Casey Approves First Annexation in Push to Erase City Boundary Gaps

Casey City Council Meeting | June 15, 2026

Article Summary: The Casey City Council approved Ordinance #631 annexing a Casey-Westfield school district parking lot, the first in a series of 17 annexation ordinances aimed at cleaning up “donut holes” in the city’s corporate limits — a project officials said is holding up residential additions to the county’s enterprise zone.

Casey Annexation Program Key Points:

• Ordinance #631, approved 4-0, annexes a 0.741-acre Casey-Westfield school district parking lot south of the tennis courts, with a zip code correction made on the floor.
• Ordinance #632, a voluntary annexation of roughly 80 acres of Huisinga family farmland for potential residential development, is set for action July 6.
• Ordinances #633 through #647, covering 15 wholly bounded parcels, are targeted for approval at the council’s July meeting after certified-mail notices went out.
• Economic Development Director Tom Daughhetee said the cleanup must finish before residential projects can be added to the enterprise zone.

CASEY — The Casey City Council on Monday, June 15, 2026, approved the first ordinance in a sweeping effort to annex more than a dozen parcels that sit inside or against the city’s boundaries but were never formally brought into the corporate limits, a paperwork cleanup that officials said the rest of Clark County is waiting on.

The council voted 4-0 to approve Ordinance #631, annexing property owned by Casey-Westfield Community Unit School District Number C-4 — the parking lot immediately south of the tennis courts. According to the ordinance’s exhibit, the parcel is the east 57 feet of Lot 4, Block 1, in Ferguson’s Addition, parcel number 03-11-20-06-101-004, a 0.741-acre exempt parcel owned by the school district at 401 E. Main St. Alderman Tanner Brown made the motion, seconded by Alderman Lori Wilson, with a correction to the zip code listed in the document. Aldermen Brown, Marcy Mumford, Carlene Richardson and Wilson voted yes; Aldermen Jeremiah Hanley and Steve Jenkins were absent.

City Attorney Tracy Willenborg told the council the school district’s petition was the only annexation ready for formal action Monday because statutory notice timelines had not yet run on the others.

“We’re kind of filling the donut holes and other missed properties that should have been included as municipal property,” Willenborg said, describing a city map that has become, in one official’s words during discussion, “jerrymandered up” over time.

Huisinga Farmland and 15 ‘Wholly Bounded’ Parcels Next

Willenborg said Ordinance #632, a voluntary annexation petition covering the Huisinga properties, will come up for action at the July 6 meeting. County property records included in the agenda packet show the territory consists of two farmland parcels totaling 80 acres in Casey Township — parcels 03-11-29-00-100-001 (60 acres) and 03-11-29-00-100-010 (20 acres) — owned by D Huisinga Family Holdings, LLC, with a mailing address for Dale L. Huisinga Jr. The land sits along Illinois Route 49 at 100th Street. Daughhetee said the owners are seeking annexation for potential future residential development.

The remaining measures, Ordinances #633 through #647, cover 15 properties that are wholly bounded by the municipal limits — parcels ringed by city territory or adjacent to municipal streets. Owners listed on the agenda include J&K Mithcell, Inc.; John L. and Kathleen Reed; Rosetta J. Owen; Patrick M. Niebrugge; Nancy L. and Jason J. Bollenbaugh; the K.S. Hayes Family Trust; Timothy D. and Catherine Diane Anderson; Ethan A. and Tracey E. Brewer; Rusdol W. and Julia A. Denney; Ruth Todino; Charles and Nina Meeker; the James A. Knierim Trust; Calvary LLC; Kevin A. and Linda M. Simmons; and the Lori J. Crozier Trust.

Because the parcels are wholly surrounded, owner approval is not required, Willenborg confirmed in response to a council question, though certified-mail notices were sent to all affected owners. Many of the parcels are small — several are sidewalks, she said, along with a camper lot and a handful of houses where one home sits inside city limits and its neighbor does not. She said formal approval is targeted for the council’s July 16 meeting, and copies of the ordinances and a map of the affected parcels were available for aldermen to review.

Enterprise Zone Driving the Timeline

Daughhetee told the council the boundary cleanup is a prerequisite for a larger economic development goal.

“Everybody else in the county is waiting on us to get this done so that we can add residential projects to the enterprise zone,” Daughhetee said, explaining that the city needs every residential lot within city limits properly documented before those additions can proceed.

The discussion also touched on a potentially larger future annexation question. One alderman asked why the city could not annex the area behind the former public works site, including 10th Street and nearby streets, where homes already receive city water and other utilities. Willenborg said the city could adopt an annexation policy requiring properties that receive city utilities to annex once they become contiguous, but noted the decision rests with the council and can generate frustration among affected residents. Mayor Mike Nichols said any expansion of city services obligations would need further study, and officials agreed to finish the current cleanup first.

“There‘s no rhyme or reason for it being the way it is,” Daughhetee said of the current boundary map. “The only real add-on is the Huisinga; everything else is cleanup.”