What types of transportation do you use during an average week, and how has this shaped your view of transportation policy?

In the Barrington area, I’m reliant on my car for most trips, though I try to minimize my environmental impact by driving an EV and using an electric scooter for canvassing. For trips to Chicago, I use a mix of rideshare, Metra, and the CTA. I'm a strong advocate for expanding public transportation into southwest Lake County, but we face significant hurdles. Beyond the obvious infrastructure costs and the need to win over public opinion, we also have to contend with low-density suburban sprawl that makes fixed routes inefficient, the challenge of coordinating across multiple townships and governments, and the simple fact that our communities have been designed around cars for decades. It's a complex problem, but one I'm committed to tackling.

What are some transportation challenges in your district?

Illinois House District 52 is a sprawling district that covers parts of four counties, and our transportation challenges reflect that complexity. Our biggest issue is the heavy reliance on cars, which leads to significant traffic congestion, especially on major arteries like Route 14 and Route 59. The 6-lane Randall Road corridor is a prime example of how dangerous our roads can be for pedestrians, making it nearly impossible to cross safely. This is compounded by the recent increase in freight train traffic, which can bring local roads to a standstill. We recently saw a perfect storm in Barrington when a stalled train blocked all three rail crossings, effectively cutting off parts of the town and preventing first responders from doing their jobs.

While we have the Metra for commuting to Chicago, there's a real lack of 'last-mile' transportation options to get people to and from the train station and around their local communities. We have a limited Pace bus service and some dial-a-ride programs, but they don't meet the growing need. Expanding these services and improving pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure are critical, but it's a challenge to coordinate these efforts across so many different townships and county governments. We need a more integrated approach to transportation planning that addresses the unique needs of our suburban and exurban communities.

The Illinois Department of Transportation (“IDOT”) plays a significant role in transportation throughout the state, in Chicago, and Cook County. What is your opinion on their role with the Chicago Department of Transportation, Cook County Department of Transportation and Highways, local communities, and the impact that has?

The Illinois General Assembly’s role is absolutely critical. We are the ones who set the vision and the priorities for transportation in our state. It’s our job to ensure that IDOT’s plans reflect the real needs of our communities, not just the needs of cars and highways.

The recent passage of the historic transit bill is a perfect example of this. The General Assembly stepped up to avert a fiscal crisis, but more importantly, we made a clear statement that public transit is a priority. We did this by redirecting significant funding to support our transit systems, creating a new regional authority for better coordination, and advancing goals for integrated fares and improved accessibility.

This isn't just about funding. It's about policy. We have the power to pass laws like the 'People Over Parking Act' to encourage development around transit hubs, and we can direct agencies like Metra to explore expanding passenger rail service.

Ultimately, the General Assembly is responsible for ensuring our transportation system is equitable and accessible for everyone, including seniors and people with disabilities. We must use our authority to hold our transportation agencies accountable and push for a modern, integrated system that serves all of Illinois.

How do you view the Illinois General Assembly’s role in setting IDOT’s priorities for public transit, passenger rail, and strengthening accessibility in transportation?

The General Assembly's fundamental role is to be the conscience of our state's transportation policy, ensuring it serves all people, not just the path of least resistance which has for too long been a system designed solely around the automobile. We are elected to represent the diverse needs of our communities, and that means championing a future where everyone, regardless of their age, income, or ability, has access to safe and reliable transportation.

Our recent work on the landmark transit bill is a testament to this principle in action. It wasn't just about averting a fiscal crisis; it was about fundamentally shifting our state's priorities. We made a conscious decision to move away from a car-centric model and invest in a more equitable and sustainable future. This required us to think holistically about how transportation impacts our lives, from economic opportunity to environmental justice.

This new approach means we are empowering communities to prioritize people over parking, fostering development that connects residents to transit, and creating a more unified and user-friendly system for riders. It also means we are looking beyond the Chicago area and exploring how we can expand passenger rail to other parts of the state.

Ultimately, the General Assembly must be the driving force behind this progress. We have the power and the responsibility to ensure that our transportation network is a force for good, connecting our communities, creating opportunities, and building a better Illinois for all.

States like Colorado, Minnesota, Virginia have passed legislation that has shifted their transportation infrastructure spending towards projects that prioritize safety, transit and cycling, and greenhouse gas mitigation. What’s your position on Illinois’ current transportation infrastructure spending, and if you could change anything, what would it be?

While I am encouraged by the recent historic investments in our infrastructure, I believe Illinois is still too focused on a 20th-century model of transportation. Our current spending plan still dedicates the lion's share of funding—nearly two-thirds—to roads and bridges. This approach perpetuates the very problems we face in my district, like the dangerous, six-lane expanse of Randall Road that is nearly impossible for a pedestrian to cross safely, and the traffic-clogged arteries of Routes 14 and 59.

If I could change our approach, I would look to the leadership of states like Colorado and Minnesota. First, I would champion legislation to establish binding greenhouse gas reduction targets for our transportation sector. It’s not enough to simply encourage EV adoption, as I have done personally; we must fundamentally change the system that forces people to drive for every trip.

Second, I would rebalance our spending priorities. Instead of pouring the majority of our funds into widening highways, which often just induces more traffic, we should be investing in safety, transit, and accessibility. This means dedicating significant, reliable funding for pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, so that every community can build the sidewalks, protected bike lanes, and safe crossings it needs. It also means aggressively expanding our public transit options, from increasing Pace bus services to providing the 'last-mile' connections that get people from the Metra station to their homes and jobs without a car.

Finally, we need to shift from a 'predict and provide' model to a 'fix-it-first' and 'safety-first' approach. Let's prioritize maintaining the roads and bridges we already have and redesigning our most dangerous corridors to protect all road users. By doing this, we can create a transportation system that is not only safer and more efficient but also more equitable and sustainable for all of us aligned with our climate goals.

This fall, the Illinois General Assembly passed a historic investment in transit operations – as well as significant governance reforms in the establishment of the Northern Illinois Transit Authority. How do you view the Assembly’s role in ensuring both the short- and long-term success of this legislation?

Passing the historic transit bill was the starting line, not the finish line. The General Assembly’s most critical role now is rigorous oversight. Our job is to ensure the new funding is spent wisely and that the governance reforms are implemented effectively. We must be the watchdog for the public, holding the new Northern Illinois Transit Authority accountable and guaranteeing that these investments translate into a truly integrated, accessible, and reliable transit system for every rider.

What is your position on investing to expand passenger rail service in Illinois, including the development of high-speed rail?

Frankly, I find the conversation around high-speed rail in Illinois exasperating. For over 30 years, since the Chicago to St. Louis corridor was first designated for high-speed rail in 1992, we have been stuck in a cycle of endless studies and grand pronouncements with very little to show for it. We’ve spent millions on feasibility studies, like the one from the University of Illinois that estimated a cost of up to $50 billion for a 220-mph line, without ever having a serious conversation about how to actually fund it. After three decades, we finally have 110-mph trains on that route, which is an improvement, but it’s a far cry from the true high-speed rail that has been promised for generations.

My position is this: we need to stop chasing these pie-in-the-sky projects and focus on real, tangible investments that expand passenger rail service to communities that need it now. I am far more interested in the practical, achievable projects that are finally getting the funding they deserve. I’m talking about the nearly $1 billion commitment to restore service to Rockford and the Quad Cities, and to finally study a connection to Peoria. I’m talking about looking at extending Metra service to Kankakee.

These are not fantasies; they are common-sense connections that will boost local economies, give residents more transportation options, and take cars off our congested highways. This is where our energy and our dollars should be focused. Let’s build a robust, reliable network of 110-mph passenger rail that serves our entire state before we spend another 30 years talking about a 220-mph train that exists only on paper.

Federal funding for Illinois transportation projects – such as the Red Line Extension and Red-Purple Modernization projects – has come under threat from the Trump administration. How can legislators shore up funding for critical infrastructure projects under a hostile federal climate?

Federal funding for Illinois transportation projects – such as the Red Line Extension and Red-Purple Modernization projects – has come under threat from the Trump administration. How can legislators shore up funding for critical infrastructure projects under a hostile federal climate?

The hard truth is, we can’t rely on a hostile federal administration to be a reliable partner. The Trump administration didn’t outright ‘kill’ the Red Line Extension, but they did freeze $2.1 billion in funding, holding it hostage for political reasons. That’s not a partner you can count on to build generational infrastructure.

This is precisely why we have to get our own house in order. Illinois can barely pay its bills, so the idea of the state backfilling a multi-billion dollar federal commitment is daunting. But we can’t just throw our hands up and let critical projects die.

For me, the only responsible path forward is to finally pass the Fair Tax Amendment. We cannot keep going back to the same well and asking working families to pay more. A Fair Tax would allow us to raise the revenue we need for these massive projects by asking the wealthiest Illinoisans—those who have done exceptionally well—to pay their fair share. It’s the only way to create a large, sustainable, and state-controlled funding source that can weather any political storm in Washington. Without it, we’re simply at the mercy of who is in the White House, and our most important infrastructure projects will continue to be used as political footballs.