LAST HALF OF A TWO-PART ARTICLE By SUE KENNEDY

Land Use legislation: The Illinois situation

Both of these measures failed to pass the 78th General Assembly, largely due to opposition from the Illinois Municipal League, according to Schlickman. He reintroduced the local government bill (H.B. 800) last year in the 79th General Assembly but merely cosponsored a similar bill for state land use planning (H.B. 1491), introduced by Rep. Harry Yourell. H.B. 800 placed no specific restrictions on building density or limitation of development on local governments. Schlickman explained. "That's primarily the local counties' and municipalities' jobs. I don't think we should interfere in matters that would differ so widely from place to place But this bill (H.B. 800) will give local planners the chance to reorganize their fragmented zoning and planning practices along more environmentally sound lines."

10/February 1976/Illinois Issues

At least 16 bills were considered in 1975 spring session, and four were passed, but only two became law because of vetoes

Schlickman became interested in such matters while serving on the village board of Arlington Heights, a community that has grown from a population of 18,000 in 1956 to over 70,000 today. "On the board I felt we weren't engaging in enough planning to implement zoning properly. I became extremely concerned about the way in which municipalities are played off one against another by development companies .... In bidding, the municipalities usually ended up reducing standards set up for sound planning," he explained.

The quality of zoning
Schlickman says his bill emphasizes the idea that zoning is not an end in itself. It requires preservation of agricultural land, historical sites, environmentally critical land and provision for open spaces in developments — items not presently mandatory in most zoning enabling acts. "We are coming up with one uniform body of substantive law and procedures that will apply to all units of local government instead of counties, municipalities and townships all having different acts." Schlickman believes such uniformity will equalize the quality of zoning in adjoining municipalities. By tightening the rules by which municipalities can engage in land use actions, Schlickman says fewer zoning acts will be found unconstitutional in the courts. He adds that the bill emphasizes professionalism in planning.

Pointing to attempts by the 94th Congress to pass legislation calling for land use planning at the state level employing the carrot-stick inducement Schlickman says such local reorganization is "inevitable." In the 93rd Congress (1973-74) S. 268 sponsored by Sen. Henry Jackson (D., Washington) would have established, had it passed an Office of Land Use Policy Administration in the Department of the Interior. The intent was not to preempt local responsibilities and priorities but to require states to (1) develop a planning process which met specific requirements for ongoing growth assessment, and (2) establish an agency to oversee land use planning statewide. States participating would have had to develop an identification process for environmental and economic concerns within three years of the bill's passage, and within five years, assure surveillance of land use practices through either state review of local decisions or direct regulation.

"Fragmented efforts on the part of governmental land use planning to date, environmental concerns, rapidly expanding urban areas and the growth of private development concerns" were cited as reasons for needing a national land use policy. A federal Land Use Information and Data Center with regional branches would have been established as a resource for states developing land use policies. Schlickman says his bill (H.B. 800) would direct planning in Illinois toward the goals which would have been set forth in the national legislation. However, the Illinois Municipal League believed Schlickman's bill was too strong, so the League's Land Use Subcommittee entered its own, H.B. 1731, sponsored by Rep. Edward E. Bluthardt. Steve Sargent, executive director of the Illinois Municipal League, says that small communities with populations 5,000 to 15,000 cannot deal with the amount of professional planning required in the Schlickman bill. "Our bill would modernize zoning laws but we've got to deal with political realities here. Municipal officials have had unusable planning up to the ears. They don't need stacks and stacks of plans filed on shelves. We relate zoning to planning in this bill, but it permits local governments to do planning without paying $50,000 to $60,000 to a professional planning agency," Sargent says. (Schlickman, however, insists his bill does not call for "hiring professionals" but for more "professionalism" among local planners.) Sargent adds, "Our bill doesn't encompass statewide planning at all. We are still totally opposed to state land use planning. This is traditionally a local issue. And we were opposed to the legislation in Washington."

Clauses in Schlickman's bill requiring the establishment of standards for neighborhood redevelopment and providing for a wide range of housing opportunities in a community were omitted from the Illinois Municipal League version because, Sargent says, "We don't feel those things have a place in zoning. We're not dealing with social problems in zoning."

Agricultural Association bill
In addition, Rep. Harry "Bus" Yourell introduced H.B. 1417, also nearly identical to Schlickman's local land use planning legislation. None of the bills passed the 1975 spring session. H.B. 800 was referred to the interim study calendar of the House Committee on Cities and Villages, and both H.B. 1731 and H.B. 1417 were referred to the interim study calendar of the Committee on Counties and Townships. At one point Schlickman had hoped his bill would be sent to the new House Committee on Environment, Energy and Natural Resources where he felt it would have had a better chance for passage.

Farmers, not content at seeing their land destined for suburban development and believing Schlickman's bill too general, devised their own legislation

February 1976/Illinois Issues/11

The home rule provision is totally inconsistent with the purpose of this act, as expressed in the legislative findings, that urban development is one of the main threats to agricultural land,' the governor said in returning the bill with recommendations for change

through the Illinois Agricultural Association. This bill, H.B. 898, sponsored by Rep. Joseph Fennessey, was returned to the legislature by the governor with recommendations for change, but these failed in the Senate. H.B. 898 would have allowed farmers in a local area to set aside at least 500 acres in an "agricultural district" to be used only for farming for at least eight years. Tax incentive would have been provided for those participating, but if the farmer decided to reverse his position and use this landforanotherpurpose,a rollback penalty would have taken effect.

The governor's vetoes
The bill had been amended in the Senate to exempt home rule governments from its application, and Gov. Dan Walker's amendatory veto recommended among other things that this exemption be deleted. "The home rule provision is totally inconsistent with the purpose of this act, as expressed in the legislative findings, that urban development is one of the main threats to agricultural land," the governor said in explaining his return of the bill. But removal of this exemption constituted a "preemption" of home rule powers under Article VII, section 6 of the Constitution, which requires a three-fifths legislative vote; and supporters of the changes were unable to muster the 36 votes needed (33 for the governor's recommendations, 13 opposed).

Another bill that sought to encourage "open space" was vetoed by the governor. This was H.B. 729, sponsored by Rep. Lee Daniels. The bill would have given preferential property tax treatment to encourage the preservation of open spaces, but the governor said it was too broadly drawn, and in a press release September 16, he implied the bill would subsidize private golf courses. "I will not approve . . . special windfalls at taxpayers' expense," he stated. The House failed to get the three-fifths vote (107 members) required to override a total veto (89 for override, 48 to sustain the veto, 10 present). (See Roll Calls for complete tabulation of these votes on pages 25-26.)

A law for townships
A Township Open Space Act was passed by both houses and signed into law by the governor to become Public Act 79-422. Sponsored by Rep. John S. Matijevich, H.B. 853 permits townships after a referendum to establish an open space program. The law applies to townships in counties with a population over 200,000 and less than one million, and so applies only in DuPage, Kane, Lake, Madison, St. Clair, Will and Winnebago counties. Under the act, townships can acquire and hold land in a natural state and issue bonds to pay for it. Any "open space" so acquired must constitute at least 50 acres of land or water.

Two bills that sought to preserve or restore the natural character of certain Illinois rivers and wetlands were tabled. These were H.B. 461, the main bill, and 462, the appropriation bill ($75,000), sponsored by Rep. John C. Hirschfeld. Hirschfeld's main bill would have established five categories of natural rivers and wetlands under the Department of Conservation. Certain land uses would have been prohibited within one- eighth of a mile on either side of segments of the system. A Natural Rivers and Wetlands Board would have had to be petitioned for uses of the land described as incompatible in the act.

Lake Michigan bills
Relating to the Illinois Coastal Zone Management Program now underway in the Chicago area were several bills introduced by Rep. Robert E. Mann, known for his previous attempts to pass a "Lake Michigan Bill of Rights."

Under the Coastal Zone Management Act which passed Congress in 1972, Illinois is participating in a three-year; planning program to devise a means of managing land use along its 59-miie coastal boundary. Ultimately, management grants will be made available under the act. The Division of Water Resources in the Department of Transportation is presently handling the program.

Mann's legislation included H.B, 2685 to avert development along the '• Lake Michigan shoreline until an implementation plan is adopted under the federal Coastal Zone Management Act, with the Lake Michigan Interim Shoreline Protection Commission regulating development in the meantime.

H.B. 2618 would officially require the Division of Waterways or other state agency designated to develop a shoreland management program for Lake ? Michigan under the Coastal Zone Management Act. And, H.B. 2839 would provide that all newly created ,. islands, shoreland fills and other deposits and additions to the bed of Lake ' Michigan and other lakes are tield in trust for the people of the state. All of' the bills were referred to the study calendar of the Committee on Environment, Energy and Natural Resources.

The research groups
During the formulative stages of developinga management plan from which state legislation may eventually '> emerge, various groups are participating in data gathering and research projects. The Illinois Geological Survey is doing underwater mapping, the Northwestern Illinois Planning Commission (NIPC) is handling land planning studies, and the Lake Michigan Federation and the League of Women Voters are conducting citizen hearings. Other groups such as the Lake Michigan Shoreline Advisory Committee, composed primarily of municipal officials whose communities abut Lake Michigan, have been formed to speak to the issue.

The only measure regarding Lake Michigan to pass during the 1975 spring session was the Lake Michigan Shoreline Study Commission Act, H B 170 sponsored by Rep. Adeline J Geo-Karis. The measure, also signed (P.A 79-1032) by Gov. Walker, give

12/February 1976/Illinois Issues

commission the task of finding solutions to erosion problems along the shoreline and making recommendations on improving water quality. A report is due April 15.

Other bills proposed
Other attempts at dealing with the land use issue also entered as legislation last spring. Believing Schlickman's proposed commission too limited. Sen. David J. Regner has tried for two sessions to pass a bill to establish a Land Use Study Commission, the measure (S.B. 157) passed the Senate last spring, but the House referred it to the interim study calendar of the Committee on Counties and Townships. Rep. Richard A. Mugalian entered H.B. 338 to study the relation of all existing Illinois laws, regulations and agencies to land use and the effectiveness of their controls. The bill was passed in the House but tabled in the Senate.

Also tabled was the Green Belt Open Space Study Commission Act, H.B. 56, sponsored by Rep. Donald E. Deuster. It would have authorized an eight- member commission to study the impact of rapid urbanization upon farming activities, potential conservation areas and green belt areas in the state.

What Congress is doing
At the national level, H.R. 3510, sponsored by Rep. Morris Udall (D., Arizona) was killed in effect when it lost on the vote to report it to the full House by the House Interior Committee on July 15. S. 984, sponsored by Sen. Jackson, was the companion bill. These bills, alike in major policy provisions and including the components of S. 268 listed earlier, would have allowed grants to be issued to states for the development and administration of statewide land resource programs for the non- federal lands. Both bills contained sections requiring citizen and local government participation in planning, and S. 984 additionally included a major section on energy facilities planning. Both included Indian lands as units eligible to apply for land use program grants. Each bill outlined the major components of a state land use program:(1) matters of more than local concern, (2) decisions affecting key facilities, (3) large scale subdivision or development projects, (4) developments of regional impact, and (5) areas of critical state concern.�

13/February 1976/Illinois Issues