HB2887 amends the Illinois Freedom of Information Act to change how the law treats “recurrent requesters,” meaning people who submit a high volume of FOIA requests to the same public body. The bill lowers the threshold for being classified as a recurrent requester from 50 requests in 12 months to 40, from 15 requests in 30 days to 10, and from 7 requests in 7 days to 5. It also extends the deadline for public bodies to respond to recurrent requester FOIA requests from 21 business days to 30 business days.
The bill further changes the notice rules for these requesters by requiring public bodies to provide the recurrent-requester notice only once every 30 days, rather than more frequently. It also adds a new violation: a person designated as a recurrent requester may not knowingly obtain a public record without disclosing that status. The bill leaves in place the existing exemptions for news media and nonprofit, scientific, and academic organizations when their requests are for journalism, public-interest content, or research/education purposes.
Impact
HB2887 would directly amend Sections 2 and 3.2 of the Illinois FOIA statute (5 ILCS 140/2 and 5 ILCS 140/3.2). Its practical effect would be to expand the category of requesters subject to the recurrent-requester procedures, give public bodies more time to respond to those requests, and reduce how often they must send recurrent-requester notices. The bill would also create a new compliance obligation and potential violation tied to disclosure of recurrent-requester status when obtaining public records.
Sentiment
The available record shows no committee transcript or vote history, so there is no documented debate or recorded support/opposition in the materials provided. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears aimed at easing administrative burdens on public bodies that receive frequent FOIA requests, while still preserving special treatment for media, nonprofit, academic, scientific, and research requesters. The overall tone of the proposal is procedural and administrative rather than expansive or controversial on its face.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely to be the balance between government transparency and administrative burden. Supporters would likely argue that lowering the recurrent-requester threshold and extending response times helps public bodies manage heavy FOIA traffic and discourages abuse of the process. Opponents would likely argue that the bill makes it easier to label requesters as recurrent, slows access to records, and adds a disclosure requirement that could chill frequent requesters, journalists, watchdog groups, or other public-interest users, even though the bill preserves explicit exemptions for news media and certain nonprofit and academic requests.