One notion that’s become evident over the years of observation is that government is about drawing lines.

This is readily apparent with respect to the interplay between the legislative and judicial branches, through which we require judges to introduce clarity when laws are vague. But it’s also as simple as establishing basic functions, like speed limits or when the post office is open.

I’d not quite applied this concept to the government’s role in wooing private development, but that was before I dug into House Bill 4508 and read an endorsement from John Atkinson, chairman of the Illinois Economic Development Corp.

State Rep. Jay Hoffman, D-Swansea, introduced the bill in May. It landed directly in the Rules Committee and hasn’t moved. Atkinson generated new attention with a recent Chicago Tribune essay titled “The tool Illinois needs to compete for megaprojects.”

This bill draws a bright line establishing how much money a private company must pledge to access certain privileges. The top line numbers are $100 million invested and a commitment to stay in place for 20 years. With that, companies could negotiate property tax agreements with cities, counties, schools and so forth, among other considerations.

“This is not a one-sided incentive,” Atkinson wrote. “Built into the legislation is the requirement that agreements must be reviewed and approved by representatives of school districts, park districts and other taxing bodies, ensuring accountability and guaranteeing that communities benefit alongside companies. If no agreement is reached, neither side is obligated to proceed.”

Anyone would appreciate the cost stability such an arrangement promises, but most everyone operates under the usual conditions: everything costs more year after year, and the hope is to keep income running at or ahead of expenses. And the fact that local officials would be allowed to review and approve agreements is no guarantee that they will make good deals.

Atkinson’s essay alludes to developments like “semiconductor and electric vehicle plants, to quantum campuses, advanced logistics hubs and the clean-tech facilities powering the industries of tomorrow” and says nothing about professional football teams valued at nearly $9 billion, but it only serves to include such an enterprise on the short list of entities with megaproject-type spending power.

The law commits the state to nothing but granting a new privilege to businesses on the correct side of this line. It’s important to remember that any development at this scale necessarily impacts public resources, even if just transportation infrastructure and emergency response. Someone somewhere pays for those things, which demands acknowledgement of downstream budget implications.

Letting every taxpayer negotiate individual deals with public bodies would be beyond absurd. Extending that option to megaprojects may well be good government and good business. Is this where we want to draw the line?

• Scott T. Holland writes about state government issues for Shaw Local News Network. He can be reached at sholland@shawmedia.com.