Monday, October 31, 2016
Friday, October 28, 2016
Friday, October 28, 2016 Julie Tappendorf
I think it's unlikely this bill will pass and question whether the law could even be enforced if it does. But, it's Friday, and it's the most interesting bill I've read recently.
Thursday, October 27, 2016
Thursday, October 27, 2016 Julie Tappendorf
Monday, October 24, 2016
Monday, October 24, 2016 Julie Tappendorf
Tier I and Tier II organizations are publicly identified terrorist groups such as ISIS and al‐Qaeda. Tier III organizations are defined in 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(3)(B)(vi)(III) as any group of two or more people that engages in terrorist activity (as defined in 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(3)(B)(iv)), even if their terrorist activity is conducted exclusively against regimes that are enemies of the United States. Tier III organizations tend to have a lower profile than Tier I’s or Tier II’s, not only because the government does not publish their names but also because they tend to be groups about which the U.S. government does not have good intelligence.
Friday, October 21, 2016
Friday, October 21, 2016 Julie Tappendorf
Wednesday, October 19, 2016
Wednesday, October 19, 2016 Julie Tappendorf
7:45 – 8:15 Registration
Peter M. Friedman, Holland & Knight LLP, Chicago
Peter M. Friedman, Holland & Knight LLP, Chicago
Michael F. Zimmermann, Tressler LLP, Chicago
John B. Murphey, Rosenthal, Murphey, Coblentz & Donahue, Chicago
James V. Ferolo, Klein, Thorpe and Jenkins, Ltd., Chicago
Katherine S. Janega, Former Attorney for Village of Winnetka, Chicago
(1.0 Professional Responsibility Pending Approval)
Steven M. Elrod, Holland & Knight LLP, Chicago
Julie A. Tappendorf, Ancel, Glink, Diamond, Bush, DiCianni & Krafthefer, P.C., Chicago
During our annual “lunch & learn” session, each member of our top-notch faculty will lead a small-group discussion on the ethical and practical dilemma of electronic messaging that confronts every elected and appointed public official. Recent cases on this topic will also be analyzed.
All Members of the Faculty
Steven B. Adams, Robbins Schwartz, Chicago
Lance C. Malina, Klein, Thorpe and Jenkins, Ltd., Chicago
All Members of the Faculty will Participate as Members of the Panel
(1.25 Professional Responsibility Pending Approval)
Patrick W. Hayes, Legal Director, City of Rockford
Jeffrey R. Jurgens, City Attorney, City of Bloomington
Patricia J. Lord, Senior Assistant City Attorney, City of Naperville
Michael M. Lorge, orporation Counsel, Village of Skokie
Enza Petrarca Village Attorney, Village of Downers Grove
Steven M. Elrod and Peter M. Friedman, Panel Moderators
Friday, October 14, 2016
Friday, October 14, 2016 Julie Tappendorf
An increase or decrease in the salary of an elected officer of any unit of local government shall not take effect during the term for which that officer is elected.
Thursday, October 13, 2016
Thursday, October 13, 2016 Julie Tappendorf
Monday, October 10, 2016
7th Circuit Rejects Taxi Company Constitutional Claims They Were Treated Less Favorably Than Ridesharing Services
Monday, October 10, 2016 Julie Tappendorf
Friday, October 7, 2016
Friday, October 07, 2016 Julie Tappendorf
neither a local public entity nor a public employee is liable for an injury caused by a condition of…any hiking, riding, fishing, or hunting trail. 745 ILCS 10/3-107(b).
As a matter of law, this restriction defeats the City’s assertion that the path is a riding or hiking trail. No contention has been made that the path is located in a mountainous region (mountains being scarce in Lake County). No serious contention can be made that the path is located in a forest; no reasonable person who views the photographs of the path and its surroundings, or even reads their descriptions by those who have seen them, would describe those surroundings as a forest. The path is bordered by narrow bands of greenway that sport some shrubs and a few trees; these narrow bands are surrounded by industrial development, residential neighborhoods, parking lots, railroad tracks, and major vehicular thoroughfares (to the east and south of the area of the accident). The case for considering the path a riding trail would not succeed even if utility poles could be considered trees with power lines for branches.
Thursday, October 6, 2016
Thursday, October 06, 2016 Julie Tappendorf
Wednesday, October 5, 2016
Wednesday, October 05, 2016 Julie Tappendorf
The law places two new obligations on covered units of local government: (1) to adopt by ordinance or resolution a local policy on expense reimbursements (section 10) and (2) to approve by roll call vote of the corporate authorities any expenses that exceed the maximum allowable reimbursement established by the local policy (section 15). The new law also prohibits any unit of local government from reimbursing entertainment expenses. (section 25)
Although the law takes effect on January 1, 2017, local governments have 180 days in which to adopt the local expense reimbursement policy (June 30, 2017), and 60 days to begin approving expenses that exceed the maximum reimbursement established by the local policy and expenses by members of the corporate authorities (March 1, 2017). These time-frames are somewhat inconsistent - without having a policy in place to establish the maximum allowable reimbursement (section 10), it is not clear what expenses will have to be approved by the corporate authorities as required by section 25. Because of this, it may be advisable to have a policy in place sooner rather than later, and at the very least no later than March 1, 2017.
The various provisions of the law are summarized below.
- an estimate of the cost of travel, meals or lodging if the expense has not yet been incurred or receipts for those expenses if they have already been incurred;
- the name and job title or position of the individual requesting reimbursement;
- the dates and nature of the official business in which the expenses were or will be expended.
2. Approval of Expenses
- sporting events
- any other place of public or private entertainment or amusement unless ancillary to the purpose of the program or event
Post Authored by Julie Tappendorf
Tuesday, October 4, 2016
Tuesday, October 04, 2016 Julie Tappendorf
1. Illinois Zoning Enabling Act.
Post Authored by Julie Tappendorf
Monday, October 3, 2016
Monday, October 03, 2016 Julie Tappendorf
(g) Any person shall be permitted an opportunity to address public officials under the rules established and recorded by the public body.
- A public body can restrict the time for public comment per speaker. For example, a 3 minute per speaker time limit for public comment is acceptable. 2011 PAC 17388
- A public body can restrict the total time for public comment at a particular meeting. For example, a 30 minute time limit for all public comments is acceptable. 2011 PAC 12740
- A public body can determine when public comment is allowed at a particular meeting. For example, a public body can schedule public comment at the end of the meeting, after agenda items have been voted on. 2012 PAC 18434; 2011 PAC 13082.
- A public body can limit each speaker to one opportunity for public comment. 2011 PAC 17388
- A public body can limit comments to topics germane to the agenda at a special meeting. 2012 PAC 20198
- A public body can establish and enforce rules on decorum (and remove a person for violating those rules). 2015 PAC 35101.
- A public body is not required to respond to questions during public comment. 2011 PAC 12309, 2011 PAC 17388, 2012 PAC 20198
- A public body is not obligated to list public comment on the agenda (but must provide an opportunity for public comment if a member of the public requests it). 2011 PAC 17388
- Public bodies cannot require a speaker to disclose his or her address as a condition to participating in public comment. PAC Op. 14-009.
- Public bodies cannot require a speaker to register 5 days in advance as a condition to participating in public comment. PAC Op. 14-012.
- A public body cannot require a speaker to disclose the subject or topic of his or her proposed comments as a condition to participating in public comment. 2015 PAC 37391
- A public body cannot adopt or apply a rule that prohibits criticism of public employees. Mnyofu v. Bd of Education of Rich Township H.S. Dist. (N.E. Dist., April 5, 2016).