Before the House passed the megaproject bill last month, the people drafting it were clear that they didn’t want to just offer symbolic or “token” property tax relief. After the bill’s approval, they assured us the property tax section would actually give substantial relief to homeowners throughout the state.
Now, the Governor’s Office has put together the figures regarding the tax cut aspect of the bill and shared them with Senate Democrats. And, honestly? The news isn’t great.
The tax relief is tied to the Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILOT) program included in the legislation. Essentially, developers of these megaprojects will negotiate with local governments about “special payments” in addition to property taxes, based on fixed assessments.
According to the House bill, half of this special levy would be collected from local entities to help lower property taxes, with 60% of the annual levy going to local taxpayers in mega-project areas. The rest, 40%, would head toward statewide property tax refunds for homeowners.
Per the governor’s office analysis, Illinois has about 3.1 million homeowners. The proposed $20 million special payment for “large scale/industrial development” would translate to roughly $1.29 for each homeowner across the state. That’s based on 40% of a $10 million levy (which is half of the $20 million total).
Then, there’s a “moderate” special benefit of $3 million, which amounts to a shocking 24 cents per homeowner. And the “small” special payment of $1 million? That’s a staggering 6 cents.
So, really, it’s hardly worth the effort to send out checks. Even in a wildly successful scenario, if the program somehow generated $1 billion in special payments, homeowners would only see about $60 each.
The Governor’s Office also noted that making businesses negotiate property tax abatements would complicate PILOT agreements even further. This tool is already in play in 35 states, and there’s a real risk of losing the projects and the revenue they could bring.
To give credit where it’s due, the House did well to pass the Bears/Megaprojects bill. It faced significant challenges, similar to last year’s Senate mass transit bill, marking a “whatever it takes” moment. For House Speaker Emanuel “Chris” Welch, it was a chance to get lawmakers used to supporting tough bills as the session moves forward, and he certainly succeeded in that.
However, the repercussions are evident. As reported last week, many progressives in the Senate are frustrated that the House prioritized the Bears stadium bill over passing a constitutional amendment aimed at taxing the wealthy.
The analysis on property tax relief from the governor’s office won’t do much to help progressives or others struggling with these issues. Without the backing of “reducing” property taxes, it’s difficult to steer this situation back on course.
A hectic burst of activity in the House last month also sparked new tensions with the Senate.
You might remember that the Senate chose not to adopt the House’s proposed constitutional amendment which would have set new guidelines for remapping to ensure equal voting opportunities, particularly in relation to race.
The Senate’s choice not to move forward raises some important questions.
Clayton Harris III, chief of staff for Welch, expressed pride on Facebook about the House’s decision to bolster voting rights through a constitutional amendment, as he believed it reflects their values. Yet he admitted feeling hurt by its stalling.
As a graduate of Howard Law School and a professor focused on policing and race at the University of Chicago, he emphasized that voting rights aren’t just abstract to him; they’re about history, access, and empowerment.
This might connect to Senate President Don Harmon’s comments regarding the decision to hold off. He urged patience while the state’s legal experts look into the matter, stressing how crucial it is to avoid rush decisions that could lead to unintended negative consequences.
A spokesperson for Mr. Harmon chose not to comment on Ms. Harris’ statements.
