Complaints raised by a homeowner whose land was forcibly annexed last week prompted village trustees to rethink their policy on annexation.
The legal committee Tuesday night considered personalizing the state-required notification policy by proposing that a letter be sent to homeowners when the village intends to forcibly annex their land. State law only requires that a municipality publish a legal notice in a local newspaper 10 days prior to a public hearing on an annexation.
Because no other notification was required, the village did not inform homeowner Beverly Rauch and her family that their home, which sits on 1.75 acres of unincorporated land at 143rd Street and 84th Avenue, would technically change addresses. Unless they spotted the legal notice in the newspaper, the family would have discovered the change from unincorporated Cook County to village residency on the next property tax bill.
Rauch said a friend happened to see the legal notice, and that’s why she was able to address the Village Board when the matter was taken up last week. At that meeting, the board approved the annexation despite her objection.
She complained that it was “inconsiderate” for the village not to notify her family by phone or letter of its intentions to annex property that had been in the Rauch family for 50 years.
The Village Board agreed and referred the issue to the legal committee for review. Committee Chairman and Trustee Richard Della Croce, said, “In the past, we strictly adhered to the state statutes.” But the board now recognizes the need to create its own policy at least in the case of residential property owners, he said. The committee is considering applying the additional notification policy only in the cases of individual residential property owners, but legal counsel needs to review whether the policy can be defined to exclude commercial land, said Della Croce.
For Rauch, adopting a village address will mean municipal library, garbage and police services as well as village real estate taxes to pay for them. And, the laws governing county developments will be replaced by more stringent village standards.
Because those village standards prohibit business signs on residential property, Rauch on Tuesday asked that a variance be granted to allow a sign that would advertise a home-based accounting service that will be moving into the home.
Della Croce said, “because of the circumstances, I don’t have a problem with the sign.”
But Trustee Bernard Murphy voted against the variance, saying, “I think it’s going to set a precedent for other businesses. I think it’s wrong.”
While the new notification policy is further explored in committee, the proposed sign variance moves to the Village Board next month for a vote.
