Orland Park board approves involuntary annexation of Wolf Road pocket after extended public comment
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
After extensive public comment and staff briefings about water, septic, special‑use protections and memoranda of understanding, the Village Board adopted an ordinance to annex a contiguous Wolf Road area under 65 ILCS 5/7‑1‑13; trustees committed to MOUs to preserve existing legal nonconforming uses and to engineer utility options.
The Orland Park Village Board voted Dec. 1 to adopt an ordinance annexing a contiguous pocket of land along Wolf Road (roughly 171st–175th Street) pursuant to 65 ILCS 5/7‑1‑13. The item drew prolonged public comment from multiple residents who opposed involuntary annexation, citing potential higher taxes, costs to connect to municipal water and sewer, the presence of septic and wells, and concerns about preserving existing uses such as horse keeping and billboards.
Village staff (identified in the meeting as Steve and George) said the annexation is the last phase of a long‑running effort in the corridor, explained the statutory requirement that areas under 60 acres must be annexed in whole, and emphasized that preexisting legal nonconforming uses would not be forcibly eliminated at the time of annexation. Staff repeatedly said they intend to work with affected property owners on memoranda of understanding (MOUs) to document what will not change immediately and to develop engineering options such as special service areas (SSAs) or phased infrastructure plans should septic systems fail in the future. George told residents the village can finance infrastructure over time (for example, via SSA mechanisms) and pledged planner and engineering follow up.
Residents asked specific questions about whether the county would require immediate connection if septic systems failed; trustees and staff clarified that while the county and permit rules can constrain replacement of failing systems, the village would negotiate options and engineering plans and would not force immediate changes to existing uses. After the public exchange and trustee deliberations, the board carried the annexation ordinance by roll call. Trustees emphasized they would pursue MOUs, contact information collection for residents, and preliminary engineering studies to identify options and de‑risk potential utility costs.
Quotable: Corinne Tablas, a resident and property owner opposed to eminent domain in an earlier public comment, asked broadly about legal thresholds for land taking; an unnamed resident opposing the annexation said, “The annexation simply forced us into higher costs and higher rules while offering nothing that improves our day to day lives.” Staff: “We are not requiring you to do that at this time. But when you’re ready, you will have that opportunity to hook up to our system.”