Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Talk amongst yourselves
Next Post: Sen. Kirk once again retracts a statement
Posted in:
* The First Appellate District ruled today that the trial judge in the state employee payroll case failed to do two things.
First, Cook County Judge Diane Larson failed to limit the duration of her TRO forbidding the state from making payroll.
Second, Judge Larson failed to “balance harms” between workers not getting paid and checks being issued without an actual appropriation.
The justices seemed to hint that the balance ought to be in favor of the workers, but didn’t actually say so.
Click here to read the opinion.
The bottom line is, unless and until the Illinois Supreme Court acts (or unless the trial judge follows all the rules and comes up with the same TRO), state workers are gonna get paid.
…Adding… Comptroller Munger…
“Today’s ruling removes any conflict between Court decisions and allows my office to continue paying all state employees for their work. My priority has consistently been to comply with federal mandates and do everything in my power under the law to pay workers for services they are already providing the state. Time will tell what, if any, additional Court action occurs but I remain confident that paying state employees for their work is the legal, fiscally responsible and right thing to do.”
*** UPDATE *** From the attorney general’s office…
The Appellate Court’s order means that there will be additional proceedings before a final decision will be made. Further, and more importantly, it means that the State will continue to operate without a budget and with a high degree of uncertainty, which could be quickly remedied if Governor and the Legislature would fulfill their duty to enact a budget.
Not a whole lot there.
posted by Rich Miller
Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:12 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Talk amongst yourselves
Next Post: Sen. Kirk once again retracts a statement
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Bam!
Comment by OneMan Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:15 pm
At least it’s good news for now for our friends here.
Comment by A guy Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:16 pm
So we’re back to square one…
I can hear Lance Trover already…”Making progress for state workers…”
Comment by Commonsense in Illinois Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:16 pm
So does Lisa Madigan continue to tilt at this particular windmill, or give in and let people be paid?
Comment by so... Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:20 pm
It’s not lost on me that Governor Rauner didn’t think it was “worth it” to AV so state employees get paid, and rails on the overpaid employees to boot…
… but, make no mistake, Rauner, whose own laziness and not wanting to own anything, started this legal train wreck of going around a fearful governor’s lack of finding… “worth”.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:21 pm
there are still other actions filed that could stop the comptroller though,this is just a small battle in the whole war.
Comment by Allen D Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:25 pm
Good decision!
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:25 pm
Oswego Willy — I can’t parse your 2:21 comments. How about a re-do?
Comment by OldIllini Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:26 pm
===Even if that’s what your dad wants.===
You can argue the merits of either side of the decision, or be John Kass. You can’t do both…
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:27 pm
My question is …. how long can we continue to pay all the workers with not budget appropriations in place?… Honest question, can anyone answer please…
Comment by Allen D Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:29 pm
And nothing prevents Judge Larson from issuing a two-week (or whatever) TRO and having a hearing on the balancing issue. Plus, the ISC still has the issue. My non-litigator brain is whirling.
Comment by Archiesmom Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:31 pm
==My question is …. how long can we continue to pay all the workers with not budget appropriations in place?… Honest question, can anyone answer please…==
Indefinitely, in theory. Money’s still being collected. Appropriations are just an authority to spend it.
Comment by so... Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:32 pm
Vacuous. So individual hardships trump illegal action by a State Officer.
Comment by Anon III Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:35 pm
I guess your right…. good for us workers, I guess that means we are re-writing the state constitution now, since we are going against it.
Comment by Allen D Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:35 pm
I’m surprised it took this long for the Appellate Court decide this case if it wasn’t going to decide the case on the merits. Its a pretty quick opinion to write once the Court decides that the formalities for a TRO weren’t satisfied and an evidentiary hearing is necessary.
An evidentiary hearing on the claims that it would take a year to determine FLSA status will be interesting.
My guess is the AG will continue to pursue the case because it doesn’t look like Illinois will have a new budget for a couple of months. With this issue arising 3 time in 10 years, a precedential decision from the Appellate or Supreme would be helpful.
Comment by Uptown Lawyer Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:35 pm
Still doesn’t help Durkin and his crew…they voted against it. TWICE!
Comment by dawn Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:36 pm
I wish Illinois would operate as a government of law and not of the wishes of officials. The Feds cannot pay without appropriation and neither can any other state. Seems twisted to me to do otherwise.
Comment by Ben Franklin Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:36 pm
I am just more of a “by the book” kind of person, and if you are wanting to do something different then you change the rules for everyone first instead of breaking them….
Comment by Allen D Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:37 pm
So much for those all-powerful and compelling “constitutional” arguments by team Madigan. Mabey now Madigan will come to the table and comprimise.
Comment by just a citizen Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:38 pm
@ Ben Franklin —- EXACTLY what I was saying!!!!
Comment by Allen D Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:38 pm
AMEN
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:38 pm
I suspect a NEW TRO will be filed for today or at the latest tomorrow..
Comment by Allen D Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:40 pm
After skimming the 1st District Order, I think it’s worth pointing out a few things to add some context. Yes, the TRO was vacated, but
1. The cause was remanded to the trial court for further proceedings. The crux of the appellate court’s ruling was that the trial court did not follow the right statutory procedure in issuing the TRO by failing to issue factual findings in support of the TRO and by omitting an expiration date. Presumably the court would not object to a TRO that more carefully followed the statutory procedures.
2. The Order was vacated “without prejudice” - presumably if the trial court were to reissue a TRO following the applicable statutory framework the court would uphold it
3. The Appellate Court was very careful to say that today’s holding has NO effect upon the separate agreed interim order which specifically authorized payments pursuant to continuing appropriations, payments for the judicial branch, etc.
I am thinking that if the AG goes back before the trial court for further proceedings following the Appellate Court’s guidance, the trial court could enter a new TRO with an expiration date and supportive factual findings which the Appellate Court would sustain.
Comment by Lou Holtz Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:41 pm
“- Allen D - Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:37 pm:
I am just more of a “by the book” kind of person, and if you are wanting to do something different then you change the rules for everyone first instead of breaking them….”
Then you should rethink your illegal thoughts on the Pension.
You are not consistent.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:44 pm
Madigan is running out of tactics to avoid comprimise. He can only play the obstructionist game for so long before people see his tactics for what they really are.
Comment by Nobody important Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:44 pm
You cannot argue here that the constitution means exactly what it says, no balancing of hardships, regarding the pension clause, but infer a balancing of the hardships exception to the no expenditures without an appropriation clause. If the Supreme Court is going to be consistent, they should take this case immediately and reverse the appellate court.
Comment by Rasselas Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:44 pm
It looks like the anti-state worker crowd is out in full force today
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:48 pm
Rasselas -
After the US Supreme court ruled that the plain language of laws does not mean what it says….your argument became obsolete!
Comment by Just a lawyer ... Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:49 pm
===anti-state worker crowd is out in full force===
Another drive-by victimhood comment.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:49 pm
K-12, payroll, comtinuing approps., consent decrees, — anyone have a ballpark percentage of how much of FY16 is a go right now?
Comment by Wordslinger Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:50 pm
Oswego-
If you were just an average middle class state worker, and it was your paycheck and abillity to feed your family at stake, you might feel differently. Ideology is one thing. But state workers are victims here.
Comment by regular guy Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:53 pm
===Madigan is running out of tactics to avoid comprimise.===
My thought is that Madigan and others - the four tops, perhaps - are crafting a balanced budget as we speak. They are working on a plan, complete with new sources of revenue, that would be acceptable to the number Demos and Repubs needed to override any Rauner veto, thereby by-passing the foolish “Turnaround Agenda” add-on. Such an action would not only put a responsible budget in place, it would leave Rauner and his crew out in the cold for some time to come.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:54 pm
Tassels, the balancing is required as part of the injunctive process, not the ultimate merits of the case. Your analogy is incorrect.
Comment by Archiesmom Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:56 pm
Madigan is running out of tactics to avoid comprimise.”
What kind of compromise are you anticipating?
And what does that have to do with this payroll decision?
Comment by Politix Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:56 pm
To my comment above. Autocorrect strikes again - addressed to Rasselas, not Tassels!
Comment by Archiesmom Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:57 pm
As a state worker, it would stink, but they shouldn’t pay us without an appropriation. I can’t only agree with rulings when they benefit me.
Comment by CharlieKratos Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:57 pm
Anonymous @2:54 - I hope to God you are right.
Comment by Politix Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:59 pm
OW,
It seems you don’t know much about the legislative process. There is a very, very good reason the Gov did a full veto rather than a line-item or AV veto.
Comment by Tasty Grouper Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:59 pm
The Governor needs to take a minute to consider what this means. If operations is one of the biggest parts of the budget, and lack of any progress on a budget compromise means multiple more pay periods for all state workers, the longer this takes, the more harsh the cuts will have to be on the programming side - meaning those who need it most.
Having many friends reliant on the income from their mid-level state jobs, I understand the concern for them and their families, but it’s puzzling to me that no state budget is now, in effect, an extension of existing payrolls indefinitely. Huh?
So, in the future, the best way to keep what you want in the budget is to wait as long as you possibly can to agree on a budget? Only in Illinois.
Comment by Anon Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:59 pm
===If you were just an average middle class state worker, and it was your paycheck and abillity to feed your family at stake, you might feel differently. Ideology is one thing. But state workers are victims here.===
Rauner made you victims. Rauner thinks very little about you too. It’s not that I don’t feel differently, or I don’t “understand” or worse don’t care…
… what is going on is the Illinois Agencies top, top, boss… thinks you should be hostages, and then thought twice about it, and it was too late.
Rauner could AV the Bill to pay state workers, but then not fund Social Service type of funding…
Governing is difficult.
Enough.
Governor, do your job.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:00 pm
- Tasty Grouper -
Why? Use your words, please…
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:02 pm
- Tasty Grouper -,
While your puttin’ the think in the why, add in why schools got the AV, and state employees didn’t.
Don’t hurt yourself..,
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:04 pm
@ Kratos Right on!!!
@ regularGuy: this budget issue crisis is part of every govt entity. Govt employees accept that risk when they sign up. This GOV made it probable and such games should not be a surprise.
Comment by Notta Fan Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:06 pm
==The justices seemed to hint that the balance ought to be in favor of the workers, but didn’t actually say so.==
This. If it was just a ruling that the County has to follow proper procedure, they could have ruled so without mentioning the details of balancing hardships. They went out of their way to point out that must be done.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:07 pm
Interesting precedent being established here - I guess it’s nice to know that government employees will continue to get paid first - without regard to the appropriations process - even if the court is one day required to order that a pension payment be made.
Comment by Groth Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:07 pm
OW -
It’s team Madigan playing with state worker lives. They will remember it at the ballot box in the future.
Comment by regular guy Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:07 pm
Tasty Grouper @ 2:59: what is the “very good reason” Rauner did a full vetoe rather than an AV? His pen was running out of ink.
Comment by Yossarian Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:08 pm
From a procedural standpoint, the court seems to have ruled correctly. They also dropped a few hints for the parties and the circuit court judge to consider. But this does beg the question as to the expiration of any future TRO orders.
Does this force the circuit court to issue a TRO for each pay period following a hearing? Does a separate complaint need to be filed for each pay period? Does the judge need to judge the hardships and liabilities of the paychecks, the payees and payor each and every time in each and every case and in each and every payroll date?
From my limited experience with TRO’s, the answer is “probably yes.”
It looks like we are heading for an ultimate pay the state workers’ decision here.
Comment by Louis G Atsaves Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:08 pm
===It’s team Madigan playing with state worker lives. They will remember it at the ballot box in the future.===
Yeah, but it seemed the people protesting the closing of the state museum, they might disagree… Governors own.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:10 pm
tasty - the Governor himself saud he didn’t do line item vetoes ‘ because it wasn’t worth it’.
Comment by Thoughts Matter Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:10 pm
“It’s team Madigan playing with state worker lives. They will remember it at the ballot box in the future.”
You’ve got to be trolling.
Comment by Politix Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:10 pm
@ Anonamouse - it is not illegal to have a thought …. yet, are you the thought police? I want what is best for the STATE to make is great again, where I can say … Yes, I am from IL without and be proud of how the state has turned around and businesses are thriving and people are flocking back to IL. not another broke state at the bottom of the barrel with no end in sight state. where is the pride there… I was in GA on vacation and people actually said they were sorry when I said I was from IL. I could say anything.
Comment by Allen D Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:11 pm
Oh, the backtracking, word parsing and rhetorical gymnastics undertaken by many here (and, of course, the AG) to explain away a resounding legal & political beat-down. The Gov and Comptroller have always said they want to pay state workers. And they right about it. Then and now. So, I know it’s hard for many here, but say it with me … “the Gov. won this one.”
Comment by Georg Sande Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:13 pm
What will happen when 65,000 state workers, plus their family and close friends each put up am average of $50 to find team Madagan opponents? Can you say millions?
Comment by an idea Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:13 pm
- an idea -,
Then the $60 million allocated by Rauner to do that will be the tip money used when Rauner’s Crew meets during the campaign to talk about gutting state employees.
Money isn’t the issue…
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:16 pm
Oh I am certain the Governor is breaking open the champagne as we speak.
/s
Comment by Politix Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:16 pm
“- Rich Miller - Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 2:49 pm:
===anti-state worker crowd is out in full force===
Another drive-by victimhood comment.”
I know it’s your blog but I am not a victim. I strongly disagree with you on this one.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:18 pm
@anon 2:59
Payment of state workers ultimately shouldn’t affect the budget negotiations. It’s not like state workers are getting more money then they would have gotten. They’re just now getting it on time. It doesn’t affect the amount in the budget.
Comment by Ferris Wheel Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:22 pm
This is BS. Yes, Rauner is playing games with the lives of real people. Yes, Madigan is playing games with the lives of real people. Rauner is doing what other executives have done, and are doing. He is acting outside the law. This is making folks on the other side unhappy. Plans are afoot that will attempt to pin his ears back. Court hearings up to the supremes have occurred and will occur. And games will be played by both sides. Not for the betterment of the residents of this state and/or the taxpayers of this state. It is all about the acquisition of power and the means by which it is secured, preserved and expanded. And that, ladies and gentlemen, is politics. What I would give for a few statesmen to counter the effects of these politicians.
Comment by dupage dan Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:26 pm
Word, to you question, with Pensions, ISBE, the courts and General Assembly, consent decrees at DCFS and DHS (which I estimating a billion at DHS, it could be far more, it could be far less depending on how compliance is being interpreted), 4.5 billion for transfers out and debt service, and the Governor’s signature of the ISBE bill, I am assuming they have $20 billion committed so far.
Comment by Juice Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:27 pm
‘If you were just an average middle class state worker, and it was your paycheck and ability to feed your family at stake, you might feel differently.’
Doesn’t this argument apply just as well the hundreds of thousands of non-state workers who do work for the state via contract? Those employees also have families, mortgages, and bills. Quite a few of those employers are closing or laying off/getting ready to lay off large numbers of employees because they cannot bill and are running out of money because of no budget.
Comment by zatoichi Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:27 pm
===The Gov and Comptroller have always said they want to pay state workers. And they right about it.===
Then why didn’t the Governor AV state workers’ pay like the K-12 Ed Approp? It wasn’t “worth it”
Rauner’s words.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:28 pm
George Sande
You do know that this appellate decision is only the intermission or the end of the first half. The finale is the IL Supreme Court. Briefs are due the 20th might want to wait before claiming your hero wins. After all how many nfl games are lost in the last 2 minutes?
Comment by Mason born Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:28 pm
Willie, I believe the guv signed the K-12 approp as passed.
If I recall, he said he had wanted to spend more than the bill that was passed, but an AV allows for reductions, not increases.
As this goes on and the heat gets turned up by those who haven’t been included yet in FY16 funding, I suspect we’re going to see a slew of new approp bills.
How everyone handles the heat will tell the tale. Given the K-12 debacle between the guv and the GOP caucuses, I’d be requiring a pinky-swear that the guv will veto anything he instructs me to vote against.
Comment by Wordslinger Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:31 pm
I challenge anyone to articulate one single benefit to this state from withholding state workers pay until the correct name is written on the correct piece of paper. There isn’t one. And please don’t say to protect the integrity of the Illinois constitution. It’s not like that document includes a Bill of Rights or a list of universal and inalienable freedoms we must protect. It’s basically a technical document that guides the administration of the state, and I might add, allows for it to be administered in a lopsided and corrupt manner.
Comment by Menard Guy Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:34 pm
I have to laugh at the argument that Speaker is going to take the heat for this. Unless you have an uniformed worker or are one of the committed superstar staffers, they understand that this is Rauner’s impasse. Rauner is holding up the budget to curtail their rights.
Comment by Norseman Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:35 pm
BTW, where is Raymond Poe on this issue?????
Comment by Menard Guy Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:40 pm
Hopefully the courts will again protect state employees from Madigan’s poor judgment, as in the pension action.
Comment by SAD Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:41 pm
===Willie, I believe the guv signed the K-12 approp as passed===
Correct, apologies. Straight sign.
===Given the K-12 debacle between the guv and the GOP caucuses, I’d be requiring a pinky-swear that the guv will veto anything he instructs me to vote against.===
That will be where trust really comes back to the governor
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:43 pm
@Menard guy: well if the constitution doesn’t matter then the constitutionally guaranteed to be undiminished pension benefit becomes a lot less sacrosanct, no?
Comment by hisgirlfriday Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:43 pm
Menard Guy - have you ever read the Illinois Constitution? How about Article I, the Bill of Rights? It’s online; take a few minutes and get educated, please.
Comment by Archiesmom Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:45 pm
Laughable legal logic. When the language of the Constitution is clear as in this case a balancing test is not required. With respect to the duration of the TRO, the Appellate court could have very simply set one - its already implied, i.e., until the full hearing at the Circuit court level is completed. The Supremes must reverse - and soon - otherwise the Courts are goig to lose a whole lot of Credibility and ironically prove Rauner’s claim that they are part of a “corrupt system”
Comment by old-pol Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:46 pm
-regular guy-,
State workers are victims here, partially as a result of the GA’s failure to pass a balanced budget, Rauner and Madigan’s failure to compromise, and years of reckless state management. The old way of doing things, the old way that got us here, is broken.
Comment by SAD Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:48 pm
And try this for a preamble to a technical document related to state administration. I happen to know and believe in that Constitution, and this is one of the reasons why:
We, the People of the State of Illinois - grateful to
Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberty
which He has permitted us to enjoy and seeking His blessing
upon our endeavors - in order to provide for the health,
safety and welfare of the people; maintain a representative
and orderly government; eliminate poverty and inequality;
assure legal, social and economic justice; provide
opportunity for the fullest development of the individual;
insure domestic tranquility; provide for the common defense;
and secure the blessings of freedom and liberty to ourselves
and our posterity - do ordain and establish this Constitution
for the State of Illinois.
(Source: Illinois Constitution.)
Comment by Archiesmom Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:50 pm
Norse, the schizo quality of Tne Bots regarding state employees is fascinating to watch.
On the one hand, they want to beat them to a pulp in contract negotiations, push them out of their pensions, and put the unions out of business because they’re a bunch of overpaid political hacks.
On the other hand, they’re marching arm in arm with the corrupt union bosses to court singing “Solidarity Forever” demanding that tneir brothers and sisters get paid without an approp.
And best of all, those contradictory positions are all based on the deepest and purest of principles, lol.
On the
Comment by Wordslinger Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:50 pm
Oswego Willy -
Call it a day. Munger wins this round. Stop hyperventillating!
Comment by DuPage Don Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:50 pm
- Dupage Don -,
I’m actually enjoying to Open Golf… thanks for your concern, lol
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:52 pm
Menard Guy, first of all, Article 1 of the Constitution is in fact titled “Bill of Rights”, so you’re wrong on that front.
It could be argued that not for profits and vendors with the state are harmed by employees getting paid in that a pressure point that the Constitution envisioned to enoucrage agreement is being ignored, meaning they will have to go even longer without getting paid. In addition to that, it will inevitably have an impact on the people they serve. So people with mental illness, the disabled, elderly etc are being harmed.
And I’m sorry about the fact that you have little regard for our constitution, but it’s a document that was approved not by some old crusty white guys in a smoke filled room, but it was approved by the people, collectively, and I at least think that does in fact matter. And this attempt to go around the law raises enormous separation of powers concerns. I’m sorry that that reality has a negative consequence for state workers, but why should state workers be treated differently than every other entity that has an expectation of receiving funds from the state?
Comment by Juice Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:55 pm
What does Biss have to say? Since he wants to be Comptroller and all…
Comment by SAD Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:59 pm
Right now this is great news for the state workers! Enjoy your victory, but don’t forget the legal opinion could change again.
Comment by Mama Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 4:03 pm
Word, you are so correct. It’s frustrating to think of anyone falling for Rauner’s new-found care of state employees. I think the Rauner principle involved here is to do whatever U-turn is necessary to protect the boss’ popularity.
Comment by Norseman Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 4:06 pm
Govt employees accept that risk when they sign up.
Uhh no, I’ve been a US Navy officer and I DID know what I was signing up for. When I became a civil servant I did not expect to be in this spot. There is no why ANYONE could have predicted this!
Comment by Honeybear Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 4:07 pm
==The old way of doing things, the old way that got us here, is broken.==
No offense, but the new way of doing things doesn’t look all that great either. Unless you enjoy staring contests, foot stomping, and protracted legal battles over every detail of state government operations.
Comment by Lester Holt's Mustache Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 4:09 pm
Guy: We tire of your recent parlays of sympathy for state employees. You’ve carried *way* too much water for the Raunerite agenda to act so sweet and cuddly.
Comment by Cuddles Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 4:15 pm
Doh!
http://www.illinoiscourts.gov/SupremeCourt/SpecialMatters/2015/071715_119525_ORDER.pdf
Game, set … see you in 6 months or so for the “match.” But in the meantime, state workers get paid. Just as Munger & Rauner said. #RaunerOverMadigans
Comment by Georg Sande Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 4:21 pm
–Govt employees accept that risk when they sign up.–
nope. nope. nope. gov’t employees do not expect to have to go to work, but not know when they will get paid.
we might expect potential lay offs when things are cut, but this was not that.
Comment by anon Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 4:31 pm
== with Pensions, ISBE, the courts and General Assembly, consent decrees at DCFS and DHS (which I estimating a billion at DHS, it could be far more, it could be far less depending on how compliance is being interpreted), 4.5 billion for transfers out and debt service, and the Governor’s signature of the ISBE bill, I am assuming they have $20 billion committed so far. ==
-Juice-, I think you misunderstand on the pensions. The actual payment of the pension checks come out of the 5 pension system trust funds; they are not part of the FY16 budget. What is part of the FY16 budget is the payments INTO the 5 pension funds, the amount of which are not yet in any part of what has been signed.
Comment by RNUG Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 4:31 pm
– … do whatever U-Turn is necessary to protect the boss’ popularity.–
Norse, that’s the pattern up to now. Lousy way to bluff at poker.
As someone noted above, as elements of the budget find save haven, the revenue squeeze on the remainder will be that more severe going forward.
It’s only going to get hotter, for the governor and, increasingly, individual legislators when vendors in their districts stop getting paid.
Comment by Wordslinger Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 4:33 pm
–Payment of state workers ultimately shouldn’t affect the budget negotiations. It’s not like state workers are getting more money then they would have gotten. They’re just now getting it on time. It doesn’t affect the amount in the budget.–
That’s true as long as no program or agency and its subsequent employees is on the chopping block. That’s a leap of faith WAY to large to trust with this bunch - either side - just yet.
Comment by Anon 2:59 Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 4:38 pm
RNUG, there is a continuing approp for the payments to all five systems that will get triggered, as well as for TRIP and CIP. In addition, the TRS payment was included in the ISBE bill.
The language from statute. “(b) There is hereby appropriated from the General Revenue Fund to the State Universities Retirement System, on a continuing monthly basis, the amount, if any, by which the total available amount of all other appropriations to that retirement system for the payment of State contributions, including any deficiency in the required contributions of the optional retirement program established under Section 15-158.2 of the Illinois Pension Code, is less than the total amount of the vouchers for required State contributions lawfully submitted by the retirement system for that month under Section 15-165 of the Illinois Pension Code.”
Comment by Juice Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 4:39 pm
“- Juice - Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 3:55 pm:”
You are wrong. Nobody gets hurt by State workers who are doing work getting paid for their work, bub.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 4:40 pm
-Juice-, yes the CA specifies a minimum amount but … that is not the contribution amount required by the ramp, just enough of an amount for the state to, effectively speaking, match the employee contributions. The difference between those two numbers is several billion.
Comment by RNUG Friday, Jul 17, 15 @ 4:51 pm