NorthPoint opponents say their lawsuit will go to trial

Sierra Club, Openlands and Just Say No to NorthPoint are plaintiffs in the case

Opponents to the NorthPoint's proposed Compass Business Park lift signs at the Joliet Plan Commission meeting on Monday.

Environmentalists and local residents against the NorthPoint Development project in Joliet say they believe their case against the warehouse development will go to trial in 2023.

A Will County judge on Nov. 29 dismissed four counts in the plaintiff’s lawsuit against the project but let two stand.

Openlands, Sierra Club and Just Say No to NorthPoint this week issued a news release stating the judge’s decision means their case “will move forward for trial in 2023.”

No trial date has been set for the case.

But the organizations contend in the press release that the court decision marks a breakthrough in the defense put up against the lawsuit by NorthPoint and the city of Joliet, which also is a defendant.

The lawsuit was filed in 2020, as opponents went to court to try to stop the project that was moving through Joliet with approvals from the City Council and Plan Commission amid strong opposition, especially from residents and officials in Elwood and Manhattan who spoke against it amid concerns about increased truck traffic.

“We have been resolute in our fight, and the judge’s decision to deny NorthPoint and Joliet’s dismissal request gives all of us a voice and an opportunity to truly be heard,” Stephanie Irvine, an individual plaintiff and organizer with Just Say No to NorthPoint, said in the news release.

Noting the size of the project, Stephanie Irvine showed a map of the future Compass Business Park and said laid on top of a map of Joliet it would stretch from the Slammers baseball stadium downtown to Joliet Junior College on Houbolt Road.

"This is absolutely huge when you look at it," Irvine told the audience.

The entire project could someday stretch from Joliet to Manhattan to Elwood.

Irvine said there are weak points in the NorthPoint plan.

The developer does not have the contiguous land it needs to annex into Manhattan, she said. Even the land NorthPoint plans to annex into Joliet is questionable, she said.

"They don't own it all," she said. "It does not mean it's a done deal just because they own a few parcels and have options on the rest."

The project is now 2,300 acres in size and reaches to Elwood. Opponents believe NorthPoint eventually plans to expand it to the edge of Manhattan. Construction already has begun in an area along Route 53 near Millsdale Road.

Joliet City Attorney Sabrina Spano said a trial in 2023 is not a sure thing.

“It’s not,” Spano said. “There’s no trial date set.”

Spano said the pretrial stage is still in process, and the city and NorthPoint could appeal the judge’s decision to let two counts in the lawsuit stand or file motions for the judge to reconsider.

Sierra Club Illinois Chapter spokesperson Hannah Lee Flath in an email response to questions Wednesday said that the plaintiffs believe the case will go to trial next year and the judge’s decision to allow two courts to stand provides a path to ultimately stop the NorthPoint project.

“A plaintiff needs to prevail on only one theory to win a case,” Flath said. “Plaintiffs are confident that they will have their day in court to show why this legally and environmentally flawed project should not be located here.”

A building wall is constructed at the site of the new NorthPoint Compass Business Park along Route 53.

Judge John Pavich let stand one count alleging that the Joliet zoning process for the NorthPoint project violated due process rights of the objectors. He also let stand a count alleging that the land annexation for the NorthPoint project was unlawful.

Pavich said in his ruling that the plaintiffs’ claims if proven would show a violation of due process rights during zoning for the project but added “the court is somewhat skeptical that the individual plaintiffs will ultimately prevail on this count.”

In allowing one count alleging an unlawful land annexation, Pavich described the legal requirements for pursuing the particular claim as “extremely liberal.”

Have a Question about this article?