HB4028 creates the Property Tax Levy Relief Act of 2026, a short-lived law that directs the Illinois State Board of Elections to place a statewide advisory referendum on the November 3, 2026 general election ballot. The referendum asks voters whether Illinois should adopt a restriction applying to all taxing districts that would generally prohibit levying property taxes on a parcel at more than 103% of the prior year’s tax amount, subject to specified exceptions.
The proposed ballot question defines the “base amount” as the prior year’s levy on the property, with a special adjustment for properties that had a homestead exemption in the prior year but are no longer eligible for it. The measure also specifies that tax increases tied to substantial improvements, first-time taxation of a property, or special service areas would not be subject to the 103% cap. The act would be repealed on January 1, 2027, indicating that its purpose is to place the question before voters rather than to directly change property tax law itself.
Impact
HB4028 would not itself impose a property tax cap or change taxing-district authority in state law; instead, it would require a statewide advisory referendum on whether such a cap should be adopted. Its immediate legal effect is procedural, directing the State Board of Elections to certify the question to election authorities and place it on the ballot. If approved by voters, the question would signal support for future legislation or constitutional change, but the bill as introduced does not itself amend property tax statutes or create enforceable tax limits.
Sentiment
Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes in the provided material, there is no documented debate or formal legislative sentiment to assess. Based on the bill’s content and caption, the measure appears to be framed as property tax relief and voter input on limiting annual tax increases, which is likely to appeal to taxpayers concerned about rising property taxes. At the same time, the absence of discussion means there is no direct evidence here of support, opposition, or compromise positions from legislators or stakeholders.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely to be the proposed 103% cap on parcel-level property tax levies and whether it would unduly constrain local taxing districts’ revenue growth. Potential critics may argue that the restriction could limit funding for schools, municipalities, and other local services, while supporters would likely view it as a needed brake on property tax increases. The exceptions for substantial improvements, newly taxed property, and special service areas suggest an attempt to balance relief with local revenue needs, but the bill does not include any recorded debate showing which of these issues was most disputed.