Code, within one year of organization of any municiplaity, disconnection is allowed of any territory that is "upon the border, but within the boundary of the municipality" and which meets other statutory criteria. Division between territory and forest preserve is not "the border" under Code, as that would mean a municipality may have more than one border. No isolation of a territory occurs only if a continuing and connected boundary line exists; and such line can exist only on the periperhery, not as an internal border.

School Board cannot decrease health insurance benefits provided to retirees under collective bargaining agreements after expiration of agreements. Federal common law applies to action filed by 107 retired teachers, who have standing to sue for benefits granted under previous collective bargaining agreements.

Condo association filed action for improper land usage against hospitals which were located within 250 feet of Plaintiffs' property. Plaintiffs challenged validity of zoning amendment as exceeding floor plan density limitations, building was not permitted use, and failed to require construction start time. Plaintiffs sought administrative review of resolution approving application for planned developments on hospital campus. Power to enact zoning ordinances falls within broad grant of home rule authority, and ordinance is not rendered unconstitutional because home-rule municipality violated its own self-imposed ordinances in enacting another ordinance. Plaintiffs cannot rebut presumption of validity of ordinance.