Question of the day
Thursday, May 1, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Reboot…
The Chicago pension bill backed by Mayor Rahm Emanuel and passed by Springfield is sitting on Gov. Pat Quinn’s desk, and the governor is in no hurry to sign it. […]
Quinn doesn’t want to sign off on legislation that could possibly lead to an increase in property taxes for Chicagoans, especially after he trumpeted property tax relief in his 2014 budget address. Instead, Quinn proposed giving out extra tax revenue in the state to municipalities in need of pension fixes, including Chicago.
Emanuel has no problem with the governor sharing a greater amount of the state income tax revenue with municipalities, but that won’t replace the need to raise property taxes in Chicago, he said.
* The Question: What do you think Gov. Quinn will do with the Chicago pension reform bill? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
surveys
- Tsavo - Thursday, May 1, 14 @ 11:27 am:
He won’t sign the bill and it will become law after 60 days without his signature. Now if I can only predict the Kentucky Derby winner.
- VanillaMan - Thursday, May 1, 14 @ 11:29 am:
What bill?
Was there a bill I needed to sign?
What did it do?
OH THAT’S AWFUL! When I am reelected I will ensure that those property tax increases are gone!
- Formerly Known As... - Thursday, May 1, 14 @ 11:41 am:
Voted “B” - Won’t find and/or implement a new revenue stream, but sign it anyway.
He’ll give Rahm wants he wants in this regard, and he knows labor voters won’t flock to Rauner if he signs it. He also won’t have any useful new ideas to offer, as usual, so no new revenue stream.
As for taxes, it seems a bit difficult to pin a vote raising taxes on Quinn after the legislative language was changed from ordering the city to implement a tax hike. This is now the City of Chicago’s choice and their business. If I understand and recall correctly, they can vote to raise property taxes whether Quinn signs this bill or not.
- RNUG - Thursday, May 1, 14 @ 11:42 am:
Choice # 4 - Ignore the bill until it becomes law by default w/o his signature.
- Bring Back Boone's - Thursday, May 1, 14 @ 11:47 am:
I actually think that PQ has the upper hand here. Rahm needs that thing signed and if PQ drags his heels long enough I think Rahm will work with him on the funding- especially if it comes from Spfld.
- Mason born - Thursday, May 1, 14 @ 11:54 am:
Although not an option I thinl RNUG is right he ignores it till he doesn’t have to make a decision.
- Bob K. - Thursday, May 1, 14 @ 12:00 pm:
voted “b”
Quinn really blew this — he snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. He could have claimed credit for getting Rahm to amend the bill and remove the property tax language and signed the bill the second it hit his desk.
- bigdaddygeo - Thursday, May 1, 14 @ 12:07 pm:
Amendatory veto and send it back to GA with some not important provision that “reduces property tax increases for everyone.” Spring session ends in 30 days, right? Kick the can until after the election and stay on the stump telling prospective voters that the legislature needs to do more for retirees and tax payers.
- Keyser Soze - Thursday, May 1, 14 @ 12:11 pm:
What, you’re waiting for a PQ solution?
- DuPage - Thursday, May 1, 14 @ 12:21 pm:
Where does Quinn think he is going to get money to send to municipalities? “Extra money” from the state sales tax? What extra? The last I heard, the state is short of what it needs to pay it’s own bills.
- WhoKnew - Thursday, May 1, 14 @ 12:25 pm:
Voted for Number 3 -Then read Tsavo and RNUGs thoughts. Tended to agree, when along comes biddaddygeo’s idea. Now I’m really conflicted!
- A guy... - Thursday, May 1, 14 @ 12:43 pm:
===RNUG - Thursday, May 1, 14 @ 11:42 am:
Choice # 4 - Ignore the bill until it becomes law by default w/o his signature.===
Had no choices I could vote for listed. I think I agree with RNUG on this one. It’s the closest option to “do nothing”. Even though doing nothing is absolutely doing something in this case.
- rolling meadows - Thursday, May 1, 14 @ 12:59 pm:
Won’t find and/or impelent a new revenue stream and veto it, either outright or as a rewrite
Veto it. Not my problem deal with it
- Person 8 - Thursday, May 1, 14 @ 2:27 pm:
Few days ago I was thinking about this and concluded that he would wait the 60 days, allow it to pass, but not put his name on it.
So agree with RUNG.
- Tom Joad - Thursday, May 1, 14 @ 2:47 pm:
The bill will be amenditorily vetoed and voted on after the election. The new source of income for pensions will come from TIF money being freed up.
- Rich Miller - Thursday, May 1, 14 @ 2:51 pm:
===The bill will be amenditorily vetoed and voted on after the election===
I don’t think the situation can wait that long. Chicago is a tick or two away from junk bond status.
- Mokenavince - Thursday, May 1, 14 @ 9:40 pm:
Quinn will fiddle while Chicago burns. The man is useless as a Governor.
- downstate commissioner - Thursday, May 1, 14 @ 9:43 pm:
Why wasn’t option #4 listed? I didn’t vote because I dimly remembered something along that line…
- northernwatersports - Friday, May 2, 14 @ 7:36 am:
Chose #3, but….
He’ll veto it outright….its Rahmanators problem.
He’ll continue to champion the ‘reduce property taxes’ fantasy….
He’ll let Rahm and Chicago alderman wear the jacket because it was theirs to wear all along. They always have had the ability and the right to raise property taxes (or any other taxes) to fix their problems. They skirted their obligations for years under Daley, and now with their new leader, are going to have to pay-up.
Alternatively, they will probably tap into the slush fund that is TIF money. Really…how long does anyone think that those huge piles of money were gonna sit there, being held back from every other taxing body, and not get used to bail out the City in some way, shape or form?
- Frosty The Snowman - Friday, May 2, 14 @ 9:06 am:
Behold! Benign neglect will take place. This is something that will accidentally fall through the cracks on Quinn’s desk and won’t be rediscovered until after the election in November.
- Just The Way It Is One - Friday, May 2, 14 @ 1:50 pm:
I think he’ll find a new revenue stream by providing Chicago with a bigger chunk of State Income Tax Revenues, heretofore unavailable, and then veto the bill or rewrite it to prevent any raise in property taxes, which Pat Quinn is adamantly opposed to. (So, technically, I voted for None of the Above)…!