Daley to Quinn: Give us our money
Wednesday, Mar 18, 2009 - Posted by Rich Miller
* You knew this was going to happen sooner or later. It happened sooner. Mayor Daley is turning a big thumbs down on a Gov. Quinn’s plan not to share the wealth of any state income tax hike with municipalities…
(T)he mayor slammed the door on the governor’s controversial plan–disclosed this week by the Chicago Sun-Times–to withhold the 10 percent stake municipalities would expect to see in additional revenues from an income tax increase.
For Daley, the proposal could not come at a more difficult time.
Nose diving tax revenues tied to the prolonged recession threaten to poke a $200 million hole in the mayor’s 2009 budget. That could mean another round of employee layoffs on top of the 420 job cuts that took effect Dec. 31.
“Any reduction in revenue from the state income tax to local government will only increase the pressure on local governments to raise taxes, something we must work to avoid during these tough economic times,” Daley said at a City Hall news conference.
Daley demanded that the legislature “maintain its commitment to support local government.” He said the battle over the municipal share of the Illinois income tax was “a statewide issue fought many years ago” by Democratic, Independent and Republican mayors and should not be waged again.
It’s not a “reduction” if the city isn’t getting its share of a tax increase, but whatever. You get the idea.
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Wednesday, Mar 18, 09 @ 9:44 am:
Quinn to Daley: Back my tax hike.
LOL
- Ghost - Wednesday, Mar 18, 09 @ 9:47 am:
Daley: “I just want to wet my beak a little.”
- John Bambenek - Wednesday, Mar 18, 09 @ 9:48 am:
The feeding frenzy begins.
By the time its over we’ll need a tax hike to deal with the deficit that was left unaddressed because of the various interests looking for their cut of the taxpayers wallet.
- Dan S, a Voter, Taxpayer and Cubs Fan - Wednesday, Mar 18, 09 @ 9:53 am:
Just like a 3 year old screaming for a cookie when being told no. NO means NO Mayor, you are a city official nothing more.
- The Doc - Wednesday, Mar 18, 09 @ 9:57 am:
Daley should shut his yapper if he’s too cowardly to endorse or oppose Quinn’s budget proposal.
Setting the table for a local tax increase shouldn’t be tolerated from an administration that has enacted a slew of taxes, fines and fees to feed a bloated and mismanaged fiefdom.
- Cassandra - Wednesday, Mar 18, 09 @ 9:58 am:
I don’t think it’s just Daley who’ll be complaining. There are a lot of municipal officials whose political support is important to legislators seeking re-election. They’ll all be on the phone to those legislators after the budget address, I’m sure.
- Collar Observer - Wednesday, Mar 18, 09 @ 10:21 am:
So can we pay the bills so that Daley (and others) residents don’t lose their jobs that will be affected across the state if we don’t?
I am sick to death of Daley’s whining - and his control of the Mayor’s across the metro area.
- VanillaMan - Wednesday, Mar 18, 09 @ 10:22 am:
The City of Chicago is one of the largest employers in the City That Used To Work. So Daley has a real problem, and has to fight for every dime lifted from Illinoians. Keeping the City Government functioning can be as important to Chicago as Caterpillar is to Peoria.
- Bluefish - Wednesday, Mar 18, 09 @ 10:23 am:
The background on the Local Government Distributive Fund is that it was a deal cut years ago where municipalities receive a 1/10th share of the state income and corporate taxes in exchange for not having the ability to impose their own income/corp taxes (as in many other states). A deal’s a deal. Plus, towns are being hit by the same economic forces the state is.
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Mar 18, 09 @ 10:44 am:
My guess is that in the end, the munis will get a taste, but not the full 10%. I think Quinn might have to accept a gas tax hike, as well.
- bored now - Wednesday, Mar 18, 09 @ 10:47 am:
maybe the esteemed governor should just declare the whole state a TIF district. i note that the mayor doesn’t call it a reduction in revenues to schools when he gets new construction tiffed…
- One of the 35 - Wednesday, Mar 18, 09 @ 3:19 pm:
In order to understand the dynamics on this issue you need to go back several years to an agreement reached between the state and local governments; that income tax revenues would be shared 90/10 with local government. The state regularly tries to welch on the deal by saying, “Oh we meant 10% of the revenues on the exact date we struck the agreement, not any future growth.” Numerous times the agreement was reaffirmed to mean 10%. Period. Here we go again!
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Mar 18, 09 @ 3:27 pm:
One, if it’s statutory, no problem. If it was made by past parties, and it’s an oral agreement, then, as Samuel Goldwyn would say, it’s not worth the paper it’s written on.
- anon - Wednesday, Mar 18, 09 @ 4:37 pm:
I’m a little surprised by all the (mostly irrelevant) anti-Daley sentiment here. Frankly, I too would like to get as much of Chicago’s tax money back to Chicago as legally possible.
- Snidely Whiplash - Wednesday, Mar 18, 09 @ 4:47 pm:
anon - Wednesday, Mar 18, 09 @ 4:37 pm said:
“I’m a little surprised by all the (mostly irrelevant) anti-Daley sentiment here. Frankly, I too would like to get as much of Chicago’s tax money back to Chicago as legally possible.”
That’s right! There’s friends, relatives and cronies to keep feeding. Why should they have to lower their opulant standard of living just because we’re in the middle of a depression?
Seriously, where’s the money from the Skyway sale? From the privatization of Midway? The parking meters? We’re talking BILLIONS here! Where did it go??? Where does Daley expect to get a half a billion for an olympics Chicago can’t afford? Oh, wait, dumb question considering the topic in this thread …