RIDGE RUNNER CHRONICLES: Maybe You Better Pay Those Parking Tickets and Real Estate Taxes
PROTECTED CONTENT
If you’re a current subscriber, log in below. If you would like to subscribe, please click the subscribe tab above.
Username and Password Help
Please enter your email and we will send you a password reset link.
By: Bill Hoagland
There have been two lawsuits pending this past year before the US Supreme Court that involve some unpaid parking tickets in Chicago and some unpaid real estate taxes in Michigan. The legal issue in each case is whether the government, by confiscating and selling property to satisfy the unpaid charges and taxes, violated the Fifth Amendment of the US Constitution by taking without just compensation. For us, the lesson to be learned is that you probably need to pay those parking tickets and real estate taxes when due because you might not like the end result if you get defaulted.
In the case of Pung vs Isabella County, Michigan, a land owner neglected to pay his real estate taxes, amounting to $2,241.93, he was subsequently defaulted and the property was foreclosed and sold at a tax sale auction. The property at the time of sale had a fair market value of $194,400 but the sale price at the tax sale auction netted $76,008 after deduction for the unpaid taxes and costs. The taxpayer contended that Isabella County should have reimbursed him for the fair market value of the property after deduction for unpaid taxes rather than the net sale proceeds. In a unanimous decision on June 23, 2026, the Supreme Court ruled that this procedure (of reimbursing the tax payer for only the net tax sale proceeds, not the fair market value of the property) does not violate the Fifth and Eighth Amendments. The Court noted that this tax sale procedure was consistent with a long standing practice in local governments of dealing with delinquent tax payers via tax sale auctions. To require local governments to repay the full fair market value would unduly burden their ability to govern. The Court noted that this taxpayer had multiple opportunities to resolve this on his own but failed to do so. The Justices apparently all agree that tax payers should minimize their losses and not assume the government will bail them out at the end of the day.
In the case of O’Donnell vs. City of Chicago, the issue is whether a Chicago ordinance that allows the City to confiscate and sell at auction not just the vehicle that was ticketed for illegal parking but all vehicles owned by the vehicle owner if that owner has two or more unpaid parking tickets that remain unpaid for more than a year. This ordinance further provides that all proceeds from the sale remain the property of the City—the net proceeds are not reimbursed to the owner—and to add injury to insult, the ordinance apparently allows the City to confiscate all future vehicles owned by the offending party and sell them too until such time as the parking fine and costs are paid in full; this seems a bit draconian but my guess is that most Chicagoans would not be surprised with this heavy-handed treatment by City Hall. (Maybe Richard J. Daley is alive after all.) Sure, if the car they confiscate from you is a clunker, no great loss, but if your personal fleet includes a BMW, a Lexis, and a new GMC pick-up, this just might get your attention.
Right now, the O’Donnell case is pending before the Court on a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari; in other words, O’Donnell is asking the Court to review the case, claiming that this exercise of police power is unconstitutionally broad and constitutes a taking without just compensation, in violation of the Fifth Amendment. If the Pung case is any indication about how the Court will handle the O’Donnell situation, I will be surprised if the Court agrees to grant the petition and actually review the case because it is clear that O’Donnell had plenty of opportunity to resolve the matter before it got to this point.
So maybe it is best to pay those parking tickets and real estate bills and move on. Foreclosure and a tax sale will not be in your best interests.
–––––––––––––––
■ Bill Hoagland has practiced law in Alton for more than 50 years, but he has spent more than 70 years hunting, fishing and generally being in the great outdoors. His wife, Annie, shares his love of the outdoor life. Much of their spare time is spent on their farm in Calhoun County. Bill can be reached at [email protected].
