Rutland annexation issue remains a talking point at meetings

Rutland trustees discussed a mapping error last week that affects 29 properties located outside city limits.

Village Attorney Sheryl Churney brought up the error during the May 1 committee meeting, when she said a map was prepared by La Salle County in 2007 detailing different village boundary lines than the ones reflected in the official map of the village.

In 2007, Rutland expanded its village boundaries without an annexation agreement, leaving 29 properties that don’t legally fall within the municipal boundary paying city taxes.

Of the 29 properties, 18 could be residential properties, although some may not be occupied.

The affected residents would need to fill out a petition to annex into the village maintaining their status. However, if they choose not to be a part of Rutland, they would lose out on the services of being a part of the village, such as a reduced water rate, garbage, snow plowing, and even street lights.

A woman in the audience asked the board how the mail service would get through if the village refused to plow the roads. Village President Dan Krischel said the township would have to plow it.

Village Clerk Candace Gross-Heider said the water rate for in-town residents is $26.61 at a minimum per 2,000 gallons of water a month, with the out-of-town rate being $34.14.

Trustee Samantha Montgomery asked Krischel why he would have the attorney look through all of the annexation materials without consulting the board first.

“There are ordinance violations that people were having and the last time that was brought up, they threw their hands up and made a big stink in front of the board,” Krischel said.

Krischel said the violations were residents having animals that were not allowed in city limits and weeds that were taller than 6 inches.

In a previous correspondence, Chutney said the residents will not be reimbursed for taxes paid to the village because the time to challenge the tax assessment has passed and the affected residential properties have received the benefit of paying the resident rate for village water.

“If the property owner chose to stay outside the village, then the extra amount paid at the non-resident rate for water service would far exceed the amount paid in village real estate taxes,” she said.