WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 2887

FOIA-RECURRENT REQUESTERS

104th Regular Session Introduced by Marti Deuter and 1 co-sponsor

HB 2887 lowers thresholds for recurrent FOIA requesters, extends response time to 30 days, and requires disclosure of recurrent status for designated requesters.

Chief Sponsor Changed to Rep. Martha Deuter
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 2887

Summary — HB 2887 (FOIA — Recurrent Requesters)

Status: Rule 19(a) / Re‑referred to Rules Committee (Introduced Feb 2025)
Primary sponsor: Rep. Terra Costa Howard; Cosponsor: Rep. Martha Deuter
Related bills: SB 129, SB 386, HB 706

Purpose

HB 2887 amends the Illinois Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to (1) change the numerical thresholds that cause a requester to be designated a “recurrent requester,” (2) change procedural timing for responses to recurrent requesters, (3) limit how often public bodies must notify a requester that they are being treated as recurrent, and (4) create a disclosure requirement for persons designated as recurrent requesters.

Key provisions and changes

  • Recurrent requester thresholds (Section 2, definition of “recurrent requester”):
    • Lowers the cumulative thresholds that trigger the designation. Under the bill, a person becomes a recurrent requester for a given public body if they submit any one of the following to that body:
    • At least 40 requests (replacing the previous 50), or
    • At least 10 requests within a 30‑day period (replacing 15), or
    • At least 5 requests within a 7‑day period (replacing 7).
    • News media and nonprofit/scientific/academic organizations remain excluded from the counts when their principal purpose is news dissemination, opinion/features, or academic/scientific/public research/education.
  • Response timing (Section 3.2):
    • Public bodies must respond to requests from persons already designated as recurrent requesters within 30 days after receipt of the request (changed from 21 days).
  • Notice frequency:
    • When a public body notifies a requester that their requests are being treated as recurrent, that notice need only be provided once every 30 days (reduces frequency of repeated notices).
  • Disclosure requirement / violation:
    • The bill makes it a violation for a person designated as a recurrent requester to knowingly obtain a public record without disclosing their status as a recurrent requester.
  • Definitions / mechanics:
    • The bill continues to define “request” broadly (written or — at the public body’s option — oral) and retains exemptions for news media and certain non‑profits. (The bill text also contains definitions for voluminous requests and other FOIA provisions that remain in force.)

Who is affected

  • Public bodies across Illinois: will apply the lowered thresholds and modified timelines when identifying and processing recurrent requesters; may rely on the longer 30‑day response window for such requesters.
  • Requesters: more individuals or organizations may be classified as recurrent requesters because thresholds are reduced; those so designated must disclose that status when obtaining records or face a violation.
  • News media, and nonprofit/scientific/academic requesters: generally exempt from being counted toward the recurrent‑requester thresholds when requests serve the exempted public‑interest purposes.

Potential impacts and considerations

  • More requesters will meet the recurrent‑requester definition, which can change how public bodies process their requests (including relying on the 30‑day response window).
  • Requiring disclosure of recurrent status could deter some frequent requesters or alter requester behavior; it also creates an added compliance requirement for those designated.
  • Extending the response period for recurrent requesters from 21 to 30 days could give public bodies more time to compile records but may delay public access for frequent requesters.
  • Existing FOIA exemptions and protections for the press and academic researchers remain preserved in the counting rules.

Procedural notes

  • Bill introduced in early February 2025. Sponsors and related companion bills are listed above. Current legislative status (per the materials provided) is Rule 19(a) / Re‑referred to Rules Committee. No effective date is specified in the provided text.

If you’d like, I can:
- Provide side‑by‑side comparison (current law vs. proposed text) for each changed provision, or
- Draft a one‑page explainer for public bodies on implementing the new recurrent‑requester rules.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.