Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Clown Car’ Category

The Village Board of Trustees will be conducting their regular monthly meeting this evening beginning at 6:30 PM. Topics on their agenda include:

A copy of their agenda, including info on listening to the meeting, can be viewed and downloaded here.

*Ironically (and moronically), just six months ago President Cecola invited an unannounced guest to present their ideas on a 110-acre data center proposal adjacent to Pond Gate Farms that would have necessitated rezoning that acreage to Light Industrial in Barrington Hills at his December board meeting.

Read Full Post »

Engineer John Zimmerman, left, and Commissioner George DeMent, right, view an automatic coin collector at the toll gate of the Calumet Skyway on April 10, 1958, to be opened to traffic. | George Quinn/Chicago Tribune

By The Editorial Board | Chicago Tribune

Illinois tollways were meant to be freeways decades ago.

Gov. JB Pritzker promised to reform the Illinois Tollway before he was elected, the latest in a long line of governors, from Rod Blagojevich to Jim Thompson, who vowed reform.

Remember, the tollways aren’t even supposed to be tollways anymore. The tolls were meant to be temporary until the bonds issued to build the roads were paid off. Many of our readers may remember that old promise that by 1973, our dear tollways would become freeways.

“Toll free in ‘73,” it turns out, is just another empty promise long forgotten.

After decades — and billions of dollars — in paid tolls later, drivers are further away than ever from those cost-free roads.

Now, they’re staring down the prospect of another toll hike.

The Illinois Tollway board is in the process of implementing a 45-cent toll increase for I-Pass users, meaning a 70-cent toll today could become $1.15 in 2027.

And the toll hikes won’t stop there. Starting in 2029, the proposal to be considered by the Illinois Tollway board sets up CPI-indexed toll hikes every two years.

Editorial continues here.

Read Full Post »

A list of Barrington Hills trustees who currently follow The Barrington Hills Observer posts on Facebook.

On Saturday, May 23rd, around 7:30 AM, we posted, “(Plum Farms) NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING JUNE 3,” shortly after we received a copy of a notice sign posted on Old Sutton Road. That post was sent to all subscribers of this publication’s website and all those following our Facebook page, including those Trustees pictured above.

Subsequent to our posting of the Hoffman Estates Plum Farms notice, we followed up with subtle hints to our Board of Trustees (BOT) to take action, including:

Shortly after the Hoffman Estates Plum Farms meeting ended on June 3rd, CBS News reported, “Hoffman Estates Plan Commission rejects zoning change for new data center project.” The next day, the Daily Herald reported, “Hoffman Estates plan commission rejects rezoning request for possible data center,” and residents were quick to react to the news commenting:

  • “NOT A SINGLE MEMBER OF THE BARRINGTON HILLS BOARD OF TRUSTEES WAS THERE THAT I SAW. WOW!!!!!”
  • “Where was the leadership from Barrington Hills? No one from the Board was there. Paula (McCombie)and the numerous South Barrington Trustees were there and stayed for the entire meeting. Grateful for their support.”

We also posted, “South Barrington Mayor Paula McCombie shares an update on Hoffman Estates/Plum Farms Plan Commission meeting,” last Friday, June 5th, but outside of the hearing notice posted on the Village Facebook page, residents heard absolutely nothing from our elected trustees.

Then on Monday, June 8th, our Village posted, “UPDATE: HOFFMAN ESTATES PLUM FARMS REZONING REQUEST” on their Facebook page (SeeVillage Board once again tests our tolerance for fabrications (BS)”) that included a letter from Brian Cecola that was clearly backdated to June 2nd, since:

  • No one is copied on the letter. That is unheard of considering the number of interested parties in the matter.
  • No one read the letter aloud at the Hoffman Estates Plum Farms hearing.
  • The letter would have been “shouted out” via social media and a press release June 2nd given the embarrassing position Cecola put himself in when he fronted a, “110 Acre AI data center campus pitched to Village Board,” next to Pond Gate last December that he caught Hell for.

It is well known that Mr. Cecola is not the sharpest tack in the box. However, he can be smart from time to time.  This is not one of those times and he has insulted the intelligence of residents and his peers.

As for not one member of our Board of Trustees attending the well-publicized Plum Farms hearing, shame on them. There is no excuse.

But to a person, BOT members will whine, “But the Director of Administration (Anna Paul) went to the meeting.” The problem is she is not an elected official of the Village of Barrington Hills. They need to be reminded she has no standing to act on behalf of the Village of Barrington Hills, nor does she present herself that way. The BOT, unfortunately, seems to conveniently forget this.

This Board must show up and speak their mind at the next Plum Farms meeting which may be July 6th. Not to do so would likely decimate any remaining credibility they may have among many residents.

Related:Village Board once again tests our tolerance for fabrications (BS),” “Do you trust our Board of Trustees? We don’t. But you decide for yourself once we have finished. (Follow-up),” “Do you trust our Board of Trustees? We don’t. But you decide for yourself once we have finished. (Part 3),” “Do you trust our Board of Trustees? We don’t. But you decide for yourself once we have finished. (Part 2),” “Do you trust our Board of Trustees? We don’t. But you decide for yourself once we have finished. (Part 1),” “7 things to know about Illinois data centers,” “Data Center group concerned over pause,” “110 Acre AI data center campus pitched to Village Board

Read Full Post »

The following was posted late this afternoon to the Village Facebook page:

UPDATE: HOFFMAN ESTATES PLUM FARMS REZONING REQUEST

On June 3, 2026, the Hoffman Estates Plan Commission held a public hearing regarding a request to rezone the Plum Farms property from TN Traditional Neighborhood and C-MU Commercial Mixed Use to M-2 Manufacturing. The property is located north of Higgins Road between the Canadian National Railway and New Sutton Road.

President Brian D. Cecola submitted written public comment on behalf of the Village of Barrington Hills, expressing concern that a broad industrial zoning classification at this location would not be appropriate. While no specific development plan was before the Plan Commission, M-2 zoning would allow a range of industrial uses, including, among other uses, a data center. Director of Administration Anna Paul attended the meeting on behalf of the Village.

There were nearly three hours of public testimony; all speakers who provided testimony spoke in opposition to the proposed rezoning. Following public comment and discussion, the Plan Commission voted 2-4 on the recommendation, meaning the motion to recommend approval did not pass.

The Village of Barrington Hills hopes the Hoffman Estates Village Board will accept the Plan Commission’s recommendation and not approve the proposed rezoning to M-2.

The date for Hoffman Estates Village Board consideration of the rezoning request has not yet been determined. At the meeting, Hoffman Estates officials stated that the item was not anticipated to appear on the June 15 agenda. The next regular Village Board meeting after that is scheduled for July 6, with the agenda required to be posted no later than 48 hours before the meeting.

The Village of Barrington Hills will continue to monitor this matter and provide updates as additional information becomes available.

TO READ PRESIDENT CECOLA’S WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENT, FOLLOW THE LINK

We’ll be posting our comments on this “update”  very soon.

Related:Do you trust our Board of Trustees? We don’t. But you decide for yourself once we have finished. (Follow-up),” “Do you trust our Board of Trustees? We don’t. But you decide for yourself once we have finished. (Part 3),” “Do you trust our Board of Trustees? We don’t. But you decide for yourself once we have finished. (Part 2),” “Do you trust our Board of Trustees? We don’t. But you decide for yourself once we have finished. (Part 1),” “7 things to know about Illinois data centers,” “Data Center group concerned over pause,” “110 Acre AI data center campus pitched to Village Board

Read Full Post »

South Barrington Village President Paula McCombie adds her voice to that of 45 others criticizing a proposal for the rezoning of the 186-acre Plum Farms property at Higgins Road and Route 59 for a possible data center before the Hoffman Estates plan commission Wednesday night. | Eric Peterson/epeterson@dailyherald.com

By Eric Peterson | Daily herald

Hoffman Estates plan commissioners voted 4-2 Wednesday to recommend against rezoning the 186-acre Plum Farms property to manufacturing for a possible data center proposal.

The vote was called after 46 members of the public unanimously urged rejection of the request for an unspecified development by landowner Karis Critical of Florida, which saw a data center proposal in Naperville rejected in January.

Speakers opposed to the rezoning urged the board’s rejection of the proposal without knowing what would go there. They complained a data center would create environmental issues.

Most speakers were from Hoffman Estates, South Barrington or Barrington Hills. But independent gubernatorial candidate Collin Corbett of Palatine, Democratic state Rep. Nabeela Syed of Inverness and Democratic candidate for state representative Maria Peterson of North Barrington were also drawn by the chorus of discontent.

South Barrington Village President Paula McCombie said her village and Hoffman Estates have had a long history of understanding that what happens in one community affects the other. She found the rezoning request out of sync with their mutual development of retail uses in that area.

“I’m not a resident of Hoffman Estates but we should be strategic partners,” McCombie said.

The full article can be found here.

Related:Hoffman Estates Plan Commission rejects zoning change for new data center project,” “Hoffman Estates Plum Farm June 3rd Plan Commission Meeting Essentials,” “After being rejected in Naperville, company could build data center in Hoffman Estates,” “South Barrington Mayor Paula McCombie posts information regarding June 3 Hoffman Estates (Plum Farms) Plan Commission meeting,” “(Plum Farms) NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING JUNE 3,” “Hoffman Estates could see third data center campus with sale of Plum Farms property,” “Hoffman Estates approves sewer, water for development of 185 acres west of The Arboretum,” “Hoffman Estates approves tax incentive at routes 59, 72,” “District 220 lawsuit against Hoffman Estates, Plum Farms developers dismissed,” “South Barrington residents sue over Hoffman Estates development,” “Editorial: Listen to agencies that would feel consequences of Hoffman Estates development

Read Full Post »

The Village Board of Trustees will be conducting their regular monthly meeting Tuesday evening beginning at 6:30 PM. Topics on their agenda include:

  • [Vote] Board of Health Appointment:
    Frank Konicek – Chairman, one-year term
  • [Vote] Riding Club Commission Appointments:
    Elaine Ramesh – Chairman & Member, each a one-year term
    Mary Beth Holsteen – Member, one-year term
    Susan Helenowski – Member, one-year term
    Vicki Kelly – Member, one-year term
  • [Vote] Plan Commission Appointments:
    Matthew Vondra – Chairman, one-year term & Member, 3-year term
    Christopher Geier – Member, three-year term
    Brent Burval – New Nominee* for Member, three-year term
  • [Vote] Zoning Board of Appeals Appointments:
    Gina Koertner – Member, five-year term
    John Gigerich – Member, five-year term
  • [Vote] Police Pension Board Trustees Appointments:
    Christopher Krzysko, Two-year term
    George Panos, Two-year term
  • Register Now: Land We Love Run 5K/10K Celebrating America250 on June 28, 2026

A copy of their agenda, including info on listening to the meeting, can be viewed and downloaded here.

*No bio provided

Read Full Post »

What you need to know about the hyperscale data centers coming to the Midwest | Credit: Illustration by Shira Friedman-Parks

By Siri Chilukuri | Chicago Reader

The explosion of proposed data centers across Illinois has sparked a fierce, bipartisan backlash and even legislation to curb the long-lasting effects on people’s air quality, water quality, and energy bills. In town halls from Pekin to Joliet to Chicago’s southeast side, people have packed rooms and spent hours discussing the impact of potential developments on their communities. As residents grapple with project proposals, it’s never been more important to understand the impact of data centers.

Everything from the emails you send to the photos you save on your phone is stored in a data center. For decades, data centers have been central to the architecture of the Internet, especially the digital lives we lead today. But the rise of artificial intelligence, in particular generative AI—which uses computer models to produce text, images, videos, and more—is driving the development of facilities that use more energy and water than ever before. The size of these so-called hyperscale data centers, and the profit motives driving the rush to get them online quickly, can cause pollution.

Sarah Moskowitz, executive director of the Citizens Utility Board, has been working with utility customers for decades on issues of affordability and climate change. The CUB is an advocacy organization for Illinois ratepayers, which has been watching the rise of data center projects in Illinois and learning more in the process about what they actually do. For Moskowitz, the distinction between next-generation hyperscale data centers that have roiled communities and the existing data center infrastructure is an important one to make. At the most basic level, “a data center is a physical facility containing equipment to store, process, and disseminate digital information,” Moskowitz said. “A hyperscaler is basically a large version of that. Generally, we think of hyperscalers as gigantic facilities, largely deployed to process artificial intelligence.”

Even the term “hyperscale” is imprecise, though, according to Helena Volzer, senior source water policy manager at the Alliance for the Great Lakes. “There’s really no hard and fast definition of what hyperscale even means. It just means a large facility,” Volzer said. Economists at the University of Virginia expect an average hyperscale data center to be about 300,000 square feet by 2030.

Hyperscale data centers are energy intensive not just because of their massive size but also because of what they process. The power used by generative AI is staggering—the computational power needed to train the large language models that power chatbots, such as OpenAI’s ChatGPT or Anthropic’s Claude, and the power needed to perform basic functions once they’re up and running far outpaces the demands of existing data centers. One Goldman Sachs report estimates that AI will spur a 165 percent increase in data center power consumption by 2030.

“What makes the data center problem unique is the fact that these facilities are being built in a specific location, or specific locations, and they are being built en masse,” said Yury Dvorkin, an engineering professor at Johns Hopkins University. “[If] you put a lot of electricity demand in a very constrained location, what happens is that it’s harder for the grid to deliver power in that specific location.”

Report continues here.

Related:Illinois lawmakers begin days of deep dives on data centers,” “Do you trust our Board of Trustees? We don’t. But you decide for yourself once we have finished. (Part 4),” “Do you trust our Board of Trustees? We don’t. But you decide for yourself once we have finished. (Follow-up),” “Do you trust our Board of Trustees? We don’t. But you decide for yourself once we have finished. (Part 3),” “Do you trust our Board of Trustees? We don’t. But you decide for yourself once we have finished. (Part 2),” “Do you trust our Board of Trustees? We don’t. But you decide for yourself once we have finished. (Part 1),” “110 Acre AI data center campus pitched to Village Board

Read Full Post »

On July 1 the state tax will hit almost 50 cents a gallon. Lawmakers made yearly automatic.

By Dylan Sharkey | Illinois Policy Institute

Illinois drivers will see another gas tax increase July 1.

The state tax will rise to 49.6 cents per gallon because of the automatic annual inflation increase built into the 2019 “Rebuild Illinois” infrastructure program signed by Gov. J.B. Pritzker.

That means Illinois drivers will continue paying among the highest gas taxes in the country. Indiana and Georgia gave residents a gas tax holiday from high prices because of the war in Iran.

The average price of a gallon of gas in Illinois was $4.986 on May 6, up from about $3.40 a year ago, according to the AAA.

When Pritzker doubled the state gas tax from 19 cents to 38 cents in 2019, lawmakers also ensured Illinoisans would face automatic inflation-linked increases every year without another recorded vote.

Once federal, state and local taxes are combined, many Illinois drivers pay more than 85 cents per gallon in taxes alone at the pump. Only California and Michigan rival Illinois for the highest total gas taxes in the country.

Article continues here.

Read Full Post »

The Village Board of Trustees will be conducting their regular monthly meeting this evening beginning at 6:30 PM. Topics on their agenda include:

A copy of their agenda, including info on listening to the meeting, can be viewed and downloaded here.

Read Full Post »

State Rep. Kam Buckner listens as fellow state Rep. Eva-Dina Delgado answers questions while meeting with a House committee on a transit funding plan during the legislative session at the Illinois Capitol on Oct. 29, 2025, in Springfield. (John J. Kim/Chicago Tribune)

By David Greising | For the Chicago Tribune

Late last year, just days before a historic transit bill finally passed and went to Gov. JB Pritzker’s desk, it was loaded with controversial ideas.

But before the final up-or-down vote, proposals for statewide taxes on package deliveries, streaming services and even event tickets were tossed aside. Instead, the lawmakers raised the Regional Transportation Authority sales tax, hiked tolls on the Illinois Tollway and pulled in $200 million from the state’s road fund — which notably is intended for capital projects, not operations.

Today, we’re on to a different topic with yet another set of substantive last-minute changes. What started as a push to keep the Chicago Bears in Illinois has morphed into the so-called megaprojects bill, which could institutionalize negotiated tax breaks statewide for everything from the proposed One Central mixed-use development spanning DuSable Lake Shore Drive to new development around the quantum computing park along the lakefront.

Don’t count out data centers, either. They’re excluded from eligibility for now, but the industry is powerful, the potential for huge investment is appealing and legislative negotiations are far from complete.

Under the version of the megaprojects bill that the House passed this week, developers of projects costing at least $100 million could lock in privately negotiated tax cuts — so-called payments in lieu of taxes (PILOT) — for as long as 25 years. Projects worth $500 million could be eligible for 30-year agreements, and developments worth $1 billion would allow for 40 years of tax cuts guaranteed by cities, school districts and other taxing authorities.

At the center of the legislative trading that consumed Springfield this week was Chicago state Rep. Kam Buckner, D-Chicago, who also was at the center of last fall’s transit talks. Buckner has an eye for a deal. His last-minute, mixmaster approach to closing out the transit negotiations irritated several participants, but the end result was a fiscally responsible and transformative restructuring of mass transit in northern Illinois.

The stakes are high again this time. And as happens in Illinois too often, the legislature could well pass a momentous bill — one that could shift hundreds of millions of dollars in tax burden from megaproject investors to their neighbors and even the state — without serious study of the knock-on impacts on property owners, local governments and the state budget.

The broader fiscal consequences for the state, and for homeowners, businesses and others, in a bill now in front of the Senate, are as mysterious as the ideas in it are bold.

At the heart of the matter is a simple fact: It takes a certain amount of money to run a government, and someone needs to pay the bills. If a megaproject developer negotiates a 40-year tax break with the local school district, let’s say, then all the other taxpayers in that district have to make up the difference.

Buckner and others pushing for the megaprojects bill would seek to creatively mitigate the direct impact on ordinary taxpayers. Only half of the PILOT revenues would go toward property tax relief — of that, property tax rebates for neighbors of the project would account for 60%, and 40% would be deposited into the state’s existing property tax relief fund.

It’s a formulation Buckner unveiled just one day before the bill went to a House vote, with little study and just light debate.

But guess what? The PILOT funds that would cover those property tax rebates are dollars that otherwise would go toward the schools, roads, buildings and services that the taxing bodies still must pay for. One way or another, homeowners, business owners and other taxpayers will need to cover the gap.

Not to worry, the megaprojects bill backers say. Property values in the areas surrounding megaprojects will increase and property tax revenues along with them. But that’s hardly guaranteed.

Stadiums are notorious for their lack of multiplier impact, which is one reason these days why sports team owners, such as the McCaskey family that controls the Bears, have such a hard time hoodwinking governments into giving them direct subsidies to build their stadiums. And some megaprojects could even lead to decreased property values nearby. If data centers eventually are included, for example, neighbors could take a hit due to impacts on electricity costs, water access, industrial noise and other nuisances that can come into play when a megaproject moves in next door.

Despite the lack of information about the net cost or benefit of proposals considered in the megaprojects bill debate, the rush is on in Springfield. Buckner showed his talent for dealmaking this week and got a 78-32 House vote — momentum that will carry into the Senate.

And that legislative momentum could make it all the harder for Buckner and his colleagues in the Senate, who now must consider their own version, to do the right thing and consider a pause — for the long-term good of the state.

That’s right: Perhaps the megaprojects bill should stop right here, at least for now. There are too many open and unanswered questions to responsibly pass such a consequential law in such a rush.

The Bears are insisting on action now, or they just might move to Indiana. The General Assembly could deal with that risk, before the traditional May 31 close of the spring session, and table the broader megaprojects effort until the fall veto.

Preposterous? A deal is within reach, after all. But something quite similar happened with the transit restructuring last year, and the state, the northern Illinois transit system, and public transit users and taxpayers are better for it.

The alternate approach of passing a bill based on incomplete information and hoping for the best has had disastrous consequences in the past. The state’s pension systems are a fiscal disaster and national disgrace in part because “reforms” were passed with woefully incomplete analysis of their consequences.

No doubt Buckner and others have deal fever, and a successful Senate vote could be within sight. After all, the megaprojects idea has been under discussion, with Pritzker’s encouragement, for three years now, so the temptation is understandable. But the right course would be to address the Bears matter now — and use the time between today and year’s end to get the rest of the megaprojects bill right.

David Greising is president of the Better Government Association.

Source

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »