
Red tape is raising costs and slowing the adoption of solar in Illinois, report says
In Illinois, solar installers often face 'complex and cumbersome' permitting requirements that can add months — and hundreds of dollars in cost — to the simplest residential roof project, according to a new report from environmentalists and consumer advocates.
In some places, installers reported having to submit applications in person, rather than via email or an online portal.
One installer complained about having to place six calls just to obtain a permit that had already been approved; others said they navigate needlessly complex and drawn-out review processes or face 'wacky' formatting requirements.
Among the results: The state is viewed as 'a very good market because of all the incentives, but an absolute nightmare to operate in,' an Illinois solar installer was quoted as saying. Aurora, Elmhurst and Joliet were among the places where installers reported problems.
The report, released Thursday by Environment Illinois Research & Education Center and the Illinois PIRG Education Fund, calls on the state to streamline the process by adopting instant permitting software — an approach already in place in California and on the way in Maryland.
Instant permitting software checks whether a project is compliant with national and local building codes and can approve a permit within a matter of minutes.
Options include SolarAPP+, which was developed by the Department of Energy's National Renewable Energy Laboratory in collaboration with building and safety experts and is offered free to local governments.
'(Instant permitting) is a pretty easy way to just get more of these small-scale solar projects onto the grid faster, which can add up to a pretty significant amount of energy and ease the load on our grid,' said report co-author Theo Rosen, a climate campaigns associate for Environment Illinois.
The Illinois legislature is considering a bill that would require larger municipalities to offer instant permitting for residential solar roofs. The goal is to have instant permitting included in a larger clean energy bill that will likely be considered this spring, Rosen said.
She frames the issue in terms of untapped potential: In the United States, 45% of electricity use could be powered by rooftop solar, she said, but Illinois is only using about 2% of its rooftop solar potential.
According to a recent report from the Greenhouse Institute and the Brown University Climate Solutions Lab, instant permitting could spur solar roof adoption by reducing barriers and lowering costs for installers and customers.
Instant permitting could lead to an additional 35,000 to 36,000 home solar roofs in Illinois by 2030 and as much as an additional 300,000 by 2040, according to the report from the Greenhouse Institute, a research institute focused on climate change.
Those 300,000 solar roofs could eventually save 31 to 32 metric tons of CO2 equivalent, the report said — the rough equivalent of shutting down eight coal-fired power plants for a year.
In addition, the cost of a new solar roof could be reduced by as much as $2,100 by 2030 under instant permitting, and by more than $4,000 by 2040. An 8.6-kilowatt roof, about the median in Illinois, costs about $26,000 before federal and state tax incentives.
Rosen's report, which draws from interviews with staff at nine companies that install residential solar in Illinois, paints a picture of a permitting process that can be long, frustrating and unpredictable. The interviews were published anonymously because of concerns about the potential for retaliation by permitting authorities.
Among the towns and cities where installers said they faced obstacles was Aurora.
Solar installers said Aurora moves slowly when it comes to solar permits and is known for being unresponsive, with an online permitting system that 'frankly is a joke.'
A senior employee at a large solar company reported that he has had to go to Aurora in person — a 45-minute drive — just to get a response. He said he had to do that seven times in the past year: 'To me that's a big red flag that something is broken internally.'
Multiple solar installers said they are wary of taking jobs in Aurora, and several said they charge their Aurora customers a premium because of the extra work involved in getting a project approved. One installer said he doesn't want to do business in Aurora: 'We had one project, and only ever one, in Aurora, because we said we're never going back.'
Aurora Chief Development Services Officer John Curley responded that 96% of solar permits in the city are submitted via the online portal, and the vast majority of those users are using the portal regularly.
'We have additionally been challenging our software vendor to make portal improvements for several years and they are nearly ready to launch a newer public portal,' Curley said in an email interview.
Curley wrote that while the average time it takes to get a solar permit in Aurora is 70 days, only 5.6 of those days are due to Aurora reviewing the proposal, with the rest of the time taken up by 'private sector response' and contractor registration and payment.
As for the complaint that an installer had to visit seven times in one year to get responses, Curley wrote, 'Plan Review and Inspection results and responses are available 24/7 on-line. There is never a need to visit in person for this information.'
In communities such as Elmhurst, installers complained about the use of third-party permit reviewers, who aren't municipal employees.
'Some places you'll submit the application and you get an approval in two, three, four days,' an installer was quoted as saying. 'But with these third-party reviewers, we submit to the reviewer, they take about a week to accept the application, then they receive payment. Once they get payment, they take another week to review. Then they have comments. They send those to us. We respond. They then take another week to review our response and make us pay. Once we've paid, they take another week to review. And then they have another round of comments, and so on.'
Each round of review takes roughly three weeks, and there are often two or three rounds of comments in Elmhurst, the installer said: 'It just takes forever.'
Elmhurst officials did not respond to requests for comment.
Joliet also was named by more than one solar company as one of the more difficult and time-consuming jurisdictions to work with, a characterization the city disputes.
'Our city staff have successfully collaborated with over 100 contractors on various projects, including solar initiatives, and we are proud of our track record,' Joliet spokesperson Rosemaria DiBenedetto said in a written statement.
'The city of Joliet is committed to working diligently and effectively with contractors and businesses every day, offering support and guidance to ensure their success,' she said in the statement.
Among the complaints about Joliet: The city requires permit applications to be submitted via an online portal that an installer described as 'confusing … with its own set of crazy requirements.'
There are a variety of options for instant permitting, including privately developed software, but SolarAPP+ is a popular choice.
SolarAPP+ reduced the median number of days from permit submission to passed inspection from 47.5 to 33 in a subset of 2023 cases, according to a June review by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory and Clean Kilowatts LLC.
Michelle Knox, owner of WindSolarUSA, a renewable energy developer in Springfield, was one of the installers interviewed for Rosen's report. Knox told the Tribune she hasn't done residential solar roofs in Joliet, Aurora and Elmhurst and that she wasn't quoted regarding those places.
Knox said instant permitting would help Illinois solar developers stay on schedule and meet customer expectations and would reduce the time that understaffed towns and cities have to spend on solar permitting.
'It's a great thing,' she said. 'I think it's a win-win-win.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
22-05-2025
- Yahoo
US Senate passes ‘no tax on tips' bill in unanimous vote
The US Senate passed the No Tax on Tips Act on Tuesday after the Nevada senator Jacky Rosen brought the bill up for a unanimous consent request. 'This bipartisan bill is a good idea. It has support from Democrats and Republicans, so we should pass it, well, as soon as possible, without any poison pills,' said Rosen, a Democrat, on the Senate floor. The bill was introduced in the Senate in January 2025 by Senator Ted Cruz and a bipartisan group of co-sponsors which included Rosen and the Nevada senator Catherine Cortez Masto. No objections were made by Rosen's request, resulting in the passage of the bill, which now goes to the House. The bipartisan bill will create a tax deduction of up to $25,000 for cash tips reported to employers by workers for withholding purposes on payroll taxes, with a cap on the salary for eligible workers at $160,000 annually. The bill calls for the US Department of Treasury to issue a list of occupations that traditionally receive tips within 90 days of the bill's enactment. Ending taxes on tips gained traction during the 2024 presidential election, with Donald Trump touting the plan on the campaign trail in Nevada, and Kamala Harris later endorsing the idea. Related: No tax on tips fires up Nevada hospitality workers: 'I want that!' Economists and labor advocates have criticized the legislation, with concerns it will incentivize the expansion of tipped work, undermine pay increases and would affect only a small segment of about 5% of low-paid workers who receive tips. According to Brookings Institute researchers, 37% of all tipped workers already pay no federal income tax because their earnings are so little, and eliminating sub-minimum wages for tipped workers would be more impactful. 'Without having these earnings floors in place, the minimum wage floor and calling for an increase, workers are vulnerable to exploitation and inequality in the labor market which is harmful overall for the economy,' Lena Simet, a senior researcher Human Rights Watch, told the Guardian in August 2024 on the push to end taxes on tips. 'It doesn't mean that workers can no longer be tipped. It just means a tip comes on top of a wage floor that would guarantee them a minimum.'
Yahoo
21-05-2025
- Yahoo
A Nevada Democrat pushed 'No Taxes on Tips' through the Senate
The Senate unexpectedly passed the No Tax on Tips Act on Tuesday, moving one of President Donald Trump's major campaign promises much closer to becoming law. Adding to the surprise was the way it advanced: Sen. Jacky Rosen, a Nevada Democrat, simply asked if anyone was opposed to it passing — and none of her fellow senators objected. It was a rare moment of bipartisan agreement in the Republican-controlled chamber. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, first introduced the bill with backing from seven of his colleagues, including Rosen and fellow Nevadan Democrat Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto. Here's how NBC News described the bill: The legislation would create a tax deduction worth up to $25,000 for tips, limited to cash tips that workers report to employers for withholding purposes on payroll taxes. The tax break would also be restricted to employees who earn $160,000 or less in 2025, an amount that will rise with inflation in coming years. A Democrat pushing through a Trump priority feels out of sync with the Democratic base's clamor for more confrontation with the unpopular administration. After all, the adage that 'all politics is local' can seem quaint in an age in which issues are more often seen through a national lens. But the No Tax on Tips Act's provenance shows that some things never change. Trump first suggested that tipped workers shouldn't pay taxes on those wages during a campaign stop in Las Vegas last year. It was a pretty shameless ploy to get the support of the thousands of service industry employees in a competitive state, but one that managed to stick. When she entered the race last summer, Vice President Kamala Harris took up a version of the idea as her own. (There are major concerns from tax experts and labor activists given how little most tipped workers pay in federal taxes anyway; raising the wildly low $2.13 minimum wage for those workers would likely be a much bigger boost for their bank accounts.) It makes sense that Rosen and Cortez Masto both signed onto the bill given their narrow re-election victories: Rosen won by 1.5% last year; Cortez Masto squeaked by with an even smaller margin in 2022. 'Nevada has more tipped workers per capita than any other state. So this bill would mean immediate financial relief for countless hard-working families,' Rosen said Tuesday. 'No Tax on Tips was one of President Trump's key promises to the American people, which he unveiled in my state of Nevada. And I am not afraid to embrace a good idea, wherever it comes from.' The question is whether Rosen and Cortez Masto will actually reap the political benefits from getting behind this policy. A temporary version — slated to last only until 2028 — is currently part of the megabill that Republicans hope to pass. Rosen and Cortez Masto likely won't back that bill in the Senate, and it's unclear if the House will take up Cruz's legislation separately anytime soon. Combined with Trump's tendency to claim credit even for things that he had nothing to do with, Nevada's senators may find it hard to convince voters that they had any hand in putting whatever extra cash this bill might eventually generate in their pockets. This article was originally published on
Yahoo
21-05-2025
- Yahoo
Democrats let 'no tax on tips' pass the Senate. That doesn't mean they actually back Trump's campaign promise.
A "No Tax on Tips" bill passed the Senate on Tuesday with no Democratic opposition. This was one of Trump's key economic campaign promises. But several Democrats told BI that they still had questions about the proposal. A bipartisan bill to exempt tips from federal income tax passed the Senate. That doesn't mean everyone's fully behind the idea, which was one of President Donald Trump's key campaign promises. In fact, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are surprised that the "No Tax on Tips Act," a bipartisan bill sponsored by Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas and Democratic Sen. Jacky Rosen of Nevada, passed at all. "I'm a little amazed the Democrats didn't block it," Cruz told BI. "But I'll take yes for an answer." As it turns out, Cruz's surprise is warranted. While no Democratic senators said they were outright opposed, several told BI on Wednesday that they still had questions or concerns about the idea, or were simply ambivalent about it. "That's one way to approach the topic," Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia. "The other way is to raise the minimum wage, and sort of eliminate a tip-based economy, which is what a lot of countries do." "It's obviously great for people who make their incomes off of tips. It's just a question of fairness," Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut said. "It just, on its own, seems to be a little strange to decide that certain workers are getting taxed at a rate that's much less than other workers." The bill passed on Tuesday night after Rosen made a "unanimous consent request," a procedure that senators can use either to pass non-controversial legislation or highlight the other party's opposition to one of their bills. If no senator shows up to object, it passes. Senators are notified about these requests ahead of time, giving them plenty of time to prepare to object. But no one in either party did so, despite some expectation that Republicans would, given that their own version of the proposal is included in the "One Big Beautiful Bill" reconciliation package. "Frankly, I was surprised," Murphy said, adding that he assumed a member of the Senate Finance Committee would "object to something that big going outside of regular order." The No Tax on Tips Act would allow tipped workers to claim a tax deduction of up to $25,000 for the sum of all tips they earned in the previous year. The GOP's "Big Beautiful Bill" includes a similar provision, but without the $25,000 cap. For Rosen, passing the bill was smart politics. Her home state of Nevada has among the highest concentrations of tipped workers in the country, owing to the hospitality and entertainment industry in cities like Las Vegas. The senator also wanted to divorce the issue from the GOP's broader bill, which includes safety-net cuts that Democrats oppose. "Our office ran a hotline on both sides of the aisle and, after seeing no objections, Senator Rosen went to the floor to pass this bipartisan bill by itself and without any poison pills," a spokesperson for Rosen told BI. "In doing so, Senate Democrats are showing we can deliver tax relief for working-class families without Republicans' extreme cuts to Medicaid and SNAP." Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer applauded the passage of the bill on Tuesday, saying in a statement that "thanks to Senator Rosen's incredible leadership, we are one step closer to eliminating taxes on tipped wages for hardworking Americans." But while the bill has the support of Republicans and Nevada's other Democratic senator, Catherine Cortez Masto, none of the Democratic senators who BI spoke with on Wednesday said they were fully supportive of the idea. "I haven't studied the full implications," said Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent who caucuses with Democrats. "I fear very much that corporations may be able to use it in certain ways." "It's not the worst element of this bill, though," Sanders added. "No tax on tips makes a great headline, but if it's not done the right way, it fails to help hardworking people who are barely scraping by, while it gives one more boost to Wall Streeters who change their compensation to tipped income," Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts said. "So, like so many things, the devil is in the details." Rosen's bill does include a provision to prevent the wealthy from doing what Warren suggests, barring those who earn more than $160,000 a year from claiming the deduction. Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, the top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee and a key voice within the party on tax policy, declined to comment specifically on the no tax on tips proposal, only saying that Democrats as a whole want to find ways to help workers. "I strongly favor getting relief to the workers," Wyden said. "But we know we have a lot of legislative hoops to jump through." Read the original article on Business Insider