* Seems a bit late. From the Suburban Mayors Coalition for Fair Transit via the Illinois Municipal League…
Honorable Members of the Illinois General Assembly:
Over the past 18 months, members of both chambers have dedicated considerable time to evaluating our region’s transit system and exploring ways to improve service for the more than one million daily riders who rely on Metra, Pace, and the CTA. Many of these riders are among our most vulnerable residents, who have no alternative means of transportation. We appreciate your commitment to addressing the looming fiscal cliff facing public transit. However, the legislative proposals introduced thus far raise significant concerns for municipalities and the residents we represent.
We respectfully share the following concerns:
Real Estate Transfer Tax
The proposed $3 per $1,000 real estate transfer tax would apply to transactions in suburban Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake, McHenry, and Will Counties while excluding the City of Chicago. This new tax would add to the growing barriers to affordable housing in our communities. Furthermore, it would derail parallel legislative efforts that aspire to improve housing access across the state.
Retail Delivery Fee
A statewide $1.50 delivery fee on all motor vehicle deliveries of goods subject to sales tax would affect every household, regardless of income or proximity to transit. This fee is regressive, disproportionately burdens low to moderate income families, and lacks a clear connection between those paying and those benefiting from the transit system.
Development Authority
The proposed authority for the new regional transit entity to acquire, develop, or redevelop property within a ½-mile of transit stations or ⅛-mile of bus stops raises serious concerns about local control and private property rights. Even with the inclusion of local zoning requirements, granting such powers to an unelected regional board would allow development across broad swaths of suburban communities potentially overriding local planning efforts. This also includes concerns about the regional board exerting authority over local parking requirements. These decisions should remain under municipal governments.
Board Composition and Voting
The proposed structure of the NITA Board lacks the necessary safeguards to ensure balanced regional representation. We urge you to consider models like the CMAP Board, which requires a 4/5 majority vote to pass all major decisions. Without similar protections, there is a real risk of disenfranchising any one subregion and discouraging collaboration.
Board Membership
The restrictions on who may be Directors on the NITA Board and service boards preclude local elected officials who may be the most knowledgeable people on transportation needs of their constituents. Local elected officials have been some of the most reliable and knowledgeable members of our region’s boards for decades. There is a reason so many members of boards like CMAP, the service boards, and ISTHA have been elected officials or former elected officials, they know the regional challenges of funding and operating complex systems.
Service Standards and Funding Distribution
The proposed performance metrics and service propensity measures may disadvantage Metra and Pace in favor of CTA, potentially skewing future funding and service priorities. Considering the legislation proposes only fifteen votes of the NITA Board to approve these criteria, the suburbs and collar counties could face significant hurdles in receiving sufficient funding to providing transit to their residents. Greater clarity and assurances regarding service equity and long-term funding parity are essential before finalizing this legislation.
We are asking you, our legislators, to stand up for our hometowns and your constituents in northeastern Illinois and across the state. We urge you to pass legislation that would provide for a more efficient and regionally balanced approach to public transit. We further hope this new legislation will align new revenue sources with access to transit service, ensures meaningful representation for all subregions, and preserves local authority over land use, parking and development.
Transit reform should focus on improving service, expanding access and financial sustainability, not on development powers at the expense of municipal autonomy or creating new burdens on residents with little connection to the transit system.
We respectfully ask to be included in ongoing discussions to better collaborate on a path forward that supports fair, reliable, and equitable public transit for all northeastern Illinois.
Thank you for your service and for your attention to this critical issue.
Sincerely,
The undersigned Mayors and Village Presidents:
Rodney Craig, Village of Hanover Park
Leon Rockingham, Jr., City of North Chicago
John Noak, Village of Romeoville
Nancy Rotering, City of Highland Park
William McLeod, Village of Hoffman Estates
Frank Saverino, Village of Carol Stream
Craig Johnson, Village of Elk Grove Village
Jeffery Schielke, City of Batavia
Tom Dailly, Village of Schaumburg
Philip Suess, City of Wheaton
Gary Grasso, Village of Burr Ridge
Frank Trilla, Village of Willowbrook
Paul Hoefert, Village of Mount Prospect
Eleanor Sweet McDonnell, Village of North Barrington
Donna Johnson, Village of Libertyville
Tom Hundley, Village of Addison
David Kaptain, City of Elgin
Rick Reinbold, Village of Richton Park
Mark Kownick, Village of Cary Larry Herman, Village of Oak Brook
Rick Mack, Village of Ringwood
David Pileski, Village of Roselle
Joseph Marchese, City of Darien
Sam Cunningham, City of Waukegan
* From a spokesperson for Reps. Eva-Dina Delgado and Kam Buckner…
Years of discussions and more than a year of formal negotiation have generated valuable feedback, and that has brought us to the point where we are close to a better path forward for our transit agencies. While some discussions continue, those discussions need to be focused on constructive feedback and solutions.
* From Senate President Don Harmon’s spokesperson John Patterson…
We welcome the feedback and look forward to their input and ideas on how to resolve this looming crisis.
Your translation of the responses?
* Meanwhile, Sen. Ram Villivalam talked to Governing Magazine about the immediate future…
Governing: Are there sticking points in the reform conversation. If so, what are they?
Villivalam: The reforms that have been presented in House Bill 3438 are largely agreed to by all of the stakeholders and I think represent what our residents and taxpayers want to see in terms of having a safe, reliable, accessible and integrated public transit system. The Senate has passed a package of reforms and funding with a transformational investment of $1.5 billion. We believe the package of reforms has really achieved a consensus of stakeholders and residents that have been involved in this process.
Governing: You’re waiting for the House to vote on that.
Villivalam: If there’s a better funding plan that achieves $1.5 billion in investment, we’re happy to work with folks on that. Our position, though, is that we passed a bill, and short of there being a better funding plan, we’d like to see our bill passed and sent to the governor.
In other words, the governance and related reforms are basically locked down. Some revenues are still up in the air.
…Adding… Press release…
Labor, Environmental, and Transit Advocates call on legislators to return to Springfield, address $770 million transit fiscal cliff
With pink slips scheduled for September and planned cuts to transit service, advocates and workers rally, urge state lawmakers to prevent a catastrophe
WHAT: The Illinois General Assembly adjourned on May 31 without addressing the state’s $770 million transit fiscal cliff. With pink slips scheduled for September and the RTA’s instruction for the CTA, Metra, and Pace to plan for service cuts, transit riders and workers are urging the General Assembly to avert a catastrophe by returning to Springfield for a special summer session.
After months of negotiations, legislation passed the Senate on May 31, but was not available to be called in the House. The bill included long-awaited reform measures agreed upon by labor, environment, and transit advocates and a new, dedicated revenue stream for transit.
As a result of Springfield’s inaction, the RTA estimates that nearly 3,000 transit workers could lose their jobs, including 2,000 CTA workers. The service boards have indicated that staffing cuts will result in a 40% reduction to service, leaving Chicago with a transit network smaller than Madison, WI.
By law, the 2026 CTA, Metra, and Pace budgets must only include the funding they will receive for the next year when the budgeting process begins in July 2025. As such, even though the General Assembly is scheduled to return in October for a fall veto session, the agencies must still plan as if they are not receiving the funding to address the fiscal cliff. All four agencies have indicated that, even if a revenue solution were proposed, the collected revenue from October through December would not be enough to plug the budget hole.
WHO:
State Senator Ram Villivalam
State Senator Graciela Guzmán
Tiffany Rebb, CTA Bus Operator
Orlando Rojas, Metra Conductor
Ann Marie Moore, Flight Attendant, Transit Rider
Evan Urchell, The People’s Lobby, Transit Rider
Jose Manuel Almanaza, Equiticity, Transit Advocate
WHEN: Thursday, June 26, 2025
12:00 PM
WHERE: 238 S. Riverside Plaza, Chicago, IL (Between Union Station & Chicago River under the overhang)
25 Comments
|
Comments Off
|
* Background is here if you need it. From a press release..
Today, members of the Illinois House and Senate Republican caucuses joined together to call on Gov. Pritzker to veto Senate Bill 328, legislation that would serve only to enrich trial lawyers at the expense of jobs and economic growth. They also filed a lawsuit in Sangamon County court to enforce the Illinois Constitution’s Three Readings Rule, due to the blatant unconstitutional manner the Democratic Majority rammed the special interest proposal through the General Assembly after midnight on the last day of session.
The legislation would overhaul Illinois’ judicial system and allow out-of-state businesses to be sued by out-of-state plaintiffs in Illinois courts for incidents with no connection to the state. A lesser-known provision in the law, also allows foreign businesses registered in the state as well. It was passed using a variety of procedural gimmicks to avoid constitutional requirements and public scrutiny.
“We are answering the call of job creators, good government watchdog groups, and most importantly, our constituents, to stand up for transparency and against this job-killing legislation,” House Minority Leader Tony McCombie (R-Savanna) said. “Governor Pritzker must veto SB328 and show not only the people of Illinois, but also businesses around the world, we want to put all of our people to work, not just trial lawyers.”
Despite Democrats’ super majorities in both the House and Senate Chambers, major pieces of legislation continue to bypass the constitutionally required Three Readings Rule to avoid due process, transparency, and public engagement. Senate Bill 328 was passed after midnight with a gut-and-replace maneuver that allowed the majority party to avoid proper due process such as committee hearings and public input, violating the Three Readings Rule required in the Illinois State Constitution.
“This special interest proposal was passed by the Democratic Majority using a shady process that clearly violates the substance and spirit of the Illinois Constitution,” said Illinois Senate Republican Leader John Curran (R-Downers Grove). “I am calling on Gov. Pritzker to join us in standing up for Illinois taxpayers and promote economic investment in our state by vetoing this anti-business legislation.”
* Their problem is their lawsuit and their public remarks today cite dissenting opinions. For example, this is some of what Senate Republican Leader John Curran said today…
This process used was a complete gut and replace on the last day in the second chamber, completely new language, completely changing the bill and then passing it through that second chamber. In this instance, the Senate and back to the House for concurrence in the same day. That is a clear violation of what the Constitution calls for. And we are seizing upon that the courts have been more acutely aware recently of the abuse of this process, which is rampant in the Illinois General Assembly. Leaning into Justice Holder White’s recent dissent, calling out and highlighting this abuse of the legislative process in the Caulkins case.
* From the lawsuit…
Former challenges to legislation as having not met the Three Readings Rule have been countered by the Enrolled Bill Doctrine. See, e.g., Geja’s Café v. Metropolitan Pier and Exposition Authority, 606 N.E.2d 1212 (Ill. 1992); Fuehrmeyer v. City of Chicago, 311 N.E.2d 116 (Ill. 1974). Illinois Courts have held that the legislative leaders’ sign-off creates the presumption that all procedural requirements — including the Three Readings Rule — have been met. Fuehrmeyer at 119; Cutinello v. Whitley, 641 N.E.2d 360 (Ill. 1994); Cincinnati Ins. Co. v. Chapman, 691 N.E.2d 374 (Ill. 1998); Friends of the Parks v. Chicago Park District, 786 N.E.2d 161 (Ill. 2003).
Judicial adherence to the Enrolled Bill Doctrine is far from unanimous, however. In People v. Dunigan, Justice Heiple drafted a pointed dissent questioning the logical underpinnings of the Enrolled Bill Doctrine as well as the majority’s problematic reliance on the testimony of delegates to the 1970 Constitutional Convention to support it.
* We have seen this citation from the new lawsuit quite a bit over the years…
While not invalidating the Enrolled Bill Doctrine, the Illinois Supreme Court reiterated in Friends of the Parks that the legislature has “shown remarkably poor self-discipline in policing itself in regard to the three-readings requirement.”
But here is the full quote…
We noted in Geja’s Cafe and again in Cutinello that the legislature had shown remarkably poor self-discipline in policing itself in regard to the three-readings requirement. The same poor self-discipline is alleged to have occurred in this case. The record below has not, however, been sufficiently developed to support or contradict this claim. Nevertheless, because this court is ever mindful of its duty to enforce the constitution of this state, we take the opportunity to urge the legislature to follow the three-readings rule. While separation of powers concerns militate in favor of the enrolled-bill doctrine (see Cutinello, 161 Ill.2d at 425, 204 Ill.Dec. 136, 641 N.E.2d 360), our responsibility to ensure obedience to the constitution remains an equally important concern.
In sum, we hold that section 3 of the Illinois Sport Facility Act violates neither the public purpose doctrine nor the public trust doctrine and that Public Act 91-0935 is not subject to procedural challenge in light of the enrolled-bill doctrine. We therefore affirm the circuit court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of defendants.
So, the Republicans are likely hoping that if they keep bringing these cases to the court’s attention, the Supremes will eventually decide that the record has been “sufficiently developed” to support their claim.
Also, they’ll get a decent press pop about a bill their business allies strongly oppose.
…Adding… ITLA…
ITLA Statement on Senate Bill 328: Protecting Illinoisans from Dangerous Toxins
Lawmakers took a significant step to protect workers and consumers from exposure to toxic substances by passing Senate Bill 328, which will improve the likelihood that all corporate actors that contributed to poisoning a person will be held responsible in our state’s court system — regardless of where those business are physically or legally headquartered.
Toxic tort cases occur when individuals are injured, made ill or die if they ingest, inhale or absorb hazardous substances. Businesses can be held responsible for the harms they cause if they didn’t properly warn about the risks of their product, gave false or misleading information about the possible dangers, or engaged in negligent manufacturing practices.
This proposed change in law applies only in cases alleging injury or illness resulting from exposure to a substance that is defined as toxic based on the state’s Uniform Hazardous Substances Act and that also involves multiple defendants where at least one defendant is already subject to specific jurisdiction in Illinois for that case. Once the connection to a company operating in Illinois is established, other entities registered to do business in Illinois (no matter where they are based) may be brought into the case as co-defendants if their use of toxic substances in their products contributed to causing harm to that person, whether that occurred in Illinois or in another state.
One example of who would benefit is a person who was employed by a contractor and sent over the course of their career to do repair work at power plants located in Illinois and multiple other states. At those job sites for extended periods of time they were unknowingly exposed to asbestos, an extremely hazardous substance that causes irreparable lung damage leading to terrible suffering and an agonizing death. That cumulative exposure across years caused their illness. Under current law, companies based in other states could move to dismiss a case against them filed in Illinois, even though they had chosen to do business here by hiring a contractor based in our state. This helps people who may be gravely ill by keeping the case in Illinois, rather than requiring them to file separate cases and travel for court hearings in multiple states where other defendants are located.
No company should be permitted to escape accountability for the misuse of dangerous toxins simply by being headquartered in a different state. Illinois has long opposed predatory profiteering by providing a civil justice system in which everyone, regardless of their means, gets a fair shake. Senate Bill 328 upholds that tradition by recognizing that the privilege of doing business here comes with the responsibility of not hurting Illinoisans.
At a time when the Trump Administration and Republican-controlled Congress are gutting environmental, patient, worker and consumer protections, it is vital that states step up to fill the federal government’s vacuum.
Contrary to the fear-mongering and misinformation propagated by opponents, Senate Bill 328 does not apply to cases involving food or prescription drugs. This measure does not add to the volume or types of cases that can already be brought in Illinois. It is relevant in a more limited set of circumstances and merely ensures that parties that should rightfully be included as defendants are included, so plaintiffs have the prospect of obtaining more complete justice. It is also a response to the realities of the modern American economy in which people are employed by Illinois businesses, but work in other states on projects that expose them to hazardous substances, or live in Illinois and unknowingly purchase from an Illinois retailer goods made with cancer-causing toxins by an out-of-state manufacturer.
This legislation follows a 2023 U.S. Supreme Court decision concerning the liability of out-of-state companies. The court ruled in Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co. that a Pennsylvania law requiring out-of-state companies to consent to the jurisdiction of its court system, as a condition of registering to do business in that state, did not violate the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution. The nation’s high court rejected an argument from Norfolk Southern, a company incorporated and headquartered in Virginia, that it did not consent to the jurisdiction of the Pennsylvania state court system.
6 Comments
|
Comments Off
|
|
Support CapitolFax.com Visit our advertisers...
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
|
|
Hosted by MCS
SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax
Advertise Here
Mobile Version
Contact Rich Miller
|