Fred Crespo: 2026 candidate for Illinois House District 44
Bio
Office sought: House District 44
Party: Democratic
City: Hoffman Estates
Age: 68
Previous offices held: Hoffman Estates Trustee
Q&A
What do you consider the three most pressing issues facing the state in the next four years, and how should they be addressed?
Property taxes and affordability are among the top concerns I hear from constituents, particularly seniors living on fixed incomes. Another important issue is how we manage the rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI) and related issues, including data centers.
More than 70% of a typical property tax bill goes toward education. That means addressing property taxes requires addressing how we fund our schools. Illinois’ Evidence-Based Funding model was designed to provide schools with the resources they need while reducing reliance on local property taxes. We must continue meeting our funding commitments and regularly review the formula to ensure it remains fair, equitable, and responsive to the needs of our students and schools.
At the same time, we must take affordability seriously. Illinois needs to control spending, eliminate waste and duplication, and identify savings before considering new taxes or fees. Responsible budgeting should be a priority, and available resources should be directed toward meaningful relief for families and seniors, including reducing the property tax burden.
AI offers tremendous opportunities, but its rapid development also raises important questions about safety, accountability, and oversight. We must consider the potential impact of AI on critical infrastructure, financial systems, education, and the workforce, as well as the risks associated with systems operating without adequate human oversight.
AI will continue to evolve, and our policies must keep pace. We need thoughtful, clearly defined safeguards that protect the public, establish accountability, and address the broader impacts of AI and data centers while allowing innovation and its benefits to continue.
How would you assess the General Assembly's handling, to date, of the various proposals surrounding a Chicago Bears stadium in Arlington Heights? What proposals would you have been willing to support and in what ways, if any, might you have approached it differently?
First, the state needs to establish a clear direction and decide whether the preferred location for a new Bears stadium is Arlington Heights or Chicago. We need a unified strategy rather than continuing negotiations without a clear decision on the state’s priorities.
Second, the Governor’s office should take the lead in negotiating with the Bears. Having the House and Senate operate in separate silos has not produced the coordinated approach needed to move this process forward. The state needs one unified negotiating strategy.
Third, the negotiating team must include suburban representation. Similar to the approach taken with the mass transit negotiations, the current top-level negotiating structure has been dominated by Chicago legislators. Every legislator has an obligation to represent their own district, the absence of suburban voices puts Arlington Heights and the Northwest suburbs at a disadvantage. Any negotiating team making decisions that affect the entire state should reflect the interests of the communities involved.
Finally, Illinois is competing with other states for businesses, and economic-development incentives have become increasingly common. However, any public investment associated with a Bears stadium should be carefully evaluated and limited to necessary infrastructure improvements that provide tangible, lasting benefits to the surrounding communities. Taxpayers should not be expected to subsidize a private development without a clear and measurable public benefit.
Now roughly three years into the elimination of cash bail in Illinois as part of the SAFE-T Act, how would you assess the success or failure of the criminal justice reform measure? What changes, if any, would you support?
Concerns raised by Cook County State’s Attorney Eileen O’Neill Burke, along with reform recommendations from the Illinois Supreme Court and Cook County’s Chief Judge, highlight serious issues with the state’s electronic monitoring program, which is one component of the SAFE-T Act.
The General Assembly has been too slow to respond. According to Cook County records, 79 individuals accused of murder or attempted murder and 154 individuals charged with sexual assault are on electronic monitoring. These numbers underscore the urgency of reform.
My position is clear: individuals charged with violent crimes should not be eligible for electronic monitoring when public safety is at risk. Judges should not have the discretion to use electronic monitoring as an alternative to detention in these cases. We must also consider the additional reforms proposed by the Cook County State’s Attorney and act promptly to address the concerns raised by law enforcement while maintaining appropriate judicial safeguards.
The Governor has expressed a willingness to consider changes, but the legislative caucus must also be willing to listen to law enforcement and seriously address their concerns. Public safety should not be a partisan issue. The General Assembly has a responsibility to act and ensure that, at a minimum, the electronic monitoring program adequately protects our communities.
Illinois homeowners face one of the highest relative property tax burdens in the country. What specific proposals could you offer to ease the burden on state residents?
As I stated to a previous question, more than 70% of a typical property tax bill goes toward education, so addressing high property taxes requires addressing how we fund our schools. As stated in a previous question the Illinois’ Evidence-Based Funding model, was designed to provide schools with the resources they need while reducing reliance on local property taxes. The state must continue meeting its Evidence-Based Funding commitments while regularly reviewing the formula to ensure it remains fair, equitable, and responsive to the needs of our schools and students.
Since 2019 I have introduced bills and have been advocating to limit how much school districts can raise taxes. The intent is to limit a school district’s ability to ask for higher taxes if the district’s cash reserves exceed 50% of their annual operating budget. My proposal coupled with ensuring that the state continues its commitment to adequately fund the Evidence-Based funding model should alleviate the property tax pressures our constituents are facing.
There are other steps we can take like the bill that I passed in 2019 which established that Senior Citizen Homestead Exemption would auto renew. The measure saved over 200,000 seniors from having to reapply annually, ensuring that they continued getting a reduction on their property taxes.
Gov. JB Pritzker recently paused a state initiative granting incentives to data center developers, and residents statewide have concerns about how such developments are affecting their access to water, utility rates, and the environment. How should the state approach data centers going forward?
Data centers play an important role in modern life. We rely on them for everything from GPS and internet access to electronic medical records and the many devices we use every day. At the same time, we must recognize their impact on our communities, particularly when it comes to water usage, noise, and higher utility costs.
We need to reconcile these competing concerns and make sure Illinois residents are the primary beneficiaries of data-center development. Before approving new data centers, we should fully evaluate their impact on water resources, the environment, and residential electricity rates.
Illinois is competing with other states for new businesses, and economic-development incentives have become increasingly common. But incentives should not be offered without strict accountability. Before the state provides an incentive, there should be an independent net-present-value analysis conducted by an outside accounting entity — not by the state or the entity seeking the incentive.
Any proposed incentive should be transparent and subject to public scrutiny. Illinois should welcome investment and new economic opportunities, but incentives should only be provided when the long-term benefits to taxpayers, communities, and the state clearly justify the cost.
Illinois’ “sanctuary” policies concerning immigration have made it a target for the Trump administration and critics who say they encourage criminal behavior. How do you feel about those policies, and how, if at all, would you change them?
The immigration challenges facing our country and states are the result of a broken federal immigration system. The previous administration’s border policies worsened the situation, while the current administration’s indiscriminate enforcement practices — including targeting people based on their appearance or the language they speak — are wrong, discriminatory, and not a solution.
I witnessed the consequences firsthand in Hoffman Estates on October 10, 2025, when ICE agents apprehended American citizens with no criminal records. Working with the Police Chief and my daughter, an attorney with immigration experience, we were able to help secure the release of some of those apprehended. What was especially troubling was seeing children caught in the middle of the chaos, frustration, and anger. No child should have to witness that kind of situation in their community. These actions do not make our neighborhoods safer or address the underlying causes of crime.
At the same time, we absolutely need effective policies to identify, apprehend, and hold accountable individuals who are in the country illegally and commit violent crimes. Protecting our communities must be a priority. Immigration enforcement should focus on legitimate public-safety threats and be carried out lawfully, based on evidence and individual conduct — not a person’s appearance, accent, or the language they speak.
The failure to develop a workable immigration policy has been a failure of both political parties at the federal level, leaving states and local governments to navigate the consequences.
Ultimately, immigration policy and border security require federal leadership. Local elected officials must work closely with their federal counterparts to pursue meaningful reforms that secure our borders, enforce the law fairly, protect civil rights, and strengthen public safety.
Many women in the legislature complain about a culture of sexual harassment in Springfield. Do you see evidence of this and, if so, what should be done about it?
The mishandling of the Representative Harry Benton sexual harassment case is an embarrassment for the Illinois House and raises serious questions about whether the legislature has done enough to prevent and address sexual harassment.
I have been clear about my position. In a Chicago Tribune op-ed, I called for the Speaker of the House to resign over his handling of the Benton case and, more importantly, his conduct toward women.
After the op-ed was published, other women, primarily lobbyists, reached out to me and expressed concerns about the need for change. Their experiences reinforce the importance of creating a workplace where everyone is treated with respect and sexual harassment is taken seriously.
Zero tolerance must mean more than words. It requires clear standards and consistent enforcement. Allegations must be investigated promptly, thoroughly, and impartially by an independent authority. Victims and those who report misconduct must be protected from retaliation, and the process must provide appropriate confidentiality and due process for everyone involved. Findings must be addressed transparently to the extent permitted by law, and substantiated misconduct must result in meaningful consequences, regardless of a person's position, seniority, or political affiliation.
I refuse to believe that I am the only Democrat who believes protecting victims must come before politics. I urge my colleagues to support these standards, investigate the concerns that have been raised, and demand accountability from House leadership.
A zero-tolerance policy must apply to everyone, including those at the highest levels of power. When leaders fail to take appropriate action to protect people from sexual harassment, there must be consequences. Otherwise, we are simply maintaining the status quo. Given the Speaker's handling of the Benton case and the concerns about his conduct toward women, I stand by my call for his resignation. The Illinois House must demonstrate through its actions — not just its words — that protecting people from sexual harassment is a priority.
Are you satisfied with the state's existing ethics policies for senators and representatives? If so, what about the policies should reassure Illinoisans that elected leaders abide by high standards? If not, what changes need to be made?
I have always supported strong, independent oversight through the Auditor General and Legislative Inspector General. The people of Illinois deserve a government that is transparent, accountable, and responsible with their tax dollars. No legislator should be above the rules, and no ethics watchdog should be subject to political pressure.
I support three concrete reforms to strengthen legislative accountability.
First, guarantee independent funding for the Legislative Inspector General. The office should have a statutory funding baseline so legislators cannot use the budget process to influence its work. An independent watchdog must have the resources to investigate misconduct without political interference.
Second, take politics out of legislative ethics oversight. The Legislative Ethics Commission should consist of independent, non-legislator members — not sitting lawmakers overseeing ethics matters involving their own colleagues. Ethics oversight must be impartial, independent, and credible.
Third, extend the deadline for filing ethics complaints against lawmakers from one year to two years. Potential misconduct does not always come to light immediately. Giving people more time to report concerns would help ensure that legitimate complaints are not dismissed simply because the current deadline has passed.
The bottom line is simple: accountability must apply to everyone, including those in power. Illinois needs an ethics system that operates independently, investigates complaints fairly, and holds public officials to the same standards of responsibility we expect from everyone else. Restoring public trust starts with meaningful reforms — not just promises.
No one should police their own conduct. No one should be above accountability.
What personal qualifications do you bring that would make you an effective legislator?
My 25 years of managerial experience in the private sector, combined with my years of experience in local and state government, have given me the leadership skills, practical experience, and knowledge needed to effectively represent the people of the 44th Legislative District.
As a state legislator, I have focused on delivering results and making government more accountable to taxpayers. I introduced and passed the Debt Transparency Act and the Grant Transparency and Accountability Act, which strengthen oversight of taxpayer dollars and hold state agencies accountable for the use of public funds, helping to protect against fraud, waste, and misuse.
I have also worked to bring state resources back to our communities. I was instrumental in securing funding for the Barrington Road Interchange, which has served as a catalyst for economic development throughout the Northwest suburbs. I also secured funding for St. Alexius Women and Children’s Hospital, helping improve its ability to provide critical services to families in our community.
My approach has always been straightforward: bring my private-sector experience into government, work collaboratively, protect taxpayer dollars, and deliver tangible results for the communities I represent.