*1 ig the unfortunately this case offered say, Sad to §2). earlier this court to reconsider its opportunity nored laws Sunday closing which defined allowed decisions The observance of challenge. to survive constitutional and individ worship personal of rest or day specific governmental no for imposing matter. There is basis ual A closer examination such customs. sanctions enforce re their surface would laws beneath Sunday closing mer to protect are a device they principally veal from on Sunday do not want stay open chants who such, simul they from those that do. As competition process. and violative of due hypocritical taneously I from the decision Accordingly, dissent respectfully of the court.
(No. 72044. PRESS, v. THE CODE ENFORCE- JAY Appellee, al., Appellants. MENT BOARD OF APPEALS et Opinion June filed
HEIPLE, J., dissenting. Stavins,
Frederick C. and Attorney, Rochelle A. Funderburg, Assistant City Attorney, for Champaign, appellants.
Glenn A. Stanko and Todd J. Black, Reno, O’Byrne & P.C., of Kepley, Champaign, appellee.
CHIEF JUSTICE MILLER delivered the opinion of the court: January appellee Press received Jay notice
of 47 code housing violations on his located at property 404 East Street Healey The Champaign. viola only the 1985 chapter at issue here were based tions Life Fire Protection Association Code Safety National Association, Life Fire Protection (National Safety 3.4, at 101— 101 —128 through through §§20 20 — — 1.1 by city (Champaign, ordinance adopted 6, 1986)) (hereinafter Bill 86 — 87 Ill., (May Council No. alleged The Code)). inspec violations that Press’ should be tor were based on belief the Life Safety as a house” under categorized “rooming using pro reached this conclusion inspector rejected approach by cess-of-elimination pos under the Code. Other other classifications possible hotels, dormitories, include sible Code classifications one- two-family dwellings. apartment buildings, code enforcement appealed Champaign that his board of which concluded house was appeals, Code and upheld house” under the Life On administrative review to alleged violations. the circuit judge up circuit court Champaign County, *3 issue, that Press’ ruling held the violations at again house” in' “rooming fell within the definition of building to the appealed the Life Press Safety subsequently criticized the pro court appellate court. appellate the city classify cess-of-elimination used approach by of house, “rooming that the definition Press’ and ruled “the house was rented not satisfied because house” was rent not individuals entirety, by to all in its signatories Ill. 3d (213 App. rooms.” sleeping ing separate Ill. 2d R. (134 the leave to granted appeal We 308.) 315). the house owned
The issue is whether presented un- “rooming house” Press was classified as correctly that the Life Code. We conclude der reverse the judg- and therefore correctly was classified court. appellate ment of the
According to the the testimony before code enforce- board, ment at the the discovered, time violations were Press’ house was rented to 11 stu- University Illinois dents. The lease was nine the signed by tenants one the other two at day other times. The lease specified that the entire house was leased to all 11 ten- ants, each of whom was for the responsible entire rent and for the maintenance the upkeep premises. The tenants agreed among who themselves would sleep in what bedroom and what percentage rent each tenant would pay. Press testified that tenants sometimes rooms, switched and some moved in and out the during year. usually Press received rent checks from individual tenants, one but sometimes tenant would an- pay for other.
The house had been an previously apartment building containing apartments individual cooking facili- ties. Press the When he bought building, removed most of the kitchens. The house had two kitchens remaining available for use by all tenants. None of the bed- rooms had individual Some cooking facilities. doors, rooms had numbers on the but Press testified that there; he did them not were left from put they when an was The front building apartment door building. had a lock and each of the bedrooms could be locked. Press testified individual rooms were locked, usually city’s but director of were the time in- safety testified most locked at spected the that he premises. originally testified door gave front of tenants keys group and bed- room to individual tenants. new tenants keys When in, moved would receive their from the old they keys tenants.
The Life house” Code defines as: *4 building[] separate sleeping rooms “[a] for a of accommodations total providing sleeping
285 or permanent on a transient persons 16 fewer either or separate cooking without basis, or without meals but with occupants ***.” facilities individual §20-1.1.1. that in matter, general observe
As a we preliminary a statute of interpretations deference to gives this court its administra by agency charged or ordinance an inter not, however, agency’s an tion. We are bound or erroneous. if it is unreasonable pretation of State, County, & v. American Federation Decatur of 2d Ill. Local Employees, Municipal house” to be a building for Press’ order Code, require- it must meet three under Life Safety rented; (2) rooms must be ments: (1) separate sleeping (3) must for 16 or fewer persons; the accommodations be separate cooking must not provide accommodations There were occu- facilities for individual occupants. no that the sec- so there is pants building, dispute ond was met. requirement that the that the lease argues specifies because tenant, to each the code’s
entire was rented premises are rented” is not rooms “separate sleeping language that a argues do not The land- agree. satisfied. We not to control the his category lord should be allowed form lease he codes housing under building rather, how the one should look to adopt; chooses to reason- is a used. We believe building actually The and requirements safety able approach. ex- building. codes vary according type of resi- safety such codes to design protect perts based dents, make their recommendations on how tenants leases, in their but what landlords write record shows buildings. use different types some- tenants had their own bedrooms individual Thus, is sufficient evi- them locked. there times kept *5 dence in the record for the to conclude that the house being was used as a rooming house. next argues
Press that his house does meet the definition of house” because “separate cooking were facilities” Press provided. argues because can be a “with rooming house or without meals” landlord, the provided by the phrase “separate facilities cooking for individual must to refer occupants” facilities for the cooking available exclusive use the rather the residents than for landlord to meals. prepare Because his house had two kitchens available for the use tenants, the argues Press the house provided facilities” “separate cooking and is therefore not a house. rooming
We as reject argument interpretation well. Press’ would sense if make the word “individual” only were left out. believe that “separate cooking We facilities for occupants” individual means facilities that available one tenant. There is no only that Press’ house dispute had two communal kitchens and that there were no kitchens in individual which bedrooms were available tenant. does only single This not constitute “separate cooking facilities individual occupants.” above, For the reasons we hold that expressed Press’ house satisfies definition of house rooming under of the chapter 20 Code. We therefore reverse of the court affirm the judgment appellate judg- ment of the circuit decision upholding court of the code enforcement board of appeals. reversed; court
Appellate court circuit affirmed. HEIPLE, dissenting: JUSTICE Illinois, owns a house Jay Champaign, 1988, he college rents to students. January was to 11 Under the of the students. terms lease tenants, to all 11 each of entire was leased for the entire rent and upkeep whom was responsible house, Following an inspection premises. chapter of various violations received notice Fire Association Life Safety 1985 National Protection Association, Life (National Fire Protection 3.4, at 101— 128 through through Code §§20 20 — — 1.1 (Champaign, by city 101 — 129 ordinance adopted Bill l., 1986)).) 86 — 87 (May Council No. Il violations stemmed from Press’ house as a classifying At issue is whether Press’ house falls “rooming house.” house.” within the Code’s definition of “rooming *6 which statutes govern The same rules of construction Strict con to ordinances. construing municipal apply is create liability struction to to statutes which given be v. (Anderson exist. Board where none would otherwise No. 91 390 Ill. Education School District of 412, defines “room 422.) The Code section 20 — 1.1.1 part house” in as follows: ing pertinent rooming buildings in “Lodging or houses include sleeping providing sleeping ac separate rooms are persons 16 or ***.” commodations for total of fewer 1.1.1, at added.) 101— (Emphasis §20 — 128. of “room-
In order to fall within the Code’s definition house,” rooms must be rented. ing separate sleeping admits, the However, lease provides majority to the tenants in its entirety the house was rented all of Thus, rooms. and not renting separate sleeping terms not fall express does to look how the house at majority, by contending used, ordinance. rewriting municipal is Champaign’s of how wise it would be to struc- Regardless require to applicable the fire safety provisions ture meet Code, the City under the Life Safety houses rooming has not Champaign provided for this structure. The bur- den of redrafting amending ordnances municipal falls upon municipality itself. The Champaign its current modifying ordinance would be able to bring Press’ house within terms its and subject the fire safety provisions. It is not the responsi- bility of this court to correct errors drafting and rewrite municipal ordinances as we deem may appropriate. I
Accordingly, respectfully dissent from the decision of the court.
(No. 72346. THE PEOPLE OF THE ILLINOIS, STATE OF Appel-
lant, v. JONES, HENEY Appellee.
Opinion June filed