search.noResults

search.searching

saml.title
dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
ILAC worked very closely with Representative Wheeler, Senator Cappel, and other interested parties on this bill. CAI National, through Dawn Bauman and Phoebe Neseth assisted ILAC in negotiations with legislators, as well as calls to action sent to CAI members. The bill, in the form passed by both Houses, was the result of much discussion between ILAC and the bill sponsors.


In its initial form, the bill would have required an association to respond to a Section 22.1 request within five business days of the request. Also, the bill would have limited the fee an association could charge for a Section 22.1 response to not exceed $100. Given the real-world experience of ILAC’s members with Section 22.1 requests, consultation with other industry professionals, and a review of how other states have handled similar issues, it was clear that the changes proposed by HB5246 as it was introduced were not reasonable and would likely result in more, not less, disputes. With both Illinois specific and national information available, ILAC engaged the bill sponsors and explained how to modify the bill to achieve the goals expressed by the sponsors. The sponsors understood ILAC’s concerns raised on behalf of community associations and the community association industry and worked with ILAC on reasonable changes to the bill’s language.


Ultimately, the bill was amended to provide an association ten business days to respond to a Section 22.1 request and that the fee charged by an association cannot exceed $375. The bill further provides that fees may be adjusted based on the consumer price index for the preceding twelve-month calendar year. Also, the bill provides that an association may charge an additional $100 for rush service completed within 72 hours. Overall, ILAC was successful in working with the bill sponsors to achieve a reasonable compromise that is consistent with how other states have addressed similar issues and supported the bill to that extent.


SB 3069


SB 3069 was introduced by Senator Laura Murphy. The bill amends the Property Tax Code to clarify that condominium and homeowner associations have the right to file appeals with the Property Tax Appeal Board. The bill was amended in the House, which amendment did not change the purpose of the bill but changed that language to accomplish that purpose. The bill, as passed by both Houses, adds a new paragraph to Section 16-160 of the Property Tax Code. That new paragraph provides that an association may file an appeal to the Property Tax Appeal Board. That new paragraph defines “association” to include common interest community associations, condominium associations, and master associations, as those terms are defined in the Common Interest Community Association Act and the Condominium Property Act, respectively. Assuming it becomes law, the bill will become effective January 1, 2022.


ILAC supported this bill because it addresses an issue that some associations experienced when working to reduce property taxes.


SB 3792


SB 3792 was introduced by Senator Cristina Castro. The bill amends several statutes, including the Community Association Manager Licensing and Disciplinary Act. It makes non-substantive changes to all of those statutes. Specifically, the bill changes the term “high school equivalency certificate” to “State of Illinois High School Diploma”. Assuming it becomes law, the bill will become effective on January 1, 2021.


ILAC did not take a position on or get closely involved with this bill because it was a general revisory (or “clean up”) bill and did not make any substantive changes.


Other Legislation


The five bills that passed both Houses of the General Assembly (described above) are only a few of the many bills that were introduced in the legislature. Some of those introduced bills never made it out of the originating chamber. Some bills did make it out of the originating chamber but died in the other chamber. One such bill was HB 3125. That bill passed out of the House but failed to pass out of the Senate. HB 3125 is similar to past bills and is likely to come back again in upcoming legislative sessions.


HB 3125


HB 3125 was introduced by Representative Robyn Gabel, Assistant Majority Leader. The bill would create a new Electric Vehicle Charging Act. Among other things, the bill provides that a condominium or common interest community cannot prohibit the installation of an electric vehicle charging station by a unit owner. However, an association can impose reasonable restrictions on electric vehicle charging station installation. A reasonable restriction is defined as “a restriction that does not significantly increase the cost of the electric vehicle charging station or electric vehicle charging system or significantly decrease its efficiency or specified performance.” A unit owner who wishes to install an electric vehicle charging station would be responsible for the cost of installation and maintenance, damage from the installation and use, and insuring the charging station. The unit owner would also be responsible for the cost of electricity used.


ILAC worked closely with Representative Gabel and successfully amended the bill with language prepared by ILAC to address important community association concerns. ILAC supported the bill as passed by the House. The use of electric vehicles is increasing. Accordingly, ILAC anticipates that HB 3125 or a similar bill will be taken up in a future legislative session and will be ready to work with the sponsor to make any necessary changes.


www.cai-illinois.org • 847.301.7505 | 41


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56