Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Should AG Raoul try to yank this guy’s pension?
Next Post: *** UPDATED x2 - City files notification of appeal on intervenor denial motion, overall ruling - City files legal response *** More confusion on Bring Chicago Home
Posted in:
* Pantagraph…
Rep. Kam Buckner’s, D-Chicago, latest bill, House Bill 4592, would allow the Secretary of State to issue a mobile ID or mobile driver’s license (mDL) to Illinois residents. Buckner introduced the bill Jan. 31, but it remains in the gatekeeping House Rules Committee.
While Buckner has been seeking to implement a version of the measure since 2019, this is the first time it also includes both digital IDs and driver’s licenses. […]
And, crucially, it is the first time the the Secretary of State’s office has backed the initiative. This is important because one of the office’s primary responsibilities is issuing licenses to Illinois drivers. […]
Giannoulias said his office wouldn’t be pursuing this if it weren’t about the security and efficiency factors. For him, the move to issue mobile licenses represents a growing trend across the country that allows and uses more fraud-resistant technology in everyday life.
* Better Government Association Director of Policy Bryan Zarou…
* SB2640 was assigned to a Senate subcommittee earlier this month…
Amends the Freedom of Information Act. Provides that administrative or technical information associated with automated data operations shall be exempt from inspection and copying, but only to the extent that disclosure would jeopardize the security of the system or its data or the security of materials exempt under the Act.
Illinois AFL-CIO and Chicago Federation of Labor Leaders Support Medical-Aid-in-Dying State Legislation (Chicago, IL) — A bill introduced in the Illinois Senate last week that would allow medical aid in dying for those suffering from terminal illnesses is supported by the principal officers of both the Chicago Federation of Labor and the Illinois chapter of the AFL-CIO.
The legislation—SB3499, the End of Life Options for Terminally Ill Patients Act, initially sponsored by Senate Assistant Majority Leader Linda Holmes and State Sen. Laura Fine, would make Illinois the 11th state to give terminally ill individuals the option to experience a peaceful death by requesting and self-administering medication. […]
“When a worker chooses to join a union, they exercise a fundamental right to engage in collective action to even the field with their employers,” said CFL President Bob Reiter. “And when faced with a terminal diagnosis, people should also have a choice when planning their end-of-life care with their medical providers.”
“Terminally ill patients deserve autonomy and compassion as they weigh end-of-life care options with their medical provider. Dying people should have the power to choose what brings comfort and peace of mind for themselves and their families,” said Tim Drea, president of the Illinois AFL-CIO. “Just as we fight for the rights of workers to choose to join a union, we must also fight for individuals to have control over their own medical care, especially when faced with a devastating prognosis.”
* Forbes…
Amid the ongoing consideration of federal legislation to regulate the cryptocurrency markets, states seemingly are crafting local policies in an attempt to fill in the void. It appears states such as California, New Jersey, and now Illinois, may be rushing through legislation for the crypto markets as a response to fallout from FTX where in 2022 the third largest exchange failed and its CEO Sam Bankman-Fried was found guilty of fraud. A new bill in Illinois introduced two weeks ago called the Digital Assets Regulation Act (DARA) could be an example of this. […]
The introduction of the DARA bill two weeks ago by State Senator Laura Ellman (D-IL) seems to highlight the concern that Brachter stated as to how states may feel obligated to take action in light of the void left by federal lawmakers and the pressures to create legislation based on the FTX failure. I spoke with a new organization called the Illinois Blockchain Association regarding DARA. According to their analysis so far, the new bill includes broad definitions that may impact more than just centralized exchanges, such as DeFi and base layer blockchain networks.
“While well-intentioned, DARA goes too far. It seeks to regulate not only those entities, but almost anyone working in blockchain in Illinois,” said Nelson Rosario, Executive Director, Illinois Blockchain Association. Rosario went on to state, “No one disagrees that certain types of companies - namely centralized businesses that take custody of customer funds should be subject to a comprehensive regulatory scheme. Many people are working on that precise thing in Washington today.”
Olta Andoni, General Counsel and Chief Compliance Officer of Enclave Markets, shared some of her specific concerns about DARA. Andoni stated, “I think it definitely has a broader outreach than the BitLicense because of the broad definition of the ‘digital asset business activity’.” According to Andoni, this definition, “…will be applicable to all structures just by operating and touching digital assets without even taking custody of them.” Andoni did point out she liked an exclusion of software developers from the definition of digital asset business activities, but believes there is room to a lot more misinterpretation on what the dissemination of the software will include.
* Farm Week…
Proposed state legislation adopting California emission standards in Illinois could render thousands of farm vehicles “illegal and worthless,” according to Illinois Farm Bureau’s director of state legislation.
IFB is strongly opposed to House Bill 1634, sponsored by Democratic state Reps. Edgar Gonzalez Jr. of Chicago, Janet Yang Rohr of Naperville, and Bob Morgan of Highwood.
The legislation calls for the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency to implement the motor vehicle emission standards set by a California Air Resources Board, including the zero-emission vehicle program, low-emission vehicle program, advanced clean trucks program and heavy-duty low NOx omnibus program. The current standard, as of Jan. 1, prohibits diesel-fueled vehicles model years 2010 and older, with a gross vehicle weight rating of 14,000 pounds or greater from traveling on California roadways, unless they upgrade the engine. […]
After learning at midday Feb. 19 that the legislation was going to be considered, Illinois Farm Bureau joined a broad coalition of industry groups opposing the legislation. Ultimately, the bill’s sponsor decided to hold the bill from consideration, said IFB’s Chris Davis.
* Streetsblog Chicago co-founder Steven Vance…
State Rep. Kam Buckner of Chicago has introduced another land use bill that Illinoisans should support. The bill provides that municipalities with a population of 100,000 or more should allow property owners to have more than one home on a lot. This forward-thinking legislation represents a significant step toward addressing the pressing housing challenges facing our communities and would foster more inclusive and sustainable urban development.
The shortage of affordable housing in Illinois for middle-class families, particularly in the Chicago area, has reached a critical point. New housing in places with access to jobs, opportunities and amenities has not kept up with demand.
Buckner’s bill acknowledges the need for innovative solutions to tackle this issue head-on. By lifting the ban on multifamily housing options in residential zones, the legislation promotes diversity in housing types, catering to the needs of our population.
I believe cities that don’t allow enough housing should not be able to push people to remote areas that have cheaper housing and less access to the things that make our cities great. This sprawl has devastating effects on our agricultural land and natural open space, ultimately increasing the tax burden on municipalities by extending and maintaining utilities to far-flung, lower-density areas.
posted by Isabel Miller
Monday, Feb 26, 24 @ 9:37 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Should AG Raoul try to yank this guy’s pension?
Next Post: *** UPDATED x2 - City files notification of appeal on intervenor denial motion, overall ruling - City files legal response *** More confusion on Bring Chicago Home
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
So if you’re pulled over for a ticket and you hand your phone to the police to give them the mobile ID, can they start looking at your text messages?
Comment by lake county democrat Monday, Feb 26, 24 @ 9:54 am
–Amends the Freedom of Information Act.–
There’s a not-too-difficult workaround for most of these DB situations.
Since the state contracts out almost everything IT related, simply contact the responsible company providing the product, and simply ask them for the DB schema. Many will also offer a free trial of their on-prem software, which would allow a direct view of the internal DB and/or API structure. (Tapestry, Laredo, etc)
Last year or so, I even worked with the county treasurer and recorder to modify the way the DB info is displayed on the public webpage. If you know the name of the DB field before making the request, these perceived restrictions just dissolve into nothing. I knew the name of the DB field I wanted info from, as was able to ask for a clear and concise result. The county then placed this field onto the public website in a searchable format.
There’s always a way, it just takes some time and an understanding of the technical details ahead of time.
Comment by TheInvisibleMan Monday, Feb 26, 24 @ 9:59 am
Mr Vance
== I believe cities that don’t allow enough housing should not be able to push people to remote areas that have cheaper housing and less access to the things that make our cities great. ==
What cities in Illinois with populations over 100,000 besides Naperville fail to provide enough low-income housing opportunities?
Also, how can folks like me (I reside in a city of over 100,000) turn our homes into multifamily residences (I can have a toilet and shower in my basement, I guess) not have negative impacts on areas not designed for significant additional density? Could I just put a tiny house in my backyard and rent that out?
Comment by OneMan Monday, Feb 26, 24 @ 10:50 am
- lake county democrat - Monday, Feb 26, 24 @ 9:54 am:
Having trouble reading the bill I take it?
Comment by Google Is Your Friend Monday, Feb 26, 24 @ 10:52 am
===only to the extent that disclosure would jeopardize the security of the system===
IT security folks almost always guard table and column names under the theory that any information about the system makes it easier for the system to be breached or disrupted. Akin to security by obscurity, they say security is achieved by layering defenses: firewalls and VPNs, digital certificates and encryption, access controls and least privilege, multi-factor authentication and audit logs, malware protection and vulnerability scanning, training, etc.
I personally think their position on table and column names is too conservative, especially given TheInvisibleMan’s point about the structure being publicly available for most commercial software, but I could see many courts deferring to security experts who will almost always recommend protecting those data elements. Which means this will be litigated, and could very well result in the same ruling that Zarou believes SB2640 will reverse.
Comment by thechampaignlife Monday, Feb 26, 24 @ 11:24 am
I like Mr. Vance’s Streetblog story, and Mr. Buckner’s proposal about allowing more than one home on a lot.
Granted, I live in rural Illinois. I own three acres, and have an old farm house. I have often thought building a second, smaller home on my property (a “mom and dad” cottage”) might be a good way to keep my generational wealth going for my children after I pass on.
I do realize that rural is not the same as suburban or urban. But in principle, I think the idea has some merit, can could benefit cities in the long run if done well.
Comment by H-W Monday, Feb 26, 24 @ 11:50 am
Re HB4795, you run into many problems with any bill to increase the number of units on an existing lot in a blanket way in this day and age. While the rollout for 500k cities or more does not go into effect for awhile, still, in Chicago proper, you will violate fire codes if you are envisioning eg adding a coach house over a garage, or allowing for trailer units, etc. The City has been cracking down on not allowing coach house improvements on the 25/125 lots for decades because unless you back on to a wide enough dedicated alley proper, you cannot meaningfully get a fire truck to them to handle emergencies. (And if you are going to require these second homes to have sprinklers to try to address that issue, there goes your affordability goals). You also need to ensure that your underground water/sewer lines can handle the needed flow from doubling. (In general, if an area when built up is zoned single residential vs. multifamily, the size of the lines laid will be different compared to if you started out with multifamily from the outset). One or two additions per block probably won’t matter, but over time it assuredly will, and who is going to pay for the city to upgrade that underground infrastructure? Then you are going to run into the FEMA flood zone problems, where lot area coverage is supposed to be restricted to allow for water infiltration to avoid flooding, and if you exceed it, you have to put in underground water storage or pay remediation fines. (Which would cover Naperville, or at least the part in DuPage because DuPage has fairly stringent standards for increasing existing lot coverage above X amount). It is already a headache to get Chicago to be able to figure out who has what lines and where so you don’t wreck anything when you build now. Imagine the electrical/sewer/gas not being properly permitted in the neighborhoods… There is also plenty of cheap land in Chicago, but no-one wants to build there because the areas are unsafe. Upzoning for everyone is one of those nice ideas in theory, but which isn’t that simple in practice against a complex background like Chicago’s existing lot systems and other regulatory requirements.
Comment by Mary Monday, Feb 26, 24 @ 11:53 am
Why are the CFL and AFL weighing on end of life choices? Seems like a weird lane for them.
Comment by Chicago Blue Monday, Feb 26, 24 @ 12:46 pm
===Why are the===
We covered this last week.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Feb 26, 24 @ 12:55 pm
Mary, But most of Chicago’s housing was built for much larger families than we now have, like 3-4 kids more per residence, so it seems that the sewer lines would not be an issue there, because most families are smaller and many are just couples.
I like the idea of people being easily able to add an inlaw cottage or apartment. I suspect most of these would be built for adult children and/or parents at first at least. That seems to be what has gone on in Washington state thus far. That is still increasing housing though because now the parents or junior/ette don’t have to take housing off the market.
Comment by cermak_rd Monday, Feb 26, 24 @ 1:49 pm
“I like Mr. Vance’s Streetblog story, and Mr. Buckner’s proposal about allowing more than one home on a lot… I think the idea has some merit, can could benefit cities in the long run if done well”
Local municipalities/Townships/Counties all have building and Zoning ordinances that can be changed locally when the residents feel the same way.
Comment by Donnie Elgin Monday, Feb 26, 24 @ 2:24 pm