Home | News Index | Southern Link | Northern Link | How to Oppose | Kane 2020 Plan | Kendall Plan
Aurora Beacon-News
December 5, 2002
State seeks dismissal: Kendall County judge to rule next week
By Dave Parro
STAFF WRITER
YORKVILLE — A Kendall County judge is expected to rule as early as next week on the state's motion to dismiss
a landowners' lawsuit that alleges the Illinois Department of Transportation unconstitutionally took land to record
a corridor for the proposed Prairie Parkway.
Sixteenth Circuit Court Judge Leonard Wojtecki heard arguments on the motion last week and said he would rule
in 14 days. IDOT filed the motion to dismiss Nov. 19, two months after landowners filed the six-count complaint
challenging plans for the roadway through Kane, Kendall and Grundy counties.
Even if the judge denies the motion to dismiss, it likely outlines IDOT's defense for when the case would go
to trial next year.
IDOT attorneys argued the lawsuit has no legal grounds because property has not been taken, meaning none of the
56 plaintiffs listed in the complaint suffered injury when the state recorded a 36-mile protection corridor for
the proposed highway July 31.
The corridor protects land from future development, but the property still belongs to the landowners, the state
said.
"The defendants neither confiscated plaintiffs' property nor deprived plaintiffs of any economically viable
use of their property," the state argued in its motion.
IDOT spokesman Mike Monseur refused comment until Wojtecki rules on the motion.
The lawsuit alleges IDOT violated the law by taking property without showing a public need for the highway, giving
notice to a significant portion of landowners or making "bona fide" offers to property owners for their
land.
Opponents of the proposed highway, which would link Interstates 88 and 80, also said the state has to go through
an eminent-domain process of declaring a need for the land, appraising the property and making an offer before
taking land.
IDOT, however, argues it followed proper procedure in recording a corridor under a 1967 state law. Compensation
must only be made when "the interference deprives owner of substantial use of property," IDOT attorneys
argued.
Corridor protection under the state law requires property owners to notify IDOT if they plan to make changes
on their land. IDOT then either allows the change or buys the property through eminent domain.
Because IDOT provides a way for landowners to still develop their land or be compensated through eminent domain,
landowners' rights have not been violated, and the lawsuit should be dismissed, the state argued.
IDOT also argued there is no assurance the highway will be built and that landowners actually could benefit from
higher property values as a result of the corridor being recorded.
The plaintiffs, represented by St. Charles attorney Tim Dwyer, did not respond to the motion in court. Dwyer
could not be reached for comment.