PRESIDING JUSTICE KNECHT delivered the opinion of the court:

Defendant, County of Sangamon (County), appeals the trial court's grant of summary judgment infavor of plaintiff, Village of Chatham (Village), and its finding that Division 15.1 (65 ILCS 5/11-15.1-1through 11-15.1-5 (West 2002)) of the Illinois Municipal Code (Municipal Code) (65 ILCS 5/1-1-1through 11-152-4 (West 2002)) granted the Village zoning and building-code jurisdiction over landssubject to annexation agreements. Specifically, the County argues (1) the court erred in finding the Villagehad zoning and building-code jurisdiction; (2) section 11-15.1-2.1 is unconstitutional special legislation; (3)the court's interpretation of Division 15.1 made it an invalid exercise of police power; (4) issues of materialfact existed to preclude summary judgment; and (5) declaratory judgment was improper. We affirm.

A. Overview of Relevant Statutory and Case Law

In 1963, the Illinois legislature passed Division 15.1 of the Municipal Code, granting municipalitiesthe power to enter into annexation agreements with owners of unincorporated territory, providing that theland could be annexed to the municipality once it became contiguous to the property. 1963 Ill. Laws 2157(eff. July 31, 1963) (adding Ill. Rev. Stat. 1963, ch. 24, pars. 11-15.1-1 through 11-15.1-5). In 1989,the Second District held the land subject to these agreements had to be contiguous. Annexation agreementsconcerning noncontiguous land were declared invalid. Village of Lisle v. Action Outdoor Advertising Co.,188 Ill. App. 3d 751, 544 N.E.2d 836 (1989) (Second District). In 1990, the legislature amended section11-15.1-1 of the Municipal Code to provide for municipal jurisdiction over the lands subject to annexationagreements and to permit annexation agreements to cover noncontiguous lands as follows:

"Property that is the subject of an annexation agreement adopted under this [s]ection issubject to the ordinances, control, and jurisdiction of the municipality in all respects the same asproperty owned by the municipality that lies within its corporate limits.

Lack of contiguity to the municipality of property that is the subject of an annexationagreement does not affect the validity of the agreement whether approved by the corporateauthorities before or after the effective date of this amendatory Act of 1990." Pub. Act 86-1169,