ILCS » Chapter 25 · Act 120
Illinois Compiled Statutes

25 ILCS 120/5.5 (2026)

FY03 COLA's prohibited

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(25 ILCS 120/5.5)
    Sec. 5.5. FY03 COLA's prohibited. Notwithstanding any provision of this Act, any other law, or any resolution of the General Assembly to the contrary, members of the General Assembly, judges, other than the county supplement, State's attorneys, other than the county supplement, the elected constitutional officers of State government, and certain appointed officers of State government, including members of State departments, agencies, boards, and commissions whose annual compensation is determined by the Board, are prohibited from receiving and shall not receive any increase in compensation based on a cost of living adjustment, as authorized by Senate Joint Resolution 192 of the 86th General Assembly, for or during the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2002.
(Source: P.A. 92-607, eff. 6-28-02.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 2004–2006 · leading case: Jorgensen v. Blagojevich, 811 N.E.2d 652 (Ill. 2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Jorgensen v. Blagojevich, 811 N.E.2d 652 (Ill. 2004). · cites it 2× “5 of the Compensation Review Act (25 ILCS 120/5.5 (West 2002)), did not purport to repeal either SJR 192 or any provision of the Compensation Review Act.”
Russell v. Blagojevich, 853 N.E.2d 920 (Ill. App. Ct. 2006). “” 25 ILCS 120/5.5 (West 2004). Based on the legislation, none of the positions affected received a COLA during the 2003 fiscal year.”
Jorgensen v. Blagojevich (Ill. 2004). · cites it 2× “5 of the Compensation Review Act (25 ILCS 120/5.5 (West 2002)), did not purport to repeal either SJR 192 or any provision of the Compensation Review Act.”
Russell v. Blagojevich (Ill. App. Ct. 2006). “" 25 ILCS 120/5.5 (West 2004). Based on the legislation, none of the positions affected received a COLA during the 2003 fiscal year.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.