Illinois faces a severe affordable housing shortage that affects communities statewide. Nearly 300,000 affordable rental units are missing for the state’s lowest-income residents, while rising rents and home prices continue to strain working families, employers and local economies.

As Gov. JB Pritzker and the General Assembly debate major housing proposals, lawmakers should strengthen a proven tool that has quietly delivered results for more than two decades: the Illinois Affordable Housing Tax Credit.

The program is set to expire later this year. Without legislative action, Illinois risks losing a critical financing tool at the very moment affordable housing development faces unprecedented challenges.

Construction costs have surged dramatically since 2019, while financing has become more difficult and unpredictable. At the same time, the program’s current 5% annual growth rate is no longer enough to keep pace with rising costs and growing demand.

The Illinois Affordable Housing Tax Credit provides a 50% tax credit on donations of cash, land or buildings made to nonprofit housing developers. These contributions help close financing gaps that often determine whether projects move forward or stall.

The program’s impact can be seen across Illinois. In Chicago, Reclaiming Chicago has transformed vacant lots into homes for working families. In Rock Island, the program has helped nearly 500 workers become homeowners. In Deerfield, land donations supported housing for workers who serve the community but otherwise could not afford to live there.

Overall, the program has leveraged more than $510 million in private donations and supported tens of thousands of affordable homes statewide.

Illinois cannot afford to lose tools that work. Extending the Illinois Affordable Housing Tax Credit is essential. Lawmakers should also expand the program’s capacity so it can support more developments in more communities.

By renewing and strengthening this bipartisan program before it expires, Illinois can scale a proven solution to meet the housing challenges facing the state today.

— Allison Clements, executive director, Illinois Housing Council

Preserve home-delivered meals

Illinois’ flat funding toward home-delivered meals is projected to affect hundreds of thousands of older adults while further straining our healthcare system. Without increased investment today, Illinois will pay more tomorrow.

We recognize that this is a challenging budget year. Lawmakers are balancing many competing priorities. But the needs of older adults are growing rapidly, and the cost of inaction will only increase over time. At the same time, reductions in federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits are expected to increase food insecurity among older adults, placing even more pressure on already strained systems.

The result is predictable and concerning: fewer meals delivered, longer waitlists, and more older adults at risk of malnutrition, isolation and increased healthcare costs.

Research from Brown University shows that home-delivered meals are a smart investment: Even a modest increase, serving just 1% more older adults in Illinois, could generate significant annual Medicaid savings. Other research from The American Journal of Managed Care determined that providing meals to high-risk patients after hospital discharge can significantly reduce readmissions, yielding a return of nearly $4 for every $1 spent.

The older adult population is expected to be the fastest growing demographic in the state over the next decade. If you think this issue is prevalent today, the issue will only become exacerbated over time.

These are not abstract numbers. They represent real opportunities to reduce healthcare costs while improving the quality of life for older adults.

As Illinois lawmakers finalize the state budget, it’s clear that maintaining current funding levels for services supporting older adults is not enough. In fact, in today’s economic climate, flat funding is effectively a cut, and older adults across our state will feel the consequences.

Investing in home-delivered meals is not about expanding government; it is about making smart, strategic choices that save money in the long run while protecting some of our most vulnerable residents. It is about ensuring that older adults can continue to live with dignity in the communities they helped build.

Illinois can, and must, do better.

— Diane Slezak, president, Illinois Association of Area Agencies on Aging, and president and CEO, AgeOptions

Is Mayor Johnson just stalling?

It has taken the city’s procurement officer more than 19 months to evaluate the bids for the replacement (or reinstatement) of the ShotSpotter technology. That is utter nonsense.

I’ve been employed in a local government — in law enforcement and procurement capacities. That government analyzed and awarded bids for major buildings and aircraft in shorter times.

It seems that Chicago’s mayor is using his office to delay indefinitely instituting something that he does not want, ignoring the wisdom of law enforcement professionals and the wishes of the people of Chicago.

— Elliott Fredland, Chicago

Giving Paul Vallas a platform

I must take issue with Lara Taylor’s letter (“Vallas’ AI op-ed a terrible take,” May 11) criticizing Paul Vallas’ take on the use of artificial intelligence in classrooms. Expressing her opinion about AI in classrooms is Taylor’s right, of course. What I object to is her closing sentence: “I cannot fathom why the Tribune opinion team keeps giving him a platform over and over again.”

Well, perhaps because he has decades of experience in public education and big city governance and came within a few thousand votes of being elected mayor of Chicago in 2023.

That, and he’s a thoughtful and decent man.

— John Knoerle, Shorewood, Wisconsin

Layoffs in response to AI use

In response to reporting on Coinbase cutting 14% of its global workforce while pivoting toward artificial intelligence, a deeper imbalance is becoming clear. I work in information technology, and I see the human cost of this shift every day. In Mary Shelley’s “Frankenstein,” the tragedy isn’t the creation — it is the creator’s abandonment.

Today, tech companies embrace AI’s efficiencies while shedding the very workers who built the foundations of these systems. This is not innovation; it is displacement without responsibility.

This year, tens of thousands have lost jobs even as AI investment accelerates. When corporations prioritize self-enrichment over absolute justice, they ignore the dignity of labor. This is not a technological inevitability — it is an unjust transfer of wealth. We urgently need a framework for equitable distribution of AI’s benefits, ensuring progress serves human welfare rather than just a few shareholders.

When economic gains are concentrated and social costs ignored, instability follows. We are not witnessing a “machine threat,” but the consequences of institutional neglect. If progress continues without moral accountability, the damage will not be theoretical. The real risk of AI is not what it creates, but the socioeconomic ruin of the people it leaves behind.

— Ahmed Khan, Kokomo, Indiana

Amateur philosophers’ views

I have to respond to Larry Geraghty’s letter regarding Gov. JB Pritzker and abortions (“Obsessed with abortion,” May 11). Does he believe that life begins at conception? I was taught that the Bible says life begins at first breath. Not only that — Numbers 5:11-32 addresses the unborn, as does Exodus 21:22-25. It seems like the pseudo-Christian/amateur philosophers want to hold the rest of us to vague, amorphous explanations of when life begins.

How many of these guys, who revere life, volunteer to work with abandoned children — especially those with profound disabilities — in the foster care system?

To me, it’s these amateur philosophers, who are so sure about what the Bible says, who are obsessed with abortion.

— Robyn Michaels, Chicago

Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@chicagotribune.com.