I-57 & Curtis, LLC v. Urbana & Champaign Sanitary Dist.

• Decision Date: 26 August 2020
• Docket Number: NO. 4-19-0850,4-19-0850
• Parties: I-57 AND CURTIS, LLC, a Florida Limited Liability Company, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The URBANA AND CHAMPAIGN SANITARY DISTRICT, an Illinois Special District; The City of Urbana, an Illinois Body Politic and Corporate; The City of Champaign, an Illinois Body Politic and Corporate; The Village of Savoy, an Illinois Body Politic and Corporate; and The Village of Bondville, an Illinois Body Politic and Corporate, Defendants-Appellees.
• Court: United States Appellate Court of Illinois

2020 IL App (4th) 190850
164 N.E.3d 99
444 Ill.Dec. 474

I-57 AND CURTIS, LLC, a Florida Limited Liability Company, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
The URBANA AND CHAMPAIGN SANITARY DISTRICT, an Illinois Special District; The City of Urbana, an Illinois Body Politic and Corporate; The City of Champaign, an Illinois Body Politic and Corporate; The Village of Savoy, an Illinois Body Politic and Corporate; and The Village of Bondville, an Illinois Body Politic and Corporate, Defendants-Appellees.

NO. 4-19-0850

Appellate Court of Illinois, Fourth District.

Filed August 26, 2020

Matthew R. Trapp and Jason E. Brokaw, of Giffin, Winning, Cohen & Bodewes, P.C., of Springfield, and Kristina M. Swanson, of Wooden McLaughlin LLP, of Indianapolis, Indiana, for appellant.

James A. Martinkus, of Erwin, Martinkus & Cole, Ltd., of Champaign, for appellee Urbana and Champaign Sanitary District.

Thomas S. Yu and Frederick Stavins, of Champaign, for appellee City of Champaign.

James D. Green, of Thomas Mamer LLP, of Champaign, for appellee Village of Savoy.

Joseph P. Chamley and Amanda Riess, of Evans, Froehlich, Beth & Chamley, of Champaign, for appellee Village of Bondville.

James L. Simon and Curt S. Borman, of Urbana, for appellee City of Urbana.

JUSTICE CAVANAGH delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion.

444 Ill.Dec. 477

¶ 1 Plaintiff, I-57 and Curtis, LLC, a Florida limited liability company, brought this action against the Urbana and Champaign Sanitary District (Sanitary District), the City of Champaign, and other municipal defendants, seeking to invalidate an intergovernmental contract and some related ordinances. The contract, to which the Sanitary District and the municipal defendants are signatories, governs annexations of territory to the Sanitary District and (by virtue of such annexations) new connections to the sewer lines of the Sanitary District. Plaintiff considers itself to be wronged by the contract and related ordinances in essentially two ways. First, as the contract and an implementing ordinance require, the board of trustees of the Sanitary District (Board) will allow plaintiff to annex its land to the Sanitary District and will allow plaintiff to connect to a sewer line of the Sanitary District only if plaintiff enters into a municipal annexation agreement with the City of Champaign—which plaintiff is unwilling to do because then the land would be subject to the City of Champaign's zoning regulations. Second, pursuant to an ordinance of its own, the City of Champaign will approve the development of plaintiff's land as a subdivision (which would require connection to the sewer line of the Sanitary District) only if plaintiff enters into a municipal annexation agreement with the City of Champaign.

¶ 2 Against this annexation leverage, the first amended complaint advances several legal theories. Plaintiff claims that the intergovernmental contract is statutorily unauthorized,

164 N.E.3d 103

444 Ill.Dec. 478

if not positively forbidden by statutory law. Also, plaintiff claims that, by effectively stymieing the development of plaintiff's land, defendants have deprived plaintiff of a valuable property interest without the due process of law. Finally, plaintiff claims that "coerced annexation" violates plaintiff's constitutional right to freely and voluntarily choose whether and how to participate in the electoral process of municipal annexation. On those theories, the first amended complaint seeks declaratory relief, damages, attorney fees, and injunctive relief.

¶ 3 After answering the first amended complaint, defendants moved for a judgment on the pleadings. See 735 ILCS 5/2-615(e) (West 2018). The circuit court of Champaign County granted the motion. Plaintiff appeals.

¶ 4 We have reviewed de novo (see Pekin Insurance Co. v. Wilson , 237 Ill. 2d 446, 455, 341 Ill.Dec. 497, 930 N.E.2d 1011 (2010) ) the uncontroverted well-pleaded facts in the first amended complaint (see Village of Worth v. Hahn , 206 Ill. App. 3d 987, 990, 151 Ill.Dec. 895, 565 N.E.2d 166 (1990) ), any fair and reasonable inferences that can be drawn from those facts (see Wilson , 237 Ill. 2d at 455, 341 Ill.Dec. 497, 930 N.E.2d 1011 ), the exhibits attached to the first amended complaint (see State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. Young , 2012 IL App (1st) 103736, ¶ 11, 360 Ill.Dec. 266, 968 N.E.2d 759 ), the matters subject to judicial notice (see M.A.K. v. Rush-Presbyterian-St.-Luke's Medical Center , 198 Ill. 2d 249, 255, 261 Ill.Dec. 710, 764 N.E.2d 1 (2001) ), and the judicial admissions in the record (see id. ). In our review, we find no genuine issue of material fact, and we conclude that defendants are entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. See Gillen v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. , 215 Ill. 2d 381, 385, 294 Ill.Dec. 163, 830 N.E.2d 575 (2005). Therefore, we affirm the judgment.

¶ 5 I. BACKGROUND

¶ 6 Boneyard Creek is about three miles long and runs through the cities of Champaign and Urbana, Illinois, before flowing into the Saline Branch drainage ditch, north of downtown Urbana. The creek drains the stormwater that runs off from Champaign and Urbana.

¶ 7 On January 31, 1949, the Sanitary District entered into an "indenture" (an archaic word for a contract) in which the Sanitary District agreed to assume full responsibility for Boneyard Creek. In re Saline Branch Drainage District , 172 Ill. App. 3d 574, 575, 122 Ill.Dec. 546, 526 N.E.2d 939 (1988). The parties to this contract—let us call it "the Boneyard Indenture"—were the Sanitary District, the Saline Branch Drainage District (Drainage District), the City of Urbana, and the City of Champaign. Id. In the Boneyard Indenture, they "recognized the jurisdiction of the Sanitary District over the Boneyard and its existing open tributaries, draining such lands, and over the rights-of-way, improvements, drains[,] and drainage structures in the Boneyard." Id. ; see 70 ILCS 2405/7 (West 2018) (empowering the board of trustees of a sanitary district to "provide for the drainage of such district by laying out, establishing, constructing[,] and maintaining one or more channels * * * for carrying off and disposing the drainage (including the sewage) of such district"). The Sanitary District agreed to accept " ‘full and complete responsibility for the improvements and maintenance of the Boneyard and its existing open tributaries, and it [agreed] to provide and keep in repair an adequate system of storm water drainage therein and to correct any sanitary and unhealthful conditions existing therein.’ "

164 N.E.3d 104

444 Ill.Dec. 479

In re Saline , 172 Ill. App. 3d at 575, 122 Ill.Dec. 546, 526 N.E.2d 939. The Drainage District, for its part, agreed that lands lying within the boundaries of both the Drainage District and the Sanitary District would be detached from the Drainage District and would cease to be included in it. Id. at 576, 122 Ill.Dec. 546, 526 N.E.2d 939.

¶ 8 On March 16, 1992, the Sanitary District entered into another contract, this one titled "Agreement re Boneyard Drainage District" (hereinafter, "Municipal Assumption Agreement"). The contracting parties were the Sanitary District, the City of Champaign, and the City of Urbana. In this contract, they acknowledged some persistent problems: pollutants still were getting into Boneyard Creek, and the creek still was unable to handle all the stormwater from Champaign and Urbana. Therefore, the City of Champaign and the City of Urbana wanted to take over the management of these problems. To that end, the Sanitary District assigned to the City of Champaign and the City of Urbana all of its rights and powers under the Boneyard Indenture, and the City of Champaign and the City of Urbana assumed all of the duties of the Sanitary District under the Boneyard Indenture. Within their respective geographical boundaries, the City of Champaign and the City of Urbana agreed to take over, from the Sanitary District, full responsibility for the improvement and maintenance of Boneyard Creek.

¶ 9 This municipal assumption of responsibility, however, was tied to another agreement, which the Sanitary District executed at the same time:

"This [Municipal Assumption] Agreement is being executed concurrently with the execution of a certain agreement entitled [‘]Agreement Concerning [S]anitary [S]ewers[’] [(hereinafter, ‘Sewer Agreement’),] which is being executed by the City of Champaign, City of Urbana, Village of Savoy, and [the] Sanitary District. If a court of competent jurisdiction declares that the [Sewer] [A]greement * * *, or any provision therein, is invalid or otherwise unenforceable in whole or in part, or declares this [Municipal Assumption] Agreement to be invalid or otherwise unenforceable in whole or in part, the obligations of the Parties to this [Municipal Assumption] Agreement shall forthwith cease and terminate at the date of the exhaustion of the last appeal from such declaration of invalidity or unenforceability."

(Later, the Village of Bondville joined in the Sewer Agreement.) Thus, if the Sewer Agreement were toppled in judicial proceedings, the Municipal Assumption Agreement would go down with it, and there would be...