Tag Archives: local government

One reason Illinois has so many local governments: old rules limited how much debt governments could take on

Posted on by

Illinois has thousands of local government bodies. Here is one reason for the large number:

Photo by Mohamed hamdi on Pexels.com

Illinois was not unique in its decentralized, generous incorporation and annexation terms or in witnessing the end of the city’s physical expansion in the early twentieth century, phenomena that collectively encouraged fragmented jurisdictions in many metropolitan areas. Relatively unique, however, was Illinois’s strict constitutional limit on local debt, which prompted many suburbanites to create new governments rather than expand the charge of existing ones when new needs arose. Until amended in 1970, the Illinois Constitution restricted local borrowing to less than 5 percent of assessed valuation. This restriction made it difficult to finance big projects, especially for governments in small or rapidly growing places where property assessment increases often lagged years behind the need for services and infrastructure. Residents created new school districts to build high schools, for example, rather than extend elementary school districts’ responsibility into the upper grades (as in most other states). They also created a wide array of special-purpose governments to perform specific functions (like fire protection, building and managing parks, and managing sanitation) rather than expanding municipal functions. By 1970 there were 1,239 local governments in the six-county Chicago region: 280 incorporated municipalities, 121 township districts (with responsibility over unincorporated territory), 384 school districts and 449 special-purpose districts.”

On the one hand, you would not want small government bodies amassing large debts. How would they pay it off? How might servicing the debt affect their ability to provide local services?

On the other hand, this paragraph describes the downside of the debt limits. Have new needs or need more resources? Form a new government body in order to take on debt and pursue your goal.

Once these government bodies are established and raise money, they take on a life of their own. They live out their mandate. They provide local services. They gather resources and build their capacity. They have defenders. For ones formed before 1970, they have over half a century of inertia and history.

Even with changed rules, the number of Illinois local governments remains high. It will take a major sustained effort to reduce the number.

What Chicago suburbs could do in response to “unprecedented” storms and large number of tornadoes

Posted on by

The Chicago area has experienced a lot of severe weather this summer. This includes a large number of storms:

Photo by Zeeshaan Shabbir on Pexels.com

The damaging storms that rolled through the suburbs Tuesday marked the 329th time the National Weather Service office in Romeoville has issued a severe weather warning this year.

That’s more severe weather warnings than issued in all of 2025, and far past the previous record of 273 set in 2006. The warnings are issued for storms that have the potential to produce tornadoes, winds 58 mph or greater, and quarter-size or larger hail.

“It really is pretty unprecedented,” said Gino Izzi, senior meteorologist at the National Weather Service.

And Illinois has had a lot of tornadoes:

Snyder said Illinois will likely pass 200 confirmed tornadoes after Tuesday’s storms, far and away the most tornadoes of any state in the country for 2026, according to the National Weather Service.

If Illinois continues this stormy trend, it may not only add to its state record but perhaps break a nationwide record for the total number of tornadoes in one state in any single year — 232 tornados in Texas in 2015 and 1967.

How could suburbs respond to this (beyond doing nothing and/or hoping this was an unusual year)? Some ideas:

  1. More personnel and effort for clean-up. Storms and tornadoes bring damage. Communities could budget more resources to deal with the aftermath of storms. Roads need to be cleaned. Downed trees and branches need to be cleaned up. Storm sewers need to be clear. Suburbanites expect a certain level of local services and providing more after storms could become more common.
  2. Updating building codes so that structures can better weather storms. This might add to costs – whether in updates or in new construction – but could pay off in the long run.
  3. Changing development plans to stay away from potentially dangerous areas. It is hard to predict the exact paths of storms or tornadoes. It is easier to look at where flooding might occur. Water can cause a lot of damage.
  4. More severe weather centers where people can shelter and/or seek help. This might require centrally located buildings that are relatively safe in storms.

Options such as these might require that suburban residents ask for them. Americans like suburbs in part because they provide encounters with nature. Storms and tornadoes, however, might be parts of nature that are too threatening to the suburban way of life and residents could come to expect suburban governments to provide more help.

How much elected suburban leaders make, 2026 North Shore edition

Posted on by

What is the salary for elected suburban leaders in Chicago’s North Shore suburbs?

Photo by Charlotte May on Pexels.com

Voters may be surprised to learn that in Evanston, the position to oversee a $400 million-plus municipal government and a city of about 76,000 people comes with an annual salary of a little over $25,000…

“I don’t think anybody expects somebody in Evanston to support a family on this salary, so whether they have other employment or other wealth or, as in my case, right now they have a spouse who works full-time, I think certainly the expectation is there’s some other reason that they’re able to stay afloat.”…

Evanston is not unique in this regard. Municipalities across the North Shore tend to offer modest compensation for mayoral and other top elected offices, begging similar questions about who can afford to serve…

And Hansen said research suggests that low-pay and unpaid municipal positions tend to have less competition and therefore are more conducive to a higher rate of diversity among elected leaders who come from a wider range of backgrounds.

Historically, however, even “poorly paid positions still tend to be primarily held by white-collar professionals for reasons that aren’t directly related to the salary offered by the office,” like professionals being able to more easily raise campaign money or because they have “greater autonomy over their time, both to campaign for office and to serve if they win,” Hansen said.

Local elected officials have important roles in their suburban communities. They help make decisions in communities, they are at events in the community, and they serve as figureheads for the community.

Hinted at but not stated explicitly in the article is that there are local government staff that do a lot of day to day work. They are not typically elected.

You can see some of this dynamic at local meetings. Say there is a new development proposed for the community. Elected officials have roles and government staff have roles.

It would be interesting to put the question to local voters: should local government staff and/or local officials have higher salaries? Present the argument to the voters, including the effects on who might run or how this might affect local services and decision-making.

Communities preparing for possible property tax reductions in Florida

Posted on by

With the possibility that Florida residents will soon vote to significantly lower property taxes, communities in the states are trying to get ready:

Photo by Derwin Edwards on Pexels.com

The proposal is spurring urgent responses from local governments faced with the prospect of plummeting tax revenue. Cities and counties are scrambling to prepare for a potential overhaul of how they pay for all sorts of services, from policing to pothole repairs.

Local officials across the state say the issue is dominating discussion in commission meetings and budget workshops. Among the measures they have taken so far: freezing hiring and capital projects, planning possible service cuts and floating proposals to increase other fees and taxes to offset the shortfall…

In the 2027-28 fiscal year, the Florida changes would reduce property-tax revenue in the state overall by nearly $5 billion, according to the Office of Economic and Demographic Research, a research arm of the legislature. That would increase to $8.8 billion in 2028-29 and $10.8 billion in 2030-31.

The amounts would vary widely for individual counties, with a large one like Miami-Dade projected to lose $304 million in the first year and a small one like Okeechobee expected to lose $3.7 million, according to an analysis by the Florida Association of Counties. Suburban counties with high proportions of homestead properties would face the sharpest exposure, and economically distressed small counties would be the least equipped to respond, the study said.

Americans generally do not like the idea of high property taxes. They like the idea of homeownership but do not always like the idea they should pay more taxes on something they own.

At the same time, this tax helps fund many of the local amenities and services Americans benefit from and participate in. When looking at amenities about communities when making choices about where to live or when discussing local features and amenities they like, property taxes likely contribute. This includes schools, parks, and police and fire departments.

The tradeoffs I wonder if Americans are willing to make: either or both (1) lower levels of local amenities and services and (2) less local control over local services and amenities for lower property taxes. Immediate financial benefits for property owners but a loss of quality of life? How this plays out in Florida might help

Suburban reasons for the prevalence and expenses of youth sports

Posted on by

Here are some thoughts about how the suburbanization of the United States might be related to two concerns I have read/seen/heard multiple times in recent years: (1) most kids sports activity takes place in structured leagues and programs with a big rise in travel sports and (2) participation in these structured sports is expensive. There are lots of explanations for this but few take into account the setting where a majority of Americans live and how this has shaped these patterns. Are the sports opportunities kids get connected to suburban lifestyles?

Photo by Israel Torres on Pexels.com
  1. Sprawling suburban landscapes can make it hard for kids to get together and just play. On one hand, suburban yards would seem to provide ample opportunities. And there are parks and school grounds scattered across suburbs. But much of suburban life requires driving and until kids have licenses, they need other people to drive them. Put this together with fears for safety in suburbia (see Neighborhood of Fear by historian Kyle Riismandel for how this happened) and kids don’t get together to play sports with each other outside. In how many suburbs today could the baseball team depicted in The Sandlot play regularly and where would those games take place?
  2. Suburbs suggest a certain social class standing and suburban households desire that their kids are successful or get ahead. Instead of playing sports for fun and to develop as a person, sports are a possible pathway to success and fame. Partaking of these sports options provides room to share about kids’ successes. And plenty of suburban households have disposable income to make this happen. Why play around when you can pay for travel sports and lessons and camps and equipment? This reminded me of Richard Reeves’ book Dream Hoarders where the top 20% of American earners look to secure advantages for themselves and their kids.
  3. Local governments and private companies are willing to provide these sports opportunities. They can claim this is what residents and customers want. And there is money to generate or be made from people willing to pay. As the trust Americans have in more traditional institutions have decreased, suburbanites are willing to invest time and money in sports leagues and programs where they might feel they have more control over outcomes. And why not rep a local team or club rather than wade into national polarization?

Another way to put this: could the United States have such a system of youth sports if it was not a suburban country?

Illinois local officials against realtors and developers regarding the BUILD plan

Posted on by

The president of the Illinois Municipal League explained why his organized opposed Governor J.B. Pritzker’s plans for the BUILD plan:

Photo by Pavel Danilyuk on Pexels.com

Cole said the BUILD plan not only preempts local authority, but it also strips community engagement and public input in zoning decisions. He also said he and other IML members were wary the plan would only create more units that most people still couldn’t afford.

“Every mayor in Illinois wants their community to grow,” Cole said. “Our focus was on affordability, if this is about developers or about Realtors, well, that’s not the business we’re in.”

Pritzker’s political operation often teamed up with real estate agents to promote BUILD, hosting roundtables and filming social media videos with real estate agent influencers. His campaign’s Facebook and Instagram accounts posted BUILD content almost every week, the message being: more houses on the market means reduced costs.

These comments clearly state the sides Cole sees for and against this plan: local officials and residents who want to retain local control and realtors, developers, and the governor who want to build more housing units.

Often, all of these actors work together regarding development. As Cole notes, all communities want to grow. This can add residents and business activity. It can lead to increased tax revenues. It means jobs for construction workers.

But these groups do not always agree. Developers may propose a particular project that a municipality does not look favorably upon. Realtors may see developments or communities in particular ways. Communities have their own ideas about what they would like to be.

Given how much municipalities like to control their own zoning, I do not know if there is a compromise available between these sides. Do developers and realtors want to be portrayed as being on the side of the governor and against local communities? Can local communities say they do not really want to build middle-housing or housing that could help provide housing opportunities for more people? Everyone wants to grow but who will get to steer this growth?

Suburbanites today go online early to protest development they do not like. How different is this from 50 years ago?

Posted on by

I recently read news about a developer wanting to build duplexes in a nearby suburb. I soon saw reactions on social media platforms to the proposal. One response suggested the land should be protected green space while another response said what the community really needed was affordable housing.

Photo by Jess Chen on Pexels.com

These are not unusual reactions from suburbanites opposed to housing proposals in their community. What is different compared to reactions in the past is the form the reactions now take: quick responses online that can then reach other community members (and broader audiences). How different is this opposition compared to 50 years ago?

My own research on suburban development suggests suburbanites have opposed new housing and other kinds of development near them for decades. This occurred even as their community was growing rapidly and some of them had been part of that growth in recent years. Residents made arguments about the character of the community, traffic, water management, green or open space, local services, threats to property values, and who might move in.

But without online platforms to share their opinions, how did these residents go about voicing their concerns? One regular forum not used much today involved writing letters to the editor. In local newspapers, residents shared their argument in relatively few words. These discussions could go then back and forth multiple times as supporters and opponents of particular plans wrote in.

Presumably suburbanites talked to neighbors and others in the community. Social scientists have argued the social fabric of the United States looked different decades ago as more Americans were involved in local organizations. Americans may have had more close friends. These relationships would provide space to discuss local issues.

Local petitions could demonstrate the opinions of residents. People would collect signatures and present them to local officials. Decades ago, this would have involved going door to door or being in public spaces to get names on paper. The process looks a little different today through change.org or similar venues.

At the same time, the process by which these proposals move forward looks similar to fifty years ago. Developers talk with municipal leaders and staff. The plans of developers are vetted by zoning boards or plan commissions who then make a recommendation to a city council or village board. Residents and others have a chance to share their opinion in public in public hearings along the way or in some meetings when leaders and developers are discussing plans. There are often months, sometimes years, for conversation and deliberations to take place.

Do the loud voices online either for or against a proposal attract more attention than efforts of residents in the past? Either way, the majority of residents in a community do not publicly voice an opinion. They might vote a certain way based on such decisions or maybe even move to a different community based on what they think is happening. And these actions can be consequential; decisions about development helps shape a community for decades.

At least four Illinois municipal leaders in favor of giving up some local zoning control in order to build more housing

Posted on by

The leaders of Sesser, Des Plaines, Lexington, and Oak Park, Illinois recently described why they support the BUILD plan proposed by Governor Pritzker:

Photo by D Goug on Pexels.com

You are probably wondering why local officials are challenging the instinct of protecting local control. But here’s the reality: The housing market does not stop where our towns end. The housing market, and subsequent shortage, crosses municipal boundaries and affects communities across Illinois, from large cities to small towns. Yet the system for addressing it remains fragmented and reflects the larger problems that we are all facing — the fewer houses available, the more expensive those few become. That’s why we support a statewide solution to give us the framework to do the things that make sense for our individual towns. BUILD does not replace local control with a one-size-fits-all system. It does not override community character or dictate identical development across Illinois. It creates a tool kit for us to implement a housing vision for our individual communities that addresses our unique needs on an improved and more efficient, affordable and attainable timeline.

BUILD would mean more townhomes, two-flats, duplexes, cottages, bungalows — just regular types of houses that have historically formed the backbone of neighborhoods, made housing affordable and showcased the uniqueness of Illinois’ architecture. They are the homes that allowed working families, young people and seniors to live in communities they could afford. Somewhere along the way, these types of houses stopped being built. Regular, affordable houses have since become so rare that people think the only options are unattainable mega-mansions or luxury high-rise developments. It does not have to be this way.

BUILD would restore balance and establish a clear, statewide baseline that makes it possible to build regular types of housing in the first place. BUILD would establish minimum expectations and set a baseline to meet every locality’s housing needs, while preserving and enhancing the character of what makes each of our towns so unique. From there, we would retain control over how that housing fits in our communities through design standards, form and local context. We would still shape where housing goes, how buildings look and how development fits in our communities.

Several quick thoughts in response:

  1. This is an interesting mix of communities: two small towns, one in central Illinois, one in southern Illinois, and two Chicago suburbs. How many communities near them would agree with these arguments? Will there be a clear set of communities for and against this plan or will more quietly work behind the scenes?
  2. Each of the op-ed writers are leaders in their communities: three mayors, one village president. How many of their fellow local officials, elected or not, would agree with them? Pushing a little further, does this become an important local campaign issue for those running for municipal office?
  3. If there are some communities more open to the BUILD plan than others, would they end up with significantly more new housing units if the BUILD plan goes forward? Do they see the BUILD plan as the way to population growth and all that comes with that (status, construction jobs, etc.)?

And I would still be interested to know what kind of incentives would be needed for developers to take a big interest in cheaper or affordable housing in the four communities highlighted here…

Where data centers will end up when some community leaders see them as providing benefits, others see them as threats

Posted on by

There are already thousands of data centers in the United States and more to come. Some community leaders say they benefit their community:

Photo by Sandeep Verma on Pexels.com

The recently approved CyrusOne data center in Sangamon County is projected to bring $500 million in capital investments to the county. Marc Ayers, a former Sangamon County Board member, said it’s estimated to generate $5 million to $6 million in property taxes annually, with around $98 million in tax revenue over the next 20 years…

DeKalb Mayor Cohen Barnes said the Meta data center that has been operational since 2023 has contributed significantly to the city with community investments and around $250,000-300,000 in utility taxes…

Barnes said the data center in DeKalb employed more than a thousand union construction workers over the five years it took to build. Now, he said there are hundreds of permanent jobs working on tech, electricity and maintaining the HVAC systems.

Other local leaders describe the downsides:

Property tax revenue from data centers can be significant, but many say the massive centers aren’t worth the millions of gallons of water they consume or the stress they put on an already struggling electric grid. The ComEd territory in northern Illinois, for example, has enough large-load energy projects in its queue to more than double the amount of energy demand in the territory by 2040…

John Laesch, the mayor of Aurora, said the five operational data centers in his community have provided generous tax payments, but those benefits don’t outweigh the downsides data centers can bring to communities…

“But during our public hearings, we heard residents ask, is that $1.6 million worth the noise pollution and the strain on our power grid and potential long-term risk to our climate?” Laesch said.

With these different perspectives, are there and will there be clear patterns in which communities have data centers and which do not? With land uses that can be controversial, will most or all communities say no or will there be certain kinds of communities that approve data centers?

Given some existing patterns, these might be some fault lines:

-Communities with residents with higher incomes and higher levels of education vs. those with lower levels

-Communities who are seeking out new economic and development opportunities vs. those who are not

-The political leanings of local officials

-Communities with pro-business/jobs/growth/construction coalitions vs those where such coalitions have a lesser presence

-Metro areas with a stronger presence of big tech companies versus places that do not

I would bet some of this could be answered already but it would also be interesting to see what happens now with companies and communities having the advantages of seeing what has already happened and what might work for getting the outcome they want.