* Illinois Economic Development Corp Chairman John Atkinson…

Recently, Illinois has developed significant economic development momentum by targeting projects in future-defining sectors while strengthening our established industries. Our unmatched infrastructure, diverse workforce, top-tier education, central location and coordinated strategy are helping fuel impactful growth and rewrite the narrative on our business climate. This turnaround is also a testament to the creativity and effectiveness of Gov. JB Pritzker and the General Assembly in creating incentives — such as the REV program, MICRO Act and AIM Credit, to name a few — that give CEOs the confidence to choose Illinois.

But in today’s marketplace, we need every tool available to continue winning. That’s exactly what a new bill, introduced by Rep. Jay Hoffman, assistant majority leader, would provide.

Currently before the Illinois General Assembly, this legislation would give qualifying megaprojects — those investing at least $100 million and committing to stay for 20 years or more — the ability to negotiate long-term, predictable property tax agreements with local governments. These agreements would provide companies with stable costs as they grow in Illinois, while schools and municipalities would gain a reliable revenue stream they can plan around with confidence. […]

Crucially, there are no state dollars in play and no impact on our balanced budget. Instead, it gives control to local authorities and allows us to unlock investment that might not otherwise be possible.

Without this tool, Illinois is at serious risk of losing out to one of the 37 other states that already offer similar programs. In Ohio, New Albany granted Intel a 30-year, 100% property tax abatement to land a $20 billion semiconductor campus. In Texas, Samsung secured a package of long-term abatements for a massive chip plant. And in South Carolina, state leaders approved a 40-year tax abatement via the state’s FILOT (Fee in Lieu of Tax) Program to secure a new Scout Motors electric vehicle manufacturing plant.

* Evanston Now…

Four key Illinois legislators say that the upcoming veto session in Springfield will end with a solution in place for the $771 million “fiscal cliff” facing Chicago-area mass transit. […]

Rep. Kam Buckner, another Chicago Democrat, said “we got the bill at 11:47 p.m.” on the last day of session, making it impossible to bring it to a vote.

However, both Democrats [Rep. Buckner and Sen. Ram Villivalam] agreed that there will be a vote, and a positive vote, later this fall.

Buckner pointed out that “some people are saying we can wait, but for the sake of our transit systems we have to get this done now. I think we will do it.” […]

Both Metra and PACE leaders are now saying they should be able to make it through 2026 with no service cuts, and CTA may be able to avoid cuts until midway through the year, in part because of increased internet sales tax revenue, which helps fund transit.

But Villivalam said the long-term needs are still very real, and the projected 40% service reductions without a cliff resolution are out there, even if they’re a bit farther away.

* WAND…

State lawmakers are reviewing multiple proposals to help lower utility bills and increase energy capacity during veto session. Storage will play a key role in any plan lawmakers try to pass next month.

Illinois could create virtual power plants by having solar-powered batteries installed at homes and commercial buildings. People would receive rebates if they purchase a battery and agree to let the state access the stored energy during some of the hottest days of the summer.

“With the help of this legislation, we can get a lot of storage online fast,” said Bryan McDaniel with the Citizens Utility Board. “Large scale battery storage can be deployed very quickly compared to traditional sources of power. This speed to market attribute is really important, as we are already experiencing the cost of inaction.”

Advocates said the Storage for All program would run similarly to the state’s Solar for All program. The state would also establish consumer protection requirements to prevent misleading marketing and abusive practices by vendors.

This legislation also calls on the Illinois Power Agency to conduct procurement events to award incentive contracts to energy storage developers, aiming to bring three gigawatts of new storage projects online by 2030 and six gigawatts by 2035.

* It’s not a bill…yet. Legal Action Chicago, Catholic Conference of Illinois, Citizen Action Illinois, Woodstock Institute and others…

The Illinois Supreme Court yesterday let stand an Appellate Court’s decision upholding an arbitrator’s decision allowing an out-of-state company to charge an Illinois resident 483% APR to borrow money – more than ten times the State’s 36% rate cap. The Supreme Court declined to take up the case, effectively allowing Illinois residents to be subject to the laws of the state where an online lender does business: in this case Utah.

Utah is considered the Wild West in the world of consumer lending. Predatory lenders set up shop there to enjoy the state’s lack of an interest cap. By contrast, consumers in Illinois are protected – or were meant to be protected – by the Predatory Loan Prevention Act (PLPA) – which caps the interest rate on consumer loans at 36%.

In this case, Silver Financial, a company doing business in Utah, made a loan to Joseph Morgan, an Illinois resident, with an APR of 483% in April 2022. Under the PLPA, that APR is illegal, and the loan is null and void on its face. Silver Financial was able to get away with charging whatever it wanted through two legal mechanisms: (1) forced arbitration, and (2) choice of law. “Forced arbitration” is fine print buried in a contract forcing you, the consumer, to take any disputes to arbitration, instead of court. “Choice of law” means the company gets to choose which state’s laws apply. In this case, the company chose…. You guessed it… Utah!

On June 30, 2023, an arbitrator found that the PLPA and the public policy of Illinois were inapplicable, and the Illinois Appellate Court for the 1st District, on February 4, 2025, affirmed the arbitrator’s decision, finding that applying Utah law did not violate the public policy of Illinois.

“It has long been common knowledge that you don’t forfeit your rights when you log on to your computer and shop on the internet, but like so many other things these days, a new normal is descending upon us,” said Brent Adams, Senior Vice President of Policy & Advocacy at Woodstock Institute. “The implications of this decision are not confined to consumer lending. We are routinely forced to sign arbitration clauses when deciding to receive goods or services from a particular company; cell phone service, internet, and credit cards, in addition to loans, are among the types of industries that use forced arbitration clauses. We are all at risk of being subject to an arbitrator who will enforce a ‘choice of law’ clause drafted by a company who wants to stack the deck in its favor.”

Illinois is not entirely powerless in this situation. The Illinois Department of Financial & Professional Regulation (IDFPR) issued a cease & desist order on May 19, 2025. Silver Financial had ten days to request a hearing and refused to do so. If Silver Financial is still offering loans to Illinois consumers, the Attorney General’s Office may go to court seeking an injunction to enforce IDFPR’s order.

Today, Mr. Morgan’s attorneys filed a Petition for Rehearing with the Illinois Supreme Court noting that IDFPR’s order is in direct conflict with the Appellate Court’s decision.

Meanwhile, this coalition is working with policy experts to develop state laws to stop forced arbitration. Another possible reform is to create a Restitution Fund funded by fines paid by other licensees. The Restitution Fund would be used to pay restitution to consumers who are harmed by financial predators who fall outside the State’s reach.

Unfortunately, the final takeaway is buyer beware. When you buy a good or service or borrow money over the internet, you are taking a risk. If something goes wrong, you might find yourself in arbitration with an arbitrator selected by the company applying the laws chosen by the company. The laws could be the laws of Utah, the Virgin Islands, Isle of Man, or China, and, if you lose, you might have no remedy or recourse.