Find Legal Information

PRESIDING JUSTICE HUTCHINSON delivered the opinion of the court:

Plaintiffs, Puffer-Hefty School District No. 69 (Puffer-Hefty) and Bruce Weeks,appeal from an order of the circuit court of Du Page County on administrative reviewaffirming a decision by defendant Du Page Regional Board of School Trustees (theBoard). Pursuant to sections 7--2a(b) and 7--11 of the School Code (105 ILCS 5/7--2a(b), 7--11 (West 1996)), the Board dissolved Puffer-Hefty and annexed its territoryto defendant Downers Grove School District No. 58 (Downers Grove). Plaintiffs fileda complaint seeking administrative review of the Board's decision and a judgmentdeclaring section 7--2a(b) of the School Code unconstitutional. The trial courtaffirmed the Board's decision but declined to rule on the constitutionality of thestatute. Plaintiffs timely appeal to this court, challenging the Board's decision andthe constitutionality of the statute. For the reasons that follow, we affirm theBoard's decision and uphold the constitutionality of section 7--2a(b) of the SchoolCode.

The following facts are taken from the record on appeal, including the Board'sfactual findings, which are "held to be prima facie true and correct" (735 ILCS 5/3--110 (West 2000)). Puffer-Hefty is situated within Du Page County, and in July 1997 itspopulation numbered less than 5,000 residents. In October 1996, residents of Puffer-Hefty filed a petition pursuant to sections 7--2a(b) and 7--11 of the School Code (105ILCS 5/7--2a(b), 7--11 (West 1996)), seeking to dissolve the school district and annexits territory to a contiguous school district. In December 1996 the Board dismissedthe petition because the petition lacked the proper designation of a "committee of 10"petitioners as required by section 7--6(c) of the School Code (105 ILCS 5/7--6(c) (West1996)), and the Board, therefore, lacked jurisdiction.

On January 27, 1997, defendant Committee of Ten conducted a public informationalmeeting to inform residents of Puffer-Hefty of the proposed dissolution and to answerquestions regarding the proposed dissolution. Prior to that, the Committee of Ten gaveat least 10 days' notice of the meeting by publication in the Chicago Tribune.

On July 25, 1997, the Committee of Ten filed a second petition seekingdissolution of Puffer-Hefty and annexation of its territory pursuant to sections 7--2a(b) and 7--11 of the School Code (105 ILCS 5/7--2a(b), 7--11 (West 1996)). As ofJuly 25, 1997, Puffer-Hefty had 1,947 registered voters. The petition filed on July25 contained 1,169 signatures. The parties later stipulated that, of those 1,169signatures, 3 individuals had moved or died before July 25, 1997, thereby invalidatingthose signatures, and 65 signatures were duplicates and should be counted only once. The parties agreed that, after the subsection of those 68 signatures, the petitioncontained 1,101 valid signatures.

On October 6, 1997, the Board dismissed the second petition after it determinedthat it violated section 7--8 of the School Code (105 ILCS 5/7--8 (West 1996)), whichprohibited the filing of a similar petition for dissolution and annexation within twoyears of the resolution of an earlier petition. On administrative review, the trialcourt reversed the Board's dismissal of the second petition, and this court affirmed. See Holbrook v. Regional Board of School Trustees, 305 Ill. App. 3d 744 (1999).

On remand, the Board resumed hearings and designated December 10, 1999, as thefinal date by which the parties could submit signature withdrawals, rescission ofsignature withdrawals, and signature additions to the original petition. The Boardreconvened on July 17, 2000, to rule on the petition. The Board first made decisionsregarding the validity of the signatures to be withdrawn from and added to thepetition. The Board then voted unanimously that the petition was signed by a majorityof the registered voters of Puffer-Hefty and that the petition was properly filed undersection 7--2a(b) of the School Code. The Board thereafter recognized the dissolutionof Puffer-Hefty and indicated it would conduct further hearings regarding the issue ofannexation.

On February 15, 2001, after conducting additional hearings, the Board decided toannex Puffer-Hefty to Downers Grove. See 105 ILCS 5/7--11 (West 1996). The Board'sdecisions were reflected in its written order dated February 22, 2001. On March 5,2001, plaintiffs filed a complaint in the trial court seeking administrative review ofthe Board's decision and seeking a declaratory judgment that section 7--2a(b) of theSchool Code was unconstitutional. Both sides fully briefed the issues. On January 25,2002, the trial court affirmed the Board's decisions to dissolve Puffer-Hefty and annexits territory to Downers Grove. Plaintiffs timely appeal following the trial court'sdenial of their motion to reconsider.

[The following material is nonpublishable under Supreme Court Rule 23.]

[The preceding material is nonpublishable under Supreme Court Rule 23.]

Plaintiffs first contend that the trial court erred when it declined to rule onthe constitutionality of section 7--2a(b) of the School Code (105 ILCS 5/7--2a(b) (West1996)). Plaintiffs argued that section 7--2a(b) violated the equal protection clause(U.S. Const., amend. XIV) and constituted special legislation (Ill. Const. 1970, art.IV,