Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar » You gotta be kidding me
SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax      Advertise Here      About     Exclusive Subscriber Content     Updated Posts    Contact Rich Miller
CapitolFax.com
To subscribe to Capitol Fax, click here.
You gotta be kidding me

Tuesday, May 10, 2022 - Posted by Rich Miller

* The city for years relied on its interpretation of a state legislative “drafting error” to impose hundreds of millions in fines? Brilliant. What could possibly go wrong?

An Illinois appellate court ruled Friday that the city of Chicago unlawfully overcharged some residents who were ticketed for failing to have a vehicle sticker, which one car owner said led him to declare bankruptcy after he racked up thousands of dollars in fines.

Attorney Jacie Zolna, who represents three residents in a lawsuit that led to the ruling, said the decision sets the stage for a possible class-action lawsuit that could see hundreds of millions of dollars in ticket debt come under scrutiny. […]

Vehicle stickers are at the heart of the case. The city charges $95 annually for a passenger car sticker, with the money going toward road maintenance. Failing to display a sticker can mean a ticket.

State law sets the maximum penalty for such an offense at $250, but city attorneys argued that was “a drafting error” in the vehicle code, according to the appellate court ruling. They said the legislature intended the true ceiling to be $500 and the city charged accordingly, with a $200 ticket bringing an additional $200 fine if not paid within 25 days.

* From the opinion

Although we rest our interpretation of this statute on its plain language and our resistance to any assumption that there has been a legislative error, we note that the history of the $500 cap in section 11-208.3(a) also supports this understanding. For most of section 11-208.3’s history, the caps in subsections (a) and (b)(10) were both set at $250. Then, in 2010, the statute was amended to allow for the administrative adjudication of violations of section 11-1201.1 of the Vehicle Code, a provision that deals with automated railroad crossing enforcement systems. See Pub. Act 96- 478, § 5 (eff. Jan. 1, 2010) (amending 625 ILCS 5/11-208.3(a)). As part of this same amendment, in addition to new language on section 11-1201.1, the cap in section 11-208.3(a) was raised to $500 for the first time, presumably to accommodate the higher fines now permitted by the new railroad crossing statute. See id. Meanwhile, in that same 2010 amendment, the $250 cap in section 11-208.3(b)(10) was left unchanged. See id. Plaintiffs argue convincingly that the decision not to raise the $250 figure in section 11-208.3(b)(10), either in 2010 or in any subsequent amendments, reflects a legislative intent “to leave in place the $250 limitation for the ordinance violations that were already in existence prior to the passage of the railroad safety law.”

Seems reasonable.

Also, if the city truly believed this was an error, the brain trust shoulda passed a trailer bill to clean it up.

       

18 Comments
  1. - Ozzy - Tuesday, May 10, 22 @ 3:26 pm:

    Speculation, did the City only read the bill synopsis and not bill? This will be interesting to watch play out.

    SB 148 (2009), p. 11 line 20 of the enrolled changes $250 to $500, but p. 20 line 5 does not make the second change.

    https://ilga.gov/legislation/billstatus.asp?DocNum=0148&GAID=10&GA=96&DocTypeID=SB&LegID=40585&SessionID=76&SpecSess=


  2. - Dirty Red - Tuesday, May 10, 22 @ 3:29 pm:

    And give up a revenue stream? As if.


  3. - Bruce( no not him) - Tuesday, May 10, 22 @ 3:33 pm:

    The legislature “intended” to charge more. So we did. /S


  4. - Real - Tuesday, May 10, 22 @ 3:34 pm:

    So none of the state legislatures residing in Chicago never noticed this going on? The average person has been charged these fees and at least knows people who have. This is what being out of touch looks like.


  5. - Just a guy - Tuesday, May 10, 22 @ 3:53 pm:

    The real comedy in this is that the wheel tax - which is what the city sticker is - is supposed to fund city road maintenance (all those potholes make one wonder). As Dirty Red already noted, if the city is making money on it, you’re going to have to pry it out of their hands to take it away.


  6. - Socially DIstant watcher - Tuesday, May 10, 22 @ 3:57 pm:

    It’s the City! “Don’t print what he said, print what he meant!”


  7. - Chris - Tuesday, May 10, 22 @ 3:58 pm:

    “Hundreds of millions”??

    Really? The issue is $150 per late payment penalty (the amount over the cap).

    Have there really been over 50,000 city sticker tickets issued per year AND paid late?


  8. - duck duck goose - Tuesday, May 10, 22 @ 4:00 pm:

    This case doesn’t make sense to me. The sticker requirement is a revenue matter, not a parking or moving violation that would be subject to section 11-208.3 of the Vehicle Code. The city has authority both under its home-rule powers and under division 2.1 of the Illinois Municipal Code to hold adjudications for nontraffic offenses, where the fines are, indeed, $500. Everyone in this case seems to assume that the Vehicle-Code procedures apply here.

    The court’s reasoning is somewhat circular here. The statute references the fine amount twice. The city’s argument is that the legislature made a change in one subsection of the statute but forgot to make the corresponding change in the other. The court said that the evidence against against a mistake is that the legislature didn’t make the change. That’s not exactly airtight logic. The fact that a typo exists is not evidence that the typo was intended.

    That said, it takes some moxie to claim a statutory typo to charge higher fees.


  9. - Occasional Quipper - Tuesday, May 10, 22 @ 4:09 pm:

    I always thought that legislative intent referred to things that weren’t specifically spelled out in the legislation, but were intended by the legislation. But there is nothing more spelled out than an actual number.


  10. - JB13 - Tuesday, May 10, 22 @ 4:09 pm:

    Well, see, sometimes in Illinois, as we’ve seen in the past two years, you can convince judges that what the law says isn’t actually what it means.

    So, it’s always worth a try.

    Settlement forthcoming soon.


  11. - Real - Tuesday, May 10, 22 @ 4:10 pm:

    Really? The issue is $150 per late payment penalty (the amount over the cap).

    Have there really been over 50,000 city sticker tickets issued per year AND paid late?

    Yeah there have because they can issue a new $200 ticket every day until you get a sticker. So if a person can’t afford the $95 sticker fee right away what makes the law makers think they then can afford a $200 fee not including the new sticker. Then having said ticket fee double in 25 days.


  12. - Anyone Remember - Tuesday, May 10, 22 @ 4:29 pm:

    Ask for a Formal Attorney General’s Opinion?


  13. - Juvenal - Tuesday, May 10, 22 @ 5:11 pm:

    @duck duck goose -

    Your argument is that Senate President Don Harmon did not know what was in his own bill, or that there was a typo that the City and its 25 lobbyists including Bill Luking didn’t catch. Not just once, but three times.

    You are the one not making sense.

    The likelier explanation is that the city came up with this drafting error explanation after the fact.


  14. - Elliott Ness - Wednesday, May 11, 22 @ 7:59 am:

    Typical of how Chicago “works”…


  15. - duck duck goose - Wednesday, May 11, 22 @ 8:40 am:

    Juvenal–
    None of those things were my argument. Try reading slower and maybe sounding out the words.


  16. - From DaZoo - Wednesday, May 11, 22 @ 9:02 am:

    I see this as a double whammy for City of Chicago general operating budget. Another recent court ruling told them vehicle fees have to be used exclusive for transportation related work, not general budget (per “lock box” amendment). With this ruling they will likely have to pay back a large amount in over charged late fees (likely with interest).


  17. - Rich Miller - Wednesday, May 11, 22 @ 9:04 am:

    ===Another recent court ruling told them ===

    That was Cook, not Chicago.


  18. - From DaZoo - Wednesday, May 11, 22 @ 1:28 pm:

    === That was Cook, not Chicago. ===

    Ugh. Apologies for the mix-up.

    Maybe Cook will help Chicago fund the reimbursements since it’s transportation funding related? /s


Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.


* Showcasing The Retailers Who Make Illinois Work
* Reader comments closed for the holidays
* And the winners are…
* SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Update to previous editions
* Isabel’s afternoon roundup
* Report: Far-right Illinois billionaires may have skirted immigration rules
* Question of the day: Golden Horseshoe Awards (Updated)
* Energy Storage Brings Cheaper Electricity, Greater Reliability
* Open thread
* Isabel’s morning briefing
* SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today's edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
* Live coverage
* Selected press releases (Live updates)
* Yesterday's stories

Support CapitolFax.com
Visit our advertisers...

...............

...............

...............

...............

...............

...............

...............


Loading


Main Menu
Home
Illinois
YouTube
Pundit rankings
Obama
Subscriber Content
Durbin
Burris
Blagojevich Trial
Advertising
Updated Posts
Polls

Archives
December 2024
November 2024
October 2024
September 2024
August 2024
July 2024
June 2024
May 2024
April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004

Blog*Spot Archives
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005

Syndication

RSS Feed 2.0
Comments RSS 2.0




Hosted by MCS SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax Advertise Here Mobile Version Contact Rich Miller