Illinois open-burn bill ignites capitol clash
[February 07, 2026]
By Catrina Barker | The Center Square contributor
(The Center Square) – A proposal aimed at giving local fire protection
districts more oversight of open burning in unincorporated areas has
sparked controversy at the Illinois Capitol.
Republican lawmakers are warning the bill is vague, punitive, and
unfairly targets rural residents, while the Democratic sponsor says
critics are mischaracterizing her intent.
House Bill 4459, sponsored by State Rep. Amy “Murri” Briel, D-Ottawa,
would let counties and townships in unincorporated areas adopt permit
rules for certain open burns. Briel says the goal is to help fire
districts track fires, cut unnecessary calls, and improve readiness
during droughts.
However, State Rep. Brad Halbrook, Republican spokesman on the Counties
and Townships House committee, R-Shelbyville, said the bill as written
raises serious concerns about increased fees and excessive penalties for
rural residents.
“There seems to be a difference between the way the bill sponsor
believes it to be and the way Republicans believe it to be,” Halbrook
said. “It’s pretty vague. And whether there’s bill drafting errors or
whatever the case might be, this is more of the same, vague bills loaded
full of unintended consequences.”
Halbrook said his reading of the legislation suggests it could allow
local governments to charge residents per burn, potentially around $5
per permit, something he said would disproportionately impact people
living outside city limits.
“They want to charge fees for things that limit an individual’s freedom
and liberty on their private property. Many municipalities already have
the authority, through ordinance or state law, to regulate burning. We
saw countywide burn bans just this past summer because of drought and
dry conditions. If the concern is safety, those tools already exist —
but if this is just another way to add mandates, regulations, and raise
money, I think it’s a bad idea,” said Halbrook.
Briel, however, pushed back strongly against what she described as
misinformation surrounding the bill.
[to top of second column]
|
In a statement released after the backlash, she said HB 4459 was
never intended to limit campfires or bonfires and does not affect
them under the bill’s definition of “open burns,” which is drawn
from existing state statute under the jurisdiction of the State Fire
Marshal.
“Seeing this influx of inaccurate news is very disheartening,” Briel
said.
Halbrook questioned how such rules would be enforced and whether
local governments would realistically adopt them.
“How do you regulate that? How do you enforce that?” Halbrook said.
“It may be well-intentioned and aimed at providing additional
funding for what she calls resource-strapped fire protection
districts, but if the state were better managed, we wouldn’t be in
this situation to begin with.”
Halbrook said local governments struggle not from lack of fees, but
from Springfield’s repeated mandates, which drive up costs and
strain resources.
The bill imposes penalties up to $100,000 for burns without a permit
and $500,000 for violations on “no-burn days,” which Halbrook called
excessive.
“Those numbers are just unrealistic,” he said.
Briel emphasized that the measure does not require any local
government to adopt new rules, but instead gives unincorporated
areas the option to do so. Briel also cited worsening drought
conditions and noted that three open burn fires last year caused
more than $2 million in damages statewide.
Briel said she’s working on an amendment to fix a drafting error in
the bill.
Halbrook said the response from the sponsor appears to be driven by
public backlash.
“These ideas come out, there’s backlash, and then they have to walk
them back because they’re out of line with the majority of people in
the state,” said Halbrook.
|
