Does the Disconnection Statute State That No Part of a Municipality Be Isolated from the Remainder ?

In Indian Valley Golf Club, Inc. v. Village of Long Grove, 173 Ill. App. 3d 909, 527 N.E.2d 1273, 123 Ill. Dec. 498 (1988) the Court disagreed with the trial court's finding that the disconnection of certain property would result in the isolation of a part of Long Grove, lot 78. Indian Valley II, 173 Ill. App. 3d at 912. In making this decision, the Court rejected Long Grove's argument that lot 78 was isolated from it because the lot was inaccessible by road and thus incapable of receiving certain services from the village. Indian Valley II, 173 Ill. App. 3d at 912. The Court stated that the fact that lot 78 was inaccessible to the village by road was inconsequential to a determination of whether the lot was isolated from the rest of Long Grove." 'Rather, what we believe to be the determining factor, according to cases from this district and others, is contiguity. If property is isolated from a municipality, it is not contiguous to it; if contiguous, it is then not isolated.' " Indian Valley II, 173 Ill. App. 3d at 912, quoting Indian Valley I, 135 Ill. App. 3d at 548-49. Because a substantial physical touching existed between lot 78 and the rest of Long Grove, we concluded that "the contiguity was such that it satisfied the mandate of the disconnection statute that no part of a municipality should be isolated from the remainder." Indian Valley II, 173 Ill. App. 3d at 912.