Mokena Community Park District v. Romanek
146 N.E.3d 860
Ill. App. Ct.2020Background:
- Mokena Community Park District sued for a declaratory judgment asking the court to declare the park director employment agreement unenforceable.
- The employment agreement provided a three-year term beginning May 2, 2012, with automatic three‑year renewals unless either party gave 180 days’ notice before renewal.
- Park District alleged the renewal clause violated the Park District Code (limiting contract terms to three years), the Open Meetings Act, and public policy by binding future boards.
- James Romanek counterclaimed for breach, alleging he received nonrenewal notice on Nov. 2, 2015, was terminated Apr. 26, 2016, and is owed two years’ salary/benefits.
- The Park District moved to dismiss under section 2‑615, arguing the contract was void ab initio/ultra vires because a board cannot bind future boards; the circuit court granted dismissal and closed the case.
- The appellate court reversed and remanded, holding the Millikin rule did not bar the contract because the Park District Code authorizes multi‑year director contracts (up to three years).
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a park district board may enter an employment contract (with automatic renewal) that effectively binds future boards | The Park District: the renewal clause is ultra vires and void because one board cannot bind future boards; statutory caps and Open Meetings concerns support invalidity | Romanek: the Park District Code (§ 8‑1(i)) authorizes multi‑year contracts for a park director, so the contract is valid | Court: Millikin rule does not apply here; § 8‑1(i) permits up to three‑year contracts for park directors, so contract not ultra vires; reversal and remand |
| Whether dismissal under section 2‑615 was proper | The Park District: facial attack — complaint fails because contract void ab initio | Romanek: well‑pled facts (notice, termination, damages) could entitle him to relief; dismissal premature | Court: dismissal improper on the ultra vires ground; remanded for further proceedings (other Park District arguments not reached) |
Key Cases Cited
- Millikin v. County of Edgar, 142 Ill. 528 (1892) (established rule that one elected board ordinarily cannot bind future boards)
- Hostrop v. Board of Junior College District No. 515, 523 F.2d 569 (7th Cir. 1975) (held legislative authorization can supersede the Millikin rule for certain governmental bodies)
- Breuder v. Board of Trustees of Community College District No. 502, 888 F.3d 266 (7th Cir. 2018) (followed Hostrop; concluded statutory limits imply authority to enter multi‑year contracts that extend past the next election)
- Marshall v. Burger King Corp., 222 Ill. 2d 422 (2006) (articulated the de novo standard and pleading requirements for a section 2‑615 motion to dismiss)
- Oswald v. Hamer, 2018 IL 122203 (2018) (statutory‑construction issues are reviewed de novo)