2020 IL 125714
Ill.2020Background
- Timothy Burns filed a petition (July 2019) to place a term-limits referendum on the March 17, 2020 Elk Grove Village primary ballot limiting village president and trustees to two consecutive four-year terms and counting prior service.
- Benjamin Lee objected, invoking newly enacted 65 ILCS 5/3.1-10-17, which requires municipal term limits to be prospective (only service after adoption counts).
- The Municipal Officers Electoral Board sustained Lee’s objection and disallowed the referendum as inconsistent with §3.1-10-17.
- Burns sought judicial review; the Cook County circuit court reversed, holding §3.1-10-17 unconstitutional facially and as applied and ordering the referendum on the ballot.
- The Illinois Supreme Court took direct appeal, held §3.1-10-17 constitutional both facially and as applied to the Elk Grove petition, affirmed the electoral board, and vacated the circuit court’s rulings concerning statutory provisions that did not affect the parties.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the General Assembly validly limited home-rule municipalities to impose term limits prospectively | Burns: §3.1-10-17 unlawfully restricts home rule power under art. VII §6(f) to let voters set terms by referendum | Lee/State: Legislature may limit concurrent home-rule power under art. VII §6(i) if expressed; statute contains that express limitation | Court: GA validly imposed an express limitation; prospective requirement is within legislative authority |
| Facial challenge to §3.1-10-17 | Burns: statute facially invalid; no circumstance in which it would be constitutional | Lee: statute can validly apply in at least some circumstances | Court: Facial challenge fails because statute can be validly applied |
| As-applied challenge re: Elk Grove referendum | Burns: statute unconstitutional as applied to his petition because it would bar referendum that counts prior service | Lee: statute governs and prohibits retroactive counting of prior service | Court: Statute is constitutional as applied; electoral board properly rejected the petition |
| Retroactive effect on prior municipal term-limit referenda (passed on/after Nov. 8, 2016) | Burns: §3.1-10-17 unlawfully retroactive and nullifies voter-approved term limits elsewhere | Lee: Those provisions do not affect Elk Grove petition / parties here | Court: Trial court erred to decide provisions that don't affect the parties; Supreme Court vacated that portion of the circuit court ruling and declined to rule on retroactivity as to other municipalities |
Key Cases Cited
- Goodman v. Ward, 241 Ill. 2d 398 (Ill. 2011) (electoral board lacks authority to declare statute unconstitutional)
- Napleton v. Village of Hinsdale, 229 Ill. 2d 296 (Ill. 2008) (facial-challenge standard)
- In re M.T., 221 Ill. 2d 517 (Ill. 2006) (existence of any valid application defeats facial challenge)
- Flynn v. Ryan, 199 Ill. 2d 430 (Ill. 2002) (courts avoid deciding constitutionality of provisions not affecting parties)
- Chicago Teachers Union v. Board of Education of the City of Chicago, 189 Ill. 2d 200 (Ill. 2000) (same principle on justiciability)
- Klein v. Department of Registration & Education, 412 Ill. 75 (Ill. 1952) (courts do not rule where provisions do not affect parties)
- Schillerstrom Homes, Inc. v. City of Naperville, 198 Ill. 2d 281 (Ill. 2001) (home rule preemption principles)
- Palm v. 2800 Lake Shore Drive Condominium Ass'n, 2013 IL 110505 (Ill. 2013) (General Assembly may expressly preempt home-rule authority)