Illinois General Assembly Spring 2026 End of Session Tracking

Illinois General Assembly Spring 2026 End of Session Tracking

  Friday, May 29, 2026    Julie Tappendorf

---

As the Illinois General Assembly draws closer to concluding its 2026 spring legislative session, there are a number of outstanding bills likely to be considered that would have a significant impact on local governments throughout Illinois. The General Assembly has been busy so far in the 2026 spring session passing a number of bills that will affect local government operations as well as a bill on regulating electric mobility devices. With three days left until the General Assembly recesses on May 31^st, the Governor’s BUILD Plan legislation, and other bills impacting local governments, may still be considered.

Below is a list of bills we’re tracking with updates on the bill’s status through May 28^th. 

Housing Legislation 

House Bill 5626: BUILD Plan Housing Omnibus Bill (First Reading; referred to House Rules Committee) 

Senate Bill 4060: Middle Housing & Statewide Standards (First Reading; referred to Senate Assignments Committee) 

Senate Bill 4061: Single-Stair Reform (First Reading; referred to Senate Assignments Committee) 

Senate Bill 4062: Statewide Impact Fee Calculation (First Reading; referred to Senate Assignments Committee)

 Senate Bill 4063: Third-Party Plan Review (First Reading; referred to Senate Assignments Committee) 

Senate Bill 4064: Parking Reform (First Reading; referred to Senate Assignments Committee) 

Senate Bill 4071: Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) (First Reading; referred to Senate Assignments Committee) 

Senate Bill 0331: Restock the Block Act (Second Reading; Senate Floor Amendment No. 1 introduced on May 21^st and recommended for adoption by the Senate Executive Committee) 

Senate Bill 0608: Federally Assisted Tenant Protection Act (Second Reading; Senate Floor Amendment No. 1 recommended for adoption by the Senate Executive Committee) 

Senate Bill 635: Faith-Based Housing and Mixed-Use By-Right Act (Second Reading; Senate Floor Amendment No.1 recommended for adoption by the Senate Executive Committee) 

House Bill 5765 / Senate Bill 4200: REAL Housing Act (Frist Reading; referred to House Rules Committee and Senate Assignments Committee) 

Other Legislation Affecting Local Governments 

House Bill 1429: Amendments to IL Homeless Bill of Rights (Second Reading; House Floor Amendment No. 1; House Floor Amendment No. 2 recommended for adoption by House Housing Committee; House Floor Amendment No. 3 recommended for approval by House Housing Committee; Bill and all House floor amendments re-referred to House Rules Committee)

House Bill 5513 / Senate Bill 4016: Power Act (First Reading; Bill re-referred to House Rules Committee and Senate Assignments Committee) 

House Bill 5326: Digital Library Protection Act (Passed House; House Floor Amendment No.1 and House Floor Amendment No. 2 adopted; First Reading in Senate; referred to Senate Assignments Committee) 

House Bill 4712: Amendments to Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act (First Reading; Bill re-referred to House Rules Committee) 

Senate Bill 1796: Body Worn Camera FOIA Requests (Senate Committee Amendment No. 2 adopted; Passed Senate; Second Reading in House) 

Senate Bill 2715: OMA and FOIA Amendments: (Passed Senate; Second Reading in House; House Committee Amendment No. 1 adopted by House Executive Committee; House Floor Amendments No. 2, No. 3, No. 4, No. 5, No. 6, No. 7 recommended for adoption by House Executive Committee) 

House Bill 5784 / Senate Bill 20: Joint Omnibus CBD and Cannabis Regulatory Reform (First Reading in House and referred to House Rules Committee; First Reading in Senate; Senate Floor Amendment No. 1 referred to Senate Assignments Committee) 

Legislation Passed By Both Chambers 

Senate Bill 3336: Electric Mobility Devices (Passed both houses as of May 27, 2026; awaiting signature by Governor) 

Senate Bill 2836: Government Account Audits (Passed both houses as of May 21, 2026; awaiting signature by Governor) 

Senate Bill 2826: IMRF Pension Benefits (Passed both houses as of May 21, 2026; awaiting signature by Governor) 

Senate Bill 2769: Transfer of Funds Among Municipal Business District Tax Allocation Funds (Passed both houses as of May 21, 2026; awaiting signature by Governor) 

Senate Bill 2102: Taxing District Budget and Appropriations Ordinance Filing (Passed both houses as of May 21, 2026; awaiting signature by Governor) 

Senate Bill 638: Municipal Postemployment Benefit Trusts (Passed both houses as of May 21, 2026; awaiting signature by Governor) 

Senate Bill 2761: Service Animals and In-Service ADA Trainings (Passed both houses as of May 21, 2026; awaiting signature by Governor) 

Senate Bill 2913: Teacher Evaluation Plans (Passed both houses as of May 21, 2026; awaiting signature by Governor) 

Senate Bill 2914: Procedure for Removing/Dismissing Teachers (Passed both houses as of May 21, 2026; awaiting signature by Governor) 

Senate Bill 3361: Religious Hairstyles in Schools (Passed both houses as of May 21, 2026; awaiting signature by Governor) 

House Bill 4375: School District Interfund Transfers (Passed both houses as of May 21, 2026; awaiting signature by Governor) 

House Bill 5542: Park District Disconnection Petitions (Passed both houses as of May 21, 2026; awaiting signature by Governor) 

House Bill 5166: Dissolution of Special Districts (Passed both houses as of May 21, 2026; awaiting signature by Governor) 

House Bill 5167: Township Weed Cutting (Passed both houses as of May 21, 2026; awaiting signature by Governor) 

House Bill 4788: Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Training Curriculum (Passed both houses as of May 20, 2026; awaiting signature from Governor) 

House Bill 4862: School Staff Mental Health Policies (Passed both houses as of May 20, 2026; awaiting signature from Governor) 

House Bill 4491: Amendment to Public Employee Disability Act (Passed both houses as of May 20, 2026; awaiting signature by Governor) 

House Bill 2137: Amendment to Governmental Account Audit Act (Passed both houses as of May 20, 2026; awaiting signature by Governor) 

House Bill 4397: School Psychologist Qualifications (Passed both houses as of May 19, 2026; awaiting signature by Governor) 

House Bill 3743: School District Handbook Railroad Safety Messaging (Passed both houses as of May 19, 2026; awaiting signature by Governor) 

House Bill 4137: Amendment to Education for Homeless Children Act (Passed both houses as of May 19, 2026; awaiting signature by Governor) 

House Bill 4361: Building Inspector Certifications (Passed both houses as of May 19, 2026; awaiting signature by Governor) 

House Bill 1353: Amendment to Volunteer Emergency Worker Job Protection Act (Passed both houses as of May 19, 2026; awaiting signature by Governor) 

House Bill 4541: Revised Uniform Unclaimed Property Act (Passed both houses as of May 14, 2026; awaiting signature by Governor) 

Post Authored by Tyler Smith, Ancel Glink

Read More

Quorum Forum Podcast Ep. 105: Anatomy of a Redevelopment Agreement (Part 2)

Quorum Forum Podcast Ep. 105: Anatomy of a Redevelopment Agreement (Part 2)

  Friday, May 08, 2026    Julie Tappendorf

---

Ancel Glink's Quorum Forum Podcast has released a new episode, Episode 105: Anatomy of a Redevelopment Agreement (Part 2). 

In this episode, we return to the Southland Development Authority’s “TIF Talk” training series for a deep dive into the financial and practical implementation of economic development deals. Hosted by the Village of Hazel Crest, this session features Ancel Glink’s David Silverman, Michio Murakishi (Meech Group), and Terri Cox (Matanky Realty Group).

Building on the structural overview provided in Quorum Forum 97:  Anatomy of a Redevelopment Agreement, the panel explores how municipalities can use RDAs to bridge financial gaps and ensure projects are feasible for developers while protecting the public interest.

Highlights:

• The Math of Incentives: Understanding Internal Rate of Return (IRR), yield on cost, and how consultants use gap analysis to size incentives.
• The “But For” Test:  A look at the legal and financial necessity of incentives, and the idea that a project would not happen “but for” the public assistance.
• Net Public Benefit:  How to measure the “dividend” of a public investment through tax base growth, job creation, and revitalized storefronts.
• Case Studies from the Trenches:  Terri Cox shares lessons from the Bishop Classic project in Chicago and a $5 million car wash development on Dixie Highway in Harvey.
• Performance-Based Protections:  The importance of clawback provisions, reimbursement schedules, and why the public sector should generally avoid being a landlord.

Read More

Quorum Forum Podcast Ep. 103: Zoning, Preemption, and Housing: Navigating the BUILD Plan

Quorum Forum Podcast Ep. 103: Zoning, Preemption, and Housing: Navigating the BUILD Plan

  Tuesday, March 10, 2026    Julie Tappendorf

---

Building on yesterday's blog post, Ancel Glink just released Quorum Forum Podcast Episode 103: Zoning, Preemption, and Housing: Navigating the BUILD Plan. In this episode, Ancel Glink attorneys Erin Monforti, David Silverman, and Greg Jones break down Governor Pritzker’s proposed BUILD Plan (Building up Illinois Development). This initiative intends to reduce costs and eliminate barriers to housing development, but it includes proposals that could significantly limit local authority over zoning, building codes, and fees. The team discusses what these potential statewide mandates could mean for the future of Illinois communities. 

Highlights:

• The BUILD Plan: An overview of the Governor’s February 2026 proposal to cut "bureaucratic red tape" through new legislative and regulatory standards.
• "Middle Housing" Mandates: A look at bills that would require local governments to allow duplexes, triplexes, and townhomes in any area currently zoned for single-family homes.
• Limits on Local Review: Discussion on provisions that would prevent municipalities from requiring special use permits or variances for middle housing if those same rules don’t apply to single-family homes.
• Statewide Zoning Standards: The potential shift toward inflexible statewide rules for residential building heights, setbacks, and how much of a lot can be covered by a building.
• Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs): How proposed laws would normalize "granny flats" across the state, potentially making it easier for homeowners to get financing while increasing local density.
• Standardizing Impact Fees: Assessing the move toward mandatory state formulas for school and park impact fees to make costs more predictable for developers.
• Strict Permit Deadlines: New requirements for municipalities to complete plan reviews within 15 to 30 days, or else developers may hire their own third-party inspectors to do the work.
• Public Comment: A critical update for FOIA officers regarding emails caught in spam filters. A recent court ruled that a request is considered "received" even if it is automatically quarantined by your IT system.

Read More

Introduction of BUILD Plan Legislation Proposes Statewide Housing Development Reform

Introduction of BUILD Plan Legislation Proposes Statewide Housing Development Reform

  Monday, March 09, 2026    Julie Tappendorf

---

In mid-February, the Governor delivered his State of the State address and budget proposal for the 2027 State Fiscal Year. During his presentation, Governor Pritzker shared his concerns about the availability and cost of housing across Illinois, noting that “local regulations have made it too difficult and costly to build new housing” and citing “bureaucratic red tape” as an impediment to residential development activity. To combat these issues, the Governor announced the Building Up Illinois Development (BUILD Plan), an initiative to lower housing costs by making it more efficient and cost effective to build housing in Illinois. This initiative includes several legislative proposals that have since been introduced in the Illinois General Assembly.

House Bill 5626: Housing Omnibus

HB 5626 is a 40-page omnibus bill that includes a host of amendments to the Illinois Municipal Code and Illinois Counties Code addressing issues including impact fees, “middle housing” development, accessory dwelling units (ADUs), single-stair regulations, among others. In addition to HB 5626, several bills have been introduced in the Illinois Senate which propose the same substantive changes at an issue-by-issue level.

Senate Bill 4060: Middle Housing & Statewide Standards

SB 4060 proposes several changes to the Illinois Municipal Code with the express purpose of expanding housing choice and increasing the supply of “middle housing,” which includes duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, cottage clusters, townhomes, attached courtyard housing, detached courtyard housing, and stacked flat-plexes. If enacted, SB 4060 would limit the imposition of local standards (including bulk, lot area, setbacks, and other restrictions) that are not “clear and objective” as defined in the Bill. The Bill also proposes to prohibit municipalities from enforcing standards that impose requirements on middle housing that are more stringent than those applicable to detached single-family units and restricts the use of “discretionary review,” such as special use permitting and variations for middle housing unless the same process is required for single-family homes.

Senate Bill 4061: Single-Stair Reform

SB 4061 provides that, beginning January 1, 2027, no building code adopted by a municipality may prohibit a residential building from having a single stairway serving as an exit for all units if the building exhibits certain features (limited height, sufficient automatic sprinkler installation, and ample emergency escape and rescue openings for residents).

Senate Bill 4062: Statewide Impact Fee Calculation

SB 4062 proposes a plan to implement statewide municipal impact fee calculations. The Bill, if approved, would authorize and direct the Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity (IDCEO) to issue mandatory statewide formulas, multipliers, and other tools for calculating and imposing impact fees at the local level. The Bill sets forth several deadlines for compliance with its provisions, including an overall 30-month timeframe for municipalities to begin calculating impact fees in accordance with the formulas and guidance materials to be published by the IDCEO.

Senate Bill 4063: Third-Party Plan Review

SB 4063 provides uniform deadlines for municipal building permit review and inspections, proposing the following deadlines:

o   Plan Review:

§  A municipality must complete its initial plan review (undefined term) within 15 business days after receipt of an application for a 1-family or 2-family residential project.

§  A municipality must complete its initial plan review (undefined term) within 30 business days after receipt of an application for a multifamily, mixed-use, or commercial project.

§  Any subsequent reviews must be completed within 10 business days of the revisions being submitted.

o   Inspections: a municipality must conduct any required inspection within 2 business days of receiving a request.

Under SB 4063, if a municipality failed to comply with the plan review and inspection deadlines, an applicant would be able to retain a qualified third-party professional to conduct the review or inspection. These professionals must be licensed architects or engineers and be certified under one of several national building code standards. Upon submission of third-party plan reviews and inspection reports, municipalities would be limited in their ability to audit the reviews and impose additional standards for projects.

Senate Bill 4064: Parking Reform

SB 4064 proposes to limit municipal parking requirements starting January 1, 2027. Specifically municipalities would be prohibited from requiring more than 0.5 parking space per multifamily dwelling, or more than 1 parking space per single-family home. Municipalities would also be restricted from establishing parking minimums for certain uses including affordable housing projects, dwellings smaller than 1,500 square feet, and others.

Senate Bill 4071: Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs)

SB 4071 provides that every municipality must permit ADUs in all zoning districts allowing single-family dwellings without additional requirements related to lot size, setbacks, aesthetic standards, design review, frontage, space limitations, or controls beyond those imposed for single-family homes. The Bill also limits other ADU regulations, including by prohibiting municipalities from requiring a familial relationship between occupants of an ADU and the principal structure on a lot.

Again, the proposals in Senate Bills 4060–4064 and Senate Bill 4071 have also been introduced in the Illinois House through House Bill 5626. All of the legislative initiatives summarized above also include express language preempting home rule units from regulating in a manner more restrictive to the various housing initiatives than provided in the bills. Readers should note that these bills were only recently introduced, and some (or all) may be subject to amendments, debate, and delays as they make their way through the General Assembly. We will be tracking this legislation to provide key updates as the spring legislative session gets underway.

Post Authored by Erin Monforti, Ancel Glink

Read More

In the Zone: Appellate Court Rules in Favor of Village in TIF Dispute with Schools

In the Zone: Appellate Court Rules in Favor of Village in TIF Dispute with Schools

  Thursday, February 19, 2026    Julie Tappendorf

---

In 2004, a village in Illinois established a tax-increment financing district (TIF #1) to revitalize its town center. In 2021 (6 years before the expiration of TIF #1), the village passed several ordinances to create a new TIF district comprised entirely of parcels of land that were previously included in the original TIF district’s redevelopment area (TIF #2). The majority of the parcels in TIF #2 are owned by a local hospital network, which entered into a redevelopment agreement with the village to increase parking for its facilities and facilitate the development of a mixed-use commercial building. Due to delays in the approval processes, the redevelopment of the hospital site began prior to adoption of the ordinance establishing TIF #2.

Two local school districts filed a lawsuit against the village, claiming that the newly established TIF #2 was invalid because it did not satisfy the statutory requirements for a “conservation area” subject to TIF treatment. The school districts claimed that the ongoing redevelopment activity by the hospital (prior to establishment of TIF #2) showed there was no need for tax-increment financing to spur development. Additionally, the school districts claimed that the process of removing parcels from TIF #1 only to include those same parcels in TIF #2 was an unlawful attempt to extend the 23-year lifespan imposed for TIF districts under the Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act (Act).

The trial court ruled in favor of the village, finding it adequately established that the area comprising TIF #2 met the minimum criteria to be deemed a “conservation area” eligible for tax-increment financing. More specifically, the trial court determined that the village had shown there was (1) a lack of community planning, (2) a lagging equalized assessed value (EAV) in the proposed TIF #2 area compared with the rest of the village, and (3) deterioration of parcels within the TIF #2 area. The trial court also determined that the de-TIF/re-TIF process of removing parcels from one TIF district to enroll them in another was not prohibited by the Act.

The school districts appealed the trial court’s decision, and the Appellate Court upheld the ruling in favor of the village. On the issue of TIF #2’s designation as a conservation area, the Appellate Court first determined that the village had not erred in finding that the designated area would not reasonably be anticipated to be developed without implementation of TIF #2 and the associated redevelopment plan. While the hospital campus was being actively redeveloped when TIF #2 was established, the Court determined that this activity was clearly supported by the promise of tax-increment financing—in other words, the redevelopment activity and establishment of TIF #2 worked in tandem to stimulate revitalization of the site. The Court further affirmed that the village properly established the 3 eligibility criteria (lack of planning, lagging EAV, and deterioration) to designate TIF #2 as a conservation area.

The Appellate Court also determined that the de-TIF/re-TIF process for the parcels removed from TIF #1 and enrolled in TIF #2 was valid. The Court acknowledged that, to extend the life of a TIF district, municipalities must seek approval from the Illinois General Assembly. However, the Court found TIF #2 was sufficiently distinct from TIF #1, and therefore the de-TIF/re-TIF was not an invalid extension without legislature approval. The Appellate Court observed that nothing prohibits a parcel of land from being placed in a new TIF district after removal from another. Furthermore, the Court noted that the base EAV values had been reset upon the village’s creation of TIF #2, which effectively allowed the other local taxing bodies to receive tax revenue based on EAVs calculated in 2021 rather than 2004. Therefore, the facts and circumstances underlying the creation of TIF #2 did not suggest an unlawful extension of the original TIF #1.

Board of Education of Winfield S.D. 34, et al. v. Village of Winfield

Post Authored by Erin Monforti, Ancel Glink

Read More

Quorum Forum Podcast Ep. 97: Anatomy of a Redevelopment Agreement

Quorum Forum Podcast Ep. 97: Anatomy of a Redevelopment Agreement

  Monday, October 06, 2025    Julie Tappendorf

---

Ancel Glink's Quorum Forum Podcast recently released Episode 97: Anatomy of a Redevelopment Agreement.

In this episode, Ancel Glink partner David S. Silverman, FAICP, provides an in-depth breakdown of the essential components and negotiation strategies for drafting effective Redevelopment Agreements (RDAs) from his presentation at the Southland Development Authority’s TIF Talk training session. David explains that the RDAs serve as a clear roadmap for the project, governing everything from development specifics to the flow of incentives and guarantees, requiring an internal logic that ensures it remains understandable for potentially decades. 

Read More

Quorum Forum Podcast Ep. 77: Housing Affordability at the ACSP2023

Quorum Forum Podcast Ep. 77: Housing Affordability at the ACSP2023

  Monday, November 06, 2023    Julie Tappendorf

---

Ancel Glink has released a new episode of its Quorum Forum Podcast: Episode 77: Housing Affordability at ACSP2023. In this episode (recorded live at the 2023 Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning Annual Conference), Ancel Glink attorneys David Silverman and Dan Bolin discuss how communities are promoting housing affordability and review legal and practical approaches to addressing housing opportunities in Illinois and across the country. Thanks to APA Illinois for inviting us to the conference. 

Read More

TIF Bill Would Drastically Change Local Economic Development Authority

TIF Bill Would Drastically Change Local Economic Development Authority

  Tuesday, February 15, 2022    Julie Tappendorf

---

The Illinois General Assembly is currently considering legislation that would dramatically change how municipalities create and administer tax increment financing (TIF) districts. If approved, Senate Bill 2298 would (among other things):

• Cut the length of most new TIF districts from 23 years to 10 years.
• Revise statutory definitions to prohibit municipalities that are considering creating a new TIF district from relying on, among other things, whether (1) the district contains dilapidated or deteriorating structures; (2) whether the district’s buildings lack proper ventilation, light, and sanitary facilities; (3) whether the district has a high number of vacancies; (4) whether the area embraces modern city-planning practices; and (5) whether the value of the land in the district is appreciating at a slower rate than the community as a whole.
• Prohibit communities from establishing a new TIF district in an area currently occupied by a TIF district (i.e., “re-TIF-ing” an area).
• Prohibit municipalities from using funds remaining in the TIF district account at year end to pay for redevelopment project costs without the taxing districts’ (e.g., school districts, park districts, townships) prior consent.  
• Prohibit municipalities from annually declaring and distributing money remaining in the TIF district account to the taxing districts without the prior consent of the other taxing districts.

In practice, SB 2298 seems designed to make it more challenging for municipalities to both create new TIF districts and to realize the community benefits that TIF districts can provide. As many of our readers know, TIF districts provide perhaps the most effective local economic development tool communities can use to try to resolve the real problems resulting from underperforming neighborhoods. SB 2298 would undoubtedly alter how, when, and if municipalities use TIF districts to try to address local problems.  

More information about SB 2298, including when the bill will next be debated, is available on the Illinois General Assembly’s website.

Post Authored by Greg Jones, Ancel Glink

Read More

New Laws for 2022: Affordable Housing

New Laws for 2022: Affordable Housing

  Monday, December 13, 2021    Julie Tappendorf

---

UPDATED POST. Today, we are reporting on some of the new laws that will take effect in 2022 that address affordable housing.

P.A. 102-0175 amends the Affordable Housing Planning and Appeal Act to require that non-exempt municipalities (those municipalities that the State of Illinois has determined do not meet the State's 10% threshold for "affordable housing") provide notice and hold a public hearing on any new affordable housing plan or any amendment to an existing plan. The amendment also gives the Attorney General enforcement power for the Act’s reporting requirements related to the development of an affordable housing plan. If a non-exempt local government does not submit its plan in a timely manner, the AG can file an action for mandamus or injunctive relief or take appropriate relief to ensure compliance. The Act provides that a home-rule unit "may not regulate the activities described in this Act in a manner more restrictive than the regulation of those activities by the State under this Act." 

This new law also creates the COVID-19 Affordable Housing Grant Program Act which provides that the housing development authority shall establish a grant program to encourage the construction and rehabilitation of affordable multi-family housing in response to the pandemic. This requirement is subject to appropriations provided by the grant fund. We wrote about the Act here.

P.A. 102-0062 allows non-exempt local governments, community college districts, and the State of Illinois to develop affordable housing for students around community colleges in coordination with a nonprofit affordable housing developer.  

Post Authored by Dan James & Julie Tappendorf, Ancel Glink

Read More

New Land Use & Economic Development Laws for 2022

New Land Use & Economic Development Laws for 2022

  Thursday, December 09, 2021    Julie Tappendorf

---

Over the next week or so, we will summarize some of the new laws that are taking effect in 2022 that will be of interest to local governments. For those of you who follow our Quorum Forum Podcast, you have already heard about some of these.

Today's post focuses on new laws that affect zoning, land use, and economic development:

P.A. 102-0078, or Hayli’s Law, prohibits local health departments and public health districts from regulating lemonade stand sales by a person under the age of 16. We previously wrote about this new law here.

P.A. 102-0180 permits any person to cultivate vegetable gardens on their own property. The purpose of the Act is to encourage the cultivation of fresh fruit and produce at all levels of production, including on residential property for personal consumption. Under the law, a vegetable garden is any "vegetable garden" means any plot of ground or elevated soil bed on residential property where vegetables, herbs, fruits, flowers, pollinator plants, leafy greens, or other edible plants are cultivated. There is a home-rule restriction that states that home rule units may not regulate vegetable gardens in a manner inconsistent with the Act. Restrictions may still be made on the basis of height, water use, fertilizer use, or other characteristics. We previously reported on this Act here.

P.A. 102-0098 opens at least 50 new state licenses for adult-use cannabis dispensaries over the course of 2022. Five of the licenses will be issued through a social equity program aimed at issuing licenses to a “disproportionately impacted area.” Those areas meet certain statutory criteria such as having 20% of households receiving assistance under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or an unemployment rate more than 120% the national average. The Act sets January 1, 2022 as the deadline for the Department of Agriculture to publish an application to issue additional Conditional Adult Use Dispensing Organization licenses.

P.A. 102-0108 will expand the Illinois Enterprise Zone Act to authorize 97 (instead of 12) enterprise zones to be certified in a calendar year. The Act also provides that at least 25% of zones available for designation must be awarded to zones in counties with populations under 300,000. For those zones set to expire before 2024, the application process begins five years prior to expiration. Expiring zones may reapply, but other areas may compete for the designation.

The amendment also implements new consequences for zones failing to file reports of any capital investment, job creation or retention, or state tax expenditures for three consecutive years. After the Department of Commerce notifies the chief elected official of the county or municipality that is not compliant, the Department will place the county or municipality on probationary status for at least 6 months. If corrective action is not achieved during the probationary period, the Department will decertify the zone.

P.A. 102-0127 amends TIF reporting requirements. Beginning in FY-2022, municipalities that submit the required TIF reports will also be required to report to the State Comptroller the following: (1) the number of jobs projected to be created for each redevelopment project area at the time of approval of the redevelopment agreement; (2) the number of jobs, if any, created as a result of the development to date for that reporting period under the same guidelines and assumptions as was used for the projections used at the time of approval of the redevelopment agreement; (3) the amount of increment projected to be created at the time of approval of the redevelopment agreement for each redevelopment project area; (4) the amount of increment created as a result of the development to date for that reporting period; and (5) the stated rate of return identified by the developer to the municipality for each redevelopment project area, if any.

Post Authored by Dan James & Julie Tappendorf, Ancel Glink

Read More

Governor Signs Land Use and Environmental Legislation

Governor Signs Land Use and Environmental Legislation

  Tuesday, September 28, 2021    Julie Tappendorf

---

In this edition of the Municipal Minute series on legislative updates, we will update you on several recently enacted Illinois laws relating to land use, public transit, and replacement of lead pipes.

P.A. 102-0180 provides new protections for vegetable gardens on residential property for non-commercial use. Under this new law, any person may cultivate a vegetable garden on their private property or on private property with the owner's permission. A vegetable garden is defined as "any plot of ground or elevated soil bed on residential property where vegetables, herbs, fruits, flowers, pollinator plants, leafy greens, or edible plants are cultivated." The new law restricts local government regulation of vegetable gardens in a manner inconsistent with this new right, although governments can regulate the "height, setback, water use, fertilizer use, or control of invasive or unlawful species." The new law preempts home rule. 

P.A. 102-0660, expands bike and pedestrian pathway in highway planning and construction projects to apply beyond "urban areas" to projects within any municipality with a population of over 1,000 people. The law contains a few exceptions where bike and pedestrian path planning is not required, including a new exception where a municipality has passed a resolution declaring that the bicycle or pedestrian way does not fit the current development plan. The two current exceptions are: (1) where a pavement resurfacing project does not widen traveled roads or provide stabilized shoulders; or (2) where pathways would be unnecessary or not appropriate because of safety issues or costs.

P.A. 102-0613 creates the Lead Service Line Replacement and Notification Act, a comprehensive law that is intended to improve water service in Illinois. The Act lays out a detailed schedule for the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) and community water suppliers to replace lead service lines in the State with assistance from a new fund, the Lead Service Line Replacement Fund. The Act prioritizes funding to units of local government based on the prevalence of low-income households, lead service lines, and water samples with elevated lead levels. The Fund will be used for "planning, design, or construction directly related to the replacement of lead service lines and restoration of property."

Post Authored by Erin Monforti and Mike Halpin, Ancel Glink

Read More

Seventh Circuit Rejects Developer's Claims Against City Manager

Seventh Circuit Rejects Developer's Claims Against City Manager

  Friday, February 05, 2021    Julie Tappendorf

---

In 2018, the City of DeKalb approved a Preliminary Development Incentive Agreement (PDA) with a developer regarding potential financing for the redevelopment of property in the City. The PDA provided that if the developer met certain contingencies specified in the PDA, the City would provide an approximate $2,500,000 Development Incentive in Tax Increment Financing (TIF) funding. The PDA imposed certain conditions and obligations on both parties before the agreement was final and prior to funds being distributed to the developer. 

After conducting due diligence into the developer, the City Manager recommended that the City terminate the PDA, and the City Council unanimously voted to terminate the PDA. The developer then filed a lawsuit claiming, among other things, that the City Manager violated the developer's First and Fourteenth Amendment rights. After the district court dismissed Fisk’s federal claims for failure to state a claim with prejudice, the developer appealed to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. 

In 145 Fisk, LLC v. Niklas, the Seventh Circuit rejected the developer's First Amendment retaliation claim against the City Manager. The developer had claimed that the City Manager blocked a development incentive and retaliated against it because the company’s attorney member exposed unflattering information about the City Manager and named him in discovery in an earlier, unrelated lawsuit. The Seventh Circuit found that this claim had been properly dismissed by the district court because the developer did not engage in protected activity. The Seventh Circuit also found that the developer had waived any retaliation claim based on the exercise of free speech rights because it had not raised that claim with the district court. The Seventh Circuit also rejected the developer's procedural due process claim since the developer had no constitutionally protected property interest because the PDA only provided “a right to acquire property” and not a right in the property itself. Lastly, the Seventh Circuit rejected the developer's equal protection claim, finding that the City Manager had a rational basis for recommending that the developer not receive financing under the PDA.

Post Authored by Eugene Bolotnikov, Ancel Glink

Read More

Challenge to TIF Rejected by Court

Challenge to TIF Rejected by Court

  Friday, September 18, 2015    Julie Tappendorf

---

Rarely do the courts issue opinions relating to the Illinois TIF law - maybe because the law itself is so complicated or rarely challenged.  This week, however, an appellate court addressed a challenge that the City of Bloomington failed to comply with provisions of Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act. Specifically, the Devyn Corporation (an owner of property located within the TIF district) filed a lawsuit claiming that the City failed to comply with certain accounting and recordkeeping functions of the TIF law, and that the TIF should be terminated because the redevelopment plan had not been implemented by the estimated date of completion.  Finally, the plaintiff argued that the City violated both the Act and the redevelopment plan by levying and collecting taxes after the estimated date of completion.

The court rejected the plaintiff's argument, ruling in favor of the city on all counts.  First, the court said that plaintiff had other available remedies for his requests for documents, including FOIA. The court also held that the estimated date for completion was just that - an estimate - and did not operate to terminate the TIF or render the City's levy of taxes unlawful.  Devyn Corp. v. City of Bloomington, 2015 IL App (4th) 140819.

Post Authored by Julie Tappendorf

Read More

Notice to All Owners Required for Demolition Order

Notice to All Owners Required for Demolition Order

  Thursday, September 03, 2015    Julie Tappendorf

---

Section 55-1121 of the Counties Code authorizes a county to demolish an unsafe and dangerous building or structure provided the county follows certain procedural steps, including providing notice to all owners or lienholders and obtaining a court order authorizing demolition. 

In County of McHenry v. Smith, 2015 Ill App (2d) 141165, McHenry County commenced demolition proceedings against the owners of a home that had fallen into disrepair and had been abandoned for many years. The county sent notice to all owners of record, as well as lienholders of record, and then filed a compliant with the circuit court requesting a demolition order. However, both the circuit court and appellate courts denied the county's petition, holding that the county failed to notify all of the owners of the property.  The owners of record were both deceased, and although the county notified three of the deceased owners' children, it failed to provide notice to a fourth child. 

The court acknowledged that the county could have relied on an alternative notice provision in the demolition statute that authorizes notice to be posted at the property and sent to the taxpayer of record if the identity or whereabouts of the owners are not ascertainable "upon diligent search." In this case, the county, however, although the county published notice as an alternative, it did not post it at the property.

Post Authored by Julie Tappendorf

Read More

Illinois Business District Law Amended

Illinois Business District Law Amended

  Tuesday, September 01, 2015    Julie Tappendorf

---

The Illinois Municipal Code authorizes municipalities to establish business districts for the purposes of furthering economic development in commercial areas. Once a business district is established, municipalities have a wide range of powers within that district,including the power to enter into sales tax rebate agreements, acquire land, demolish structures, construct and finance improvements, among many other powers. The business district authorizing statute was recently amended by the Illinois General Assembly to add a new provision that allows a municipality to use up to 1% of the sales tax and hotel tax revenues received from one business district for eligible costs in another business district so long as the two business districts are either contiguous to one another or separated only by public right of way or forest preserve property.  The amendment is similar to the language already included in the TIF law that allows a municipality to "share" revenues between TIF districts.

You can read the new law here: P.A. 99-452.

Post Authored by Julie Tappendorf

Read More

Bill Would Authorize Cities to File for Bankruptcy

Bill Would Authorize Cities to File for Bankruptcy

  Friday, January 30, 2015    Julie Tappendorf

---

Illinois State Representative Ron Sandack (R-Downers Grove) filed House Bill 298 this week to amend state statute to allow Illinois municipalities to seek bankruptcy protections under Chapter 9 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code.  Chapter 9 allows for bankruptcy protection, but includes a provision that requires a municipality to gain state authorization as part of the filing. Currently, Illinois law does not allow for such authorization for municipal governments. 23 other states currently allow municipalities to file for bankruptcy, although there are few that have actually sought relief under Chapter 9.  

Before enacting this legislation, legislators should carefully consider the impact that municipal bankruptcies could have to all municipalities, taxpayers, and the public.  For example, a municipal bankruptcy could make borrowing money more expensive since bond buyers would have to price out the risk of the issuer (the municipality) declaring bankruptcy, affecting interest rates.  Contracts with municipalities could also become more expensive as contractors take into account the risk of not getting paid.  These impacts are likely to be felt by all municipalities, not just those that might file bankruptcy.  Illinois legislators should carefully study the effects these statutes have had in other states who have had similar legislation.

It's important to point out that the bill would only apply to municipalities, not other units of local government like counties, school districts, park districts, libraries, and townships.  

Here's the wording of the proposed legislation, which would amend the Illinois Municipal Code:

65 ILCS 5/8-1-19

Sec. 8-1-19.  Bankruptcy; petitions. Any municipality may file a petition and exercise powers pursuant to applicable federal bankruptcy law.

Post Authored by Adam Simon & Julie Tappendorf, Ancel Glink

Read More

Amendment to Bond Act Affects Local Government Contracts

Amendment to Bond Act Affects Local Government Contracts

  Wednesday, August 27, 2014    Julie Tappendorf

---

On August 22, 2014, Governor Quinn signed HB 4769, amending the Public Construction Bond Act. P.A. 98-1018. That Act requires public bodies, including municipalities and other local governments to require contractors to provide security (i.e., letter of credit or surety bond) for any public works project costing over $50,000.  The amendment added the following language to the Act establishing minimum rating standards for surety companies that provide bonds for public projects: 

The surety on the bond shall be a company that is licensed by the Department of Insurance authorizing it to execute surety bonds and the company shall have a financial strength rating of at least A- as rated by A.M. Best Company, Inc., Moody’s Investors Service, Standard & Poor’s Corporation, or a similar rating agency.  

Local governments should make sure that the surety companies that provide bonds to secure public works projects over $50,000 meet these new rating requirements.  It would also be good practice for local governments to include language in any RFP, bid documents, and construction contracts putting contractors on notice of this new legal requirement.

Post Authored by Julie Tappendorf

Read More

2 Great Land Use Programs You Shouldn't Miss in August

2 Great Land Use Programs You Shouldn't Miss in August

  Wednesday, August 06, 2014    Julie Tappendorf

---

Our first program is scheduled for August 14th.  Ancel Glink attorneys Dan Bolin and Greg Jones will participate in a webinar titled "Guns, Pot, and Sex:  Regulating Controversial Land Uses" hosted by the International Municipal Lawyers Association (IMLA).

A summary of the session is below:

The title says it all. IMLA shamelessly plays to your interests in sensational and prurient subjects -- the only thing that might be done to get a better turnout for this teleconference would be to have Channing Tatum and Miley Cyrus on the panel. Guns, cannabis, sexually oriented businesses are hot button issues and often have blighting effects. Learn how to deal with them in this teleconference.

The webinar is scheduled for noon to 1:00 pm (central time).  You can learn more about it on IMLA's website here and register here.

Our second program will be on August 21st. Ancel Glink attorney Dan Bolin will participate in the panel presentation "Realizing Potential:  Land Banks, Demolition & Planning for Vacant Land" hosted by the American Planning Association - Chicago Metro Section.  

A summary of the session is below:

The Great Recession has shown us that no community is immune to blight, leaving municipalities throughout the country in need of strategies to stabilize neighborhoods and commercial districts stressed by high rates of vacancy.  In some cases, communities are repurposing vacant properties for entirely different uses.  In other instances, properties with no clearly defined future are being repositioned for a variety of potential uses.  Come learn how other communities are using new and innovative tools to win the fight against blight and vacancy.

Details about the seminar are below:

WHEN: Thursday, August 21, 2014, 9:00 am to 12:00 pm

WHERE: Metcalfe Federal Building, Lake Michigan Room, 12th Floor, 77 W. Jackson Blvd, Chicago IL 60604

COST: $15 paid at the door ($5 for students); checks payable to APA-CMS

RSVP: To RSVP, please email cms@ilapa.org by August 19th

Read More

Temporary Use Articles Published in Planning & Environmental Law

Temporary Use Articles Published in Planning & Environmental Law

  Monday, July 21, 2014    Julie Tappendorf

---

The American Planning Association (APA) publishes a monthly magazine called Planning & Environmental Law where it reports on recent land use and planning cases and other legal matters. In the July 2014 edition of PEL, the APA published two articles written by Ancel Glink attorneys, which may be of interest to land use and planning officials and employees. 

Julie Tappendorf authored the article "Common Zoning Definitions Found Unconstitutional in TLC v. Elgin."  In her article, Julie summarizes the TLC v. Elgin case, where a federal district court ruled that a municipality could not require a faith-based organization to obtain a temporary use permit to operate its mobile pregnancy counseling services.  The court found that the city's zoning definitions of "land use" and "structure" were unconstitutionally vague and overbroad because these regulations could prevent people from exercising their First Amended protected rights.  The case was settled recently, and TLC was allowed to offer its mobile pregnancy counseling services, but the ruling that these commonly used zoning definitions were unconstitutional should cause some concern to municipal land use professionals.

David Silverman authored the article "The Temporary Use and Economic Development."  In his article, David explains temporary use regulations, and discusses ways temporary uses can be used effectively to promote economic development and provide unique cultural, artistic, and entrepreneurial experiences within communities. David provides a number of examples of these temporary uses such as farmers markets, mobile food operations, art and culture "temporiums," and urban farming initiatives.

Post Authored by Julie Tappendorf, Ancel Glink

Read More

Responsible Bidder Bill Still Alive

Responsible Bidder Bill Still Alive

  Wednesday, May 28, 2014    Julie Tappendorf

---

The IML recently reported about an amendment to the "Responsible Bidder" bill (HB 924) that has given new life to this proposed legislation.  Public bodies should be aware of the bill because it could significantly increase the cost of public projects if it is ultimately approved.

HB 924, as amended, would require that all local government public works projects use contractors and sub-contractors that are "responsible bidders," as defined in the law.  A "responsible bidder" would have to meet certain criteria in the statute, including that the bidder and each subcontractor participate in apprentice and training programs approved by and registered with the U.S. Department of Labor, among other requirements.  

The IML remains opposed to the legislation, even as amended, because the requirements necessary to qualify as a "responsible bidder" would impose higher costs on smaller contractors and render them unable to afford to bid on public works projects. 

The implementation of the new requirement would be phased so that certain projects would be exempt, as follows: 

Projects less than $100,000 are exempt from July 1, 2015 through June 30, 2016

Projects less than $50,000 are exempt from July 1, 2016 through June 30, 2017

Projects less than $20,000 are exempt from July 1, 2017 and onward.

You can read more about the amended legislation on the IML website here.

Read More