In October 2017, a group of politically involved women calling themselves Illinois Say No More authored an open letter alleging a culture of rampant sexual harassment and discrimination at the state Capitol. It spread like wildfire.
In it, they detailed the double standard permeating state politics , enduring inappropriate advances and the fear of being retaliated upon if they spoke up. And they demanded better, calling on elected officials to create lasting, systemic change.
A year and a half later, much of their rage hasn’t dissipated. Illinois has been slow to implement reform for those working both under and outside the Capitol dome, part of a worrying national trend in the #MeToo era, they say.
“Addressing the issue of sexual harassment is complicated but this delay is disheartening,” said Katelynd Duncan, Chicago-based fundraiser and political consultant, who co-authored the piece. “It feels like a slap in the face of women, of our cause and of female political operatives specifically. We want our elected leaders to show us we matter. Just as much as our male colleagues. That’s it. And that’s not happening.”
* Sen. Melinda Bush, you will recall, passed her own bill that took months to craft only to see it thrown into House talks about an omnibus proposal. She was super-angry about it last month, but she told me the other day that she was satisfied with the talks so far. She said pretty much the same to the Center for Illinois Politics…
Bush publicly confronted members of House leadership on the status of her bill - and even made a point of bending Madigan’s ear at his annual fundraiser at Springfield’s Yacht Club to attempt to get the bill moving again.
On May 7, Bush said, she spoke with Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s chief of staff called about the issue, who offered help and support. She said she also engaged in a two-hour meeting with members of the four legislative caucuses.
“We basically all agree on the concepts,” Bush said. “We’re all at the table negotiating and I’m hopeful. I’m really trying to get through this process with pressure and respect.”
The ongoing investigation into sexual harassment complaints in House Speaker Michael Madigan’s office could cost Illinois taxpayers up to $1.4 million — and it’s unclear whether the findings will ever be made public.
Under fire from members of his own House Democratic Caucus, Madigan announced last June he had hired the law firm Schiff Hardin to conduct an investigation into how complaints of bullying and harassment from his then-chief of staff and members of his political organizations were handled in the speaker’s office.
He selected former federal prosecutor Maggie Hickey to conduct the audit. Hickey, now a Schiff Hardin partner, had served as the executive inspector general under Madigan’s nemesis, Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner.
But nearly a year later, Hickey’s work continues. […]
Madigan’s noncommittal answer about releasing the final report troubled a former statehouse watchdog.
“There should be a way to make public the key findings and conclusions so that members of the public can collaborate with members of the General Assembly and find solutions to issues that have been really difficult for many years in Springfield and beyond,” former Legislative Inspector General Julie Porter said.
The motor fuel tax bump would be a hard pitch for Democratic Rep. Emanuel Chris Welch, from Hillside, to make to his constituents, he said.
“From 19 cents to 44 cents a gallon for gas is a lot of money and to go home and try to explain that to people — that’s hard to do, especially in a district like the one I serve,” Welch said.
And Rep. David McSweeney, a Republican from Barrington Hills, said while it is “clear” the roads, bridges and other transportation infrastructure in the state need attention, raising the motor fuel tax is not the way to pay for it.
“I oppose this bill because I don’t support an increase to the gas tax, and I think we need a capital bill, but I think we should use the revenue from the sports gambling bill,” he said.
Democratic Gov. J.B. Pritzker wants to legalize that practice, and he projected $200 million in revenues from sports gambling licensing fees in his proposed budget. It is one of several revenue streams in Pritzker’s budget that are not guaranteed to become law.
$200 million wouldn’t even make a dent in the problem.
…Adding… Rep. McSweeney…
Rich,
Sports gambling will likely produce closer to $300 million. Even if you use a $200 million annual revenue stream, you could issue about $2 billion of debt based on that. I support bonding for a capital bill. The current proposals do not yet have a bonding component.
As is the case everywhere, the needs across Sangamon County and the city of Springfield are numerous. However, in their meeting with [Deputy Governor Christian Mitchell], local leaders made clear their top priority — without a close second — is securing the funds necessary to complete the remaining phases of the Springfield Rail Improvements Project.
“If you want one project, and that was driven home by the deputy governor, is ‘OK, is this really your top priority with rail?’ I said yes, without a doubt it is,” [Springfield Mayor Jim Langfelder] said. “So, to me, it signified you have limited funds, what do you want with those limited funds if you get one request?”
The capital request, put together by local political and civic leaders in conjunction with the Land of Lincoln Economic Development Corporation, includes $121.2 million needed for the completion of the rail project.
The project, which started with rail underpass construction on Carpenter Street in 2014 and has an overall price tag of $315 million, aims to alleviate rail congestion downtown by consolidating train traffic from Third Street to 10th Street and through building a series of overpasses and underpasses along the corridor.
Or a vote [on the graduated income tax proposal] could be postponed until late this year or the fall, after Democrats get through the filing period for the March 2020 primary.
“The vote doesn’t happen now,” shrugs one Democratic lawmaker.
“I think it will make the ballot—but not until next year,” says a lobbyist.
Pritzker’s team says it’s confident that it will get what it wants.
I heard an idea along those lines last week: Postpone the vote until after the primary. I told the person who suggested it that it was goofy. You’re gonna hold a vote in the spring on income taxes because you’re worried that Democratic primary voters will be up in arms? If that’s the case, then y’all should just forget about the whole thing.
I mean, this plan is supposedly designed to appeal directly to Democratic primary voters. I just don’t see how it could result in more than a challenge or two at most. The bigger lift is convincing independents and some Republican voters to go along with it. Passing the proposal now gives everyone a chance to cool off. Waiting until April or May of next year means the issue will be hot non-stop for months on end.
From everything I’ve been told, Madigan’s political staff would like it passed now for those very reasons. Get it over with. Out of sight, out of mind.
But, some folks have apparently passed through the denial and anger stages and are now in the negotiating stage, although I gotta figure we’ll see at least a couple more blowups before this is all over (depression stage).
It’s the way of the House: Why do we even need to do this?! You can’t make us do it! OK, fine, we can do it, but for the love of all that is holy can’t we just put it off until some other time in the future?! We’re so sad that we have to do this!!!
Just about every major issue has followed that progression in the House. Then they reach the acceptance stage… or not. We’ll see. Their backs will soon be up against a May 31 wall. Some are now looking for a way to move that wall back. It’s up to Pritzker to make sure that doesn’t happen.
Electric truck and SUV startup Rivian filed a patent application for fast-charging electric vehicle batteries at different voltages using a switch mechanism. The technology could reduce the cost of electric vehicles and make high-speed charging systems easier to use.
The patent describes a configurable battery that when used in an electric vehicle can accept charging voltages of either 450 or 900 volts and use less expensive components. The system can manage a potential fault in a battery module without disconnecting the load, making it more reliable.
Rivian, based in Plymouth, Mich., is raising funds to complete development and launch production of the all-electric R1T pickup truck and R1S SUV it unveiled at the Los Angeles Auto Show in November.
Both are billed as adventure vehicles that can easily navigate rugged terrain and would compete directly with Ford vehicles including the F-150, Ranger pickup truck and upcoming Bronco SUV. Deliveries of the five-passenger R1T pickup and seven-passenger R1S SUV are expected to start in late 2020, according to Rivian. The vehicles will deliver up to 400-plus miles of range and have off-road capability, the company says.
Earlier this year the company raised $700 million in a financing round let by Amazon. In April, Ford Motor Co. invested $500 million in Rivian, saying it will use the company’s “skateboard” platform to develop a new electric vehicle.
A proposed hike in Illinois’ annual registration fee for electric vehicles, from $17.50 to $1,000, is being called unfair by current EV owners, and a sales disincentive by manufacturers — just as the new technology is beginning to gain broader traction. […]
Tesla said it opposes the Illinois fee increase. Electric truck startup Rivian, which is slated to begin production at its factory in downstate Normal next year, was more outspoken.
“Imposing fees on EVs that are over 400 percent more than their gasoline-powered counterparts is not only unfair, it discourages promising new technology that will reduce our dependence on petroleum, reduce emissions, and promote the Illinois economy,” Rivian spokesman Michael McHale said.
* Some top Dems have been asking for this new track…
Today, Think Big Illinois released a new ad highlighting why Illinois voters should have the opportunity to decide whether they want a tax system that works for everyone, not just the wealthy few. The ad, “A Chance To Vote,” also calls out opponents of a fair tax for their “nonsensical” and “completely incorrect” claims in their desperate attempts to keep our current unfair tax system in place.
“A Chance To Vote” will run on television in Chicago and Springfield, and across digital platforms. Watch the ad here.
“There are very few times where Illinoisans have the opportunity to directly decide an issue that impacts them and their families. Legislators in Springfield have the chance to give voters that opportunity, and let them choose whether they want to keep our current unfair tax system in place or want a system that works for everyone,” said Quentin Fulks, Executive Director of Think Big Illinois. “While opponents of a fair tax continue to rely on misleading claims and false attacks, Think Big Illinois will continue to stand up for middle-class families in the fight for a fair tax.”
That’s what newspapers call the attacks against the fair tax.
They can’t defeat the plan on its merits, so they’re trying to jump it on the low road.
If the General Assembly gives the green light, we’re all going to have a say at the polls next November.
The people of Illinois deserve a chance to vote on this important proposal.
This is fair and necessary.
It’s time for change.
Let’s make our tax system fair.
…Adding… To address some folks in comments who are arguing for even more constitutional questions on the ballot, I would agree with you. That’s why I strongly supported a constitutional convention in 2008. But an overwhelming 67 percent of voters rejected the convention, so they essentially agreed with the status quo. And that status quo is we can only vote on what the General Assembly puts on the ballot. The people spoke. It’ll be 2028 before that question automatically comes before them again and it was abundantly clear that would be the case in ‘08.
* Opponents of cannabis legalization have repeatedly trotted out claims that legalization results in dramatically increased usage by children. Rep. Kelly Cassidy said once that “you see steady decreases in youth use if you do [legalization] right.” Politifact chose to fact check her…
Since 2014, the data show no statistically significant uptick in pot usage among teens so legalization hardly leads to the reefer madness some critics feared. But the numbers available for Colorado and other states that have lifted bans for adults also don’t reveal the clear pattern of decline in youth pot use that Cassidy described.
Colorado and Washington were the first states to legalize retail marijuana sales, so they have the longest track records to study.
In Colorado, a 2018 report by the state Department of Public Safety’s Division of Justice reviewed data from the Healthy Kids Colorado Survey, which includes answers to various health questions asked of more than 40,000 middle and high school students every other year. The survey is conducted by the state’s Department of Public Health & Environment.
Results from the survey show 19.7% of Colorado high schoolers reported using marijuana within the past month in 2013, the year before the first retail marijuana store opened. In 2015, that figure rose slightly, but experts told PolitiFact in 2016 that increase was not statistically significant. In 2017, the rate dipped to 19.4%, slightly lower than it had been in previous surveys dating back to least 2005. […]
The state [of Washington] conducts a biennial youth health survey similar to Colorado’s, which breaks its data down by grades. Its results show some small declines but suggest little has changed there either, with decreases of 1% between 2014 and 2016 among 8th and 10th graders who said they currently used pot, followed by 1% increases for both grades in 2018. For 12th graders, rates fell by 1% the year after retail sales began and have remained at that level, which is in line with pre-legalization rates. […]
Changes in the other five states where retail sales are underway are even more difficult to evaluate than Colorado or Washington. Alaska’s state survey reported no statistically significant changes since recreational cannabis was approved for adults in 2014 and hit the market in 2016. Results in Oregon, which followed a similar timeline, were mixed. And it’s too soon to assess results out of Nevada, California and Massachusetts, which each repealed bans in late 2016 but only began allowing sales within the last two years.
*** UPDATE *** Press release…
In response to a recent PolitiFact/BGA story on the accuracy of State Representative Kelly Cassidy’s comments on teen use, Legalize Illinois issued the following statement:
Fact-Checking the Fact-Checkers
“Colorado, Oregon, California, Massachusetts and Maine all show declines in teen use since legalizing adult-use cannabis. Washington state saw declines in two of the three age groups it studied. Somehow, though, the Better Government Association found it possible to describe Rep. Kelly Cassidy’s statement that, ‘In states that have legalized, you see steady decreases in youth use if you do it right’ as ‘mostly false.’ We hope this was an honest misreading of the data and not a temptation to create click-bait.
“Let’s look at the facts. Nationwide, use by 9th-12th graders has declined from 23.1% to 19.8% (Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.) In Oregon, use among 8th graders has declined from 9.7% to 6.7%, (Source: Oregon Healthy Teens Survey), in Nevada 19.3% to 17.9% (Source: Nevada Youth Risk Behavior Survey) and in Washington from 20% to 17.2% (Source: Washington State Healthy Youth Survey.) And so on.
“The BGA story itself cites the Colorado declines but editorializes that the study is unreliable because its data is ‘baseline and preliminary.’ What Rep. Cassidy said – and what the BGA chose to malign her about – was the statement, ‘In states that have legalized, you see steady decreases in youth use if you do it right’. The statistics show she is correct.
“To borrow from the BGA’s own designation, we rate their story as follows: ‘Mostly False – The story contains particles of truth but ignores critical data that would have given the reader a more accurate impression’.”
* As we all are painfully aware, our statutory pension payment mandate is not high enough to allow Illinois to get ahead of the unfunded liability curve for several more years. The much-lauded school funding reform law contains the same basic flaw. The K-12 annual payment increases are significant, but not high enough to stay ahead of the growing inadequacy gap. From Stand for Children…
To ensure that poorly funded districts increase in adequacy, the [Evidence-Based Funding Formula] legislation established a Minimum Funding Level of $350 million per year. But in FY20, the system will be $7 billion short. That gap grows over time unless sucient money is invested, as inflation drives up the costs of education while the value of $350 million diminishes. So, while $350 million drives equity – it does little to close the gap.
* Stand for Children press release…
During passage of education funding reform in 2017, lawmakers committed to increasing school funding each year by at least $350 million. While $350 million new dollars each year is a significant commitment, Illinois schools are so inadequately funded that it barely makes a dent. Depending on inflation, the adequacy gap will continue to grow even with a $350 million annual increase, possibly even as soon as next year. New revenue through the fair tax is essential to getting schools across the state funded adequately.
Illinois can accelerate equity even further while still protecting teacher pensions by integrating their state pension normal cost payments into evidence-based funding. This proposal, known as the “equity boost” would immediately move the state over $230 million closer to adequacy without costing the state any money. It would also fix the other alarming inequity in Illinois that remains unaddressed: in Illinois, state government picks up the pension costs for school districts that have greater local property wealth at a significantly higher level than it does for poorer districts. The equity gap is startling: districts funded over 100% of adequacy receive $328 per pupil more than districts funded below 80% of adequacy.
The Equity Boost uses the new school funding formula to address the inequity of payment of teacher pension costs and brings the state closer to fully funding education. There are four parts to the Equity Boost.
1 Calculate Adequacy Targets using calculated normal cost, instead of actual cost.
2 Move responsibility for paying normal pension cost to school districts (a total of about $1.15 billion). At the same time, offset these amounts by having each district receive from the state an amount equal to its normal pension costs through the “hold harmless” or Base Funding Minimum (BFM) of the new formula.
3 Make the pension portion of the BFM subject to a continuing appropriation, just like the current pension payment is. If normal costs increase in any future years, those increases should be put through the formula and not count towards the $350 million Minimum Funding Level.
4 Gradually phase out $70 million in excess state payments that some districts will have in their Base Funding Minimum, then equitably re-distribute that amount through the formula. This approach means these dollars will first flow to the districts that need them the most, reducing the gap further.
* Here’s how this would help a “Tier One” district, which would be most in need…
Pre-Equity Boost
The District’s Adequacy Target is $14,500 per pupil. Its Local Capacity Percentage is 24%, so it is expected to raise about $3,500 locally. The District’s Base Funding Minimum is $5,000, leaving it just 59% funded and with a $6,000 gap to adequacy. It will get $473 per pupil when $350 million is allocated to the formula. The district gets a benefit of $600 per pupil from the State’s normal cost payment, but this is not reflected in the formula.
Post-Equity Boost
The District’s Adequacy Target is now $15,100, which is higher because its calculated pension costs have been added. Its Local Capacity Percentage of 24% remains the same and it is now expected to raise about $3,600 locally. The District’s Base Funding Minimum is now $5,600, which is increased because its normal cost payment is added to the BFM, and it will pay that $600 per pupil to TRS for its normal cost payment. The district is 61% funded with a $5,900 gap to adequacy. It will get $500 per pupil when $350 million is allocated.
* Here’s an example of a Tier 3 district being moved to a Tier 4 (lower need) district with this proposal…
Pre-Equity Boost
The District’s Adequacy Target is $11,500 per pupil. Its Local Capacity Percentage is 78%, so it is expected to raise about $9,000 locally. The District’s Base Funding Minimum is $2,000, leaving it 96% funded and with a $500 gap to adequa- cy. It will get $26 per pupil when $350 million is allocated to the formula. The district gets a benefit of $600 per pupil from the State’s normal cost payment, but this is not reflected in the formula.
Post-Equity Boost
The District’s Adequacy Target is now $12,000, which is higher because its calculated pension costs have been added. Its Local Capacity Percentage of 78% remains the same and it is now expect- ed to raise about $9,400 locally. The District’s Base Funding Minimum is now $2,800, which is increased because its normal cost payment is added to the BFM, and it will pay that $800 per pupil to TRS for its normal cost payment. The district is 101% funded with an Excess State Payment of $200, which would be phased out over three years. It will get $1 per pupil when $350 million is allocated.
* The group also wants the $350 million annual increase boosted to $500 million after the graduated income tax is approved. Click here to see how that would work.
If you listen closely to what Democratic state Reps. Sam Yingling and Jonathan Carroll are saying in public about their opposition to Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s graduated income tax proposal, they appear to believe that Pritzker’s proposed tax rates aren’t high enough.
Yingling and Carroll are both demanding significant property tax relief. “In Illinois,” Rep. Yingling wrote in the Chicago Tribune last week, “the disproportionate reliance on and financial burden of property taxes to fund government — roads and bridges, education, police, fire and other essential services — is devastating.”
“My constituents are concerned that their taxes will go up without essential property-tax relief,” Carroll was quoted as saying.
No sane person would argue that property taxes are too low in this state. Yingling didn’t mention school spending in his letter to the Tribune, but that’s by far the largest item in the local levies. And that’s why both Yingling and Carroll signed on to a resolution during the last General Assembly opposing a proposed shift of pension costs from the state to local school districts, which would’ve driven up property taxes much higher than they already were.
But unless a solution to this mess involves a Bruce Rauner-style elimination of collective bargaining rights for unions, or drastic cuts to school classrooms and to municipal operations (which both Yingling and Carroll would oppose), combined with a wholesale elimination of state mandates and sweeping forced district consolidations, then lowering property taxes right away will require lots more money from the state. And state money doesn’t grow on trees as it does at the federal level.
Sen. Don Harmon, D-Oak Park, has been working on this issue for years and told me that significant state-funded property tax relief would cost about $7 billion to $8 billion every year. That means almost quadrupling Gov. Pritzker’s proposed $3.4 billion tax hike on upper-income Illinoisans. Or, if the flat tax was kept in place, it would require at least a couple of percentage points added to the current income tax rate, taking it to almost 7 percent for everybody.
Rep. Yingling, however, voted against the 2017 income tax increase that ended the state’s two-year budget impasse. Rep. Carroll was not yet appointed to his seat when that bill became law over Gov. Rauner’s veto.
State funding and lots more were all discussed during the property tax working group meetings set up and facilitated by the governor’s office that both Yingling and Carroll attended — although Carroll reportedly missed the final meeting. Yingling reportedly suggested some ideas, but no agreements could be reached, mainly because if this was so easy it would’ve been done decades ago.
Property taxes have been a major issue in this state since the 1980s, when the share of the state’s funding of schools started sliding downward and local property taxes started shooting up. A half a point was added to the income tax in 1989 as a sort of “welcoming present” to newly elected Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley. Half of the increase went to schools and the other half went to local governments.
But that money eventually got rolled back into GRF and the state did things like cap suburban property tax increases, which, as homeowners in Yingling’s Lake County will certainly attest, obviously didn’t work as advertised.
Rep. Yingling passed just four of his House bills this year. None of them were bad ideas, but none would significantly reduce anyone’s property tax bills, either.
Rep. Carroll passed a bill (co-sponsored by Yingling) to place yet another unfunded state mandate on local schools to make sure third-party driver education teachers were properly certified. Those sorts of mandates drive up local taxes.
Nobody can read anyone’s mind, but Rep. Yingling’s 2017 income tax hike vote probably explains a lot more about his current refusal to support the graduated tax than his stated concerns about property taxes. He perpetually votes like a vulnerable targeted member, even though his district is now pretty safely Democratic. And Rep. Carroll has a whole lot of high-income constituents in his even more Democratic Northbrook area district who likely aren’t pleased with the prospect of paying more money to the state.
The fact that neither legislator bothered to give the governor’s office a courtesy heads-up on their intentions to publicly oppose the plan also speaks volumes.
If these two seriously want to significantly reduce property taxes, then they should introduce a bill to actually do it – and to pay for it. Otherwise, they’re just grandstanding and forcing everyone else do the heavy lifting.
*** UPDATE *** Rep. Carroll confirmed my suspicion that he wanted even higher state spending to lower property taxes. From Mark Maxwell’s Capitol Connection…
Maxwell: You’ve already singled out the property tax thing. How do you address that though at the state level because so many local governments are the ones that make those decisions? How does the state force their hand?
Carroll: We have to fund education better. I mean, that’s the bottom line. Almost 70 percent of property tax bills go to education. We have to find a way to fund education better through the state.
And that means more money, and money doesn’t grow on trees. Unless he wants huge cuts to state programs (Narrator: He doesn’t) Carroll is arguing here for even higher tax levels that Pritzker is proposing.
The Executive Ethics Commission (EEC) recently issued a decision in which it fined former Illinois Department of Human Services (IDHS) employee Mark Doyle $154,056.10 for violating the State Officials and Employees Ethics Act’s revolving door prohibition. This is the largest fine ever assessed by the EEC for a violation of the Ethics Act.
Mr. Doyle had been responsible for overseeing the closure of State-operated developmental disability and psychiatric care centers and for moving the residents of these centers to community-based settings. To assist with these closures and transitions, IDHS had contracted with Community Resource Associates, Inc. (CRA). CRA was controlled by the same person as CRA Consulting (CRA-C), which had entered into a contract with the State of Georgia to perform similar services.
CRA-C offered Mr. Doyle an opportunity to work on the Georgia contract, but the OEIG restricted Mr. Doyle from accepting that job opportunity in a revolving door determination. The EEC affirmed the OEIG’s restricted determination based on Mr. Doyle’s personal and substantial participation in the award of the contract to CRA, which the EEC determined was essentially the same entity as CRA-C. In re: Mark Doyle (15-EEC-007).
About a month later, Mr. Doyle submitted a revolving door determination request to the OEIG to provide consulting work for another different entity called BennBrook, Inc. However, he did not disclose to the OEIG that BennBrook was contracting with CRA-C to do the same work in Georgia that the OEIG and EEC had previously found to be restricted. In this latest case, the EEC found that BennBrook was acting merely as a “pass through” organization or conduit for the improper compensation from CRA-C to Mr. Doyle, and thus violated the revolving door prohibition.
The $154,056 fine represents the amount Mr. Doyle billed to BennBrook for the year after he left State service. The Ethics Act provides that an employee may be fined up to 3 times the total annual compensation that was or would have been obtained in violation of the revolving door prohibition. The prior largest financial outcome in a case before the EEC also involved a revolving door case in which the former director of the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services agreed to pay $100,000 to settle the matter.
Doyle started working for IDHS in 2011, but he was detailed to Gov. Quinn’s staff via an intergovernmental agreement. He left in 2015. The EEC decision is here.
As part of an effort to build political support for a graduated income tax in Illinois, state Senate President John Cullerton has proposed repealing the state’s estate tax. His hope is that some Republicans and Downstate and suburban Democrats —who loathe a graduated income tax because it taxes wealthier people at higher rates — might warm to it in return for ending the estate tax, which they also loathe.
We think this is a bad idea.
At a time when our state and nation are threatened by historical levels of inequality, where the richest 1 percent hold 40 percent of the wealth, we can’t see the wisdom in eliminating one of the few direct ways to check this dangerously un-American trend.
There’s an argument for revising Illinois’ estate tax to make it less of a burden on, say, family farmers, by increasing the threshold at which it kicks in and pegging it to the rate of inflation. Since 2013, the graduated tax has been levied on estates valued at $4 million more. The first $40,000 to $90,000 is taxed at .8 percent, while values above $10.04 million are taxed at the highest rate, 16 percent.
Some Chicago Democrats also pushed for the bill after feedback from their constituents.
* The Question: Abolish, modify or keep the estate tax as it is? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please…
A small county in southwest Illinois is facing big pension obligations and the possibility that it won’t make payroll in late May.
Perry County faces a $1 million shortfall that is threatening its employees’ second payday in May. County leaders May 13 will consider recommendations to hike property taxes and fees, to curb spending, to lay off employees and to shorten their workweek.
“We basically need $1 million in the month of May just to meet payroll and to pay what bills we have left,” Perry County Treasurer Mary Jane Craft told WPSD-TV. “If we just meet payroll and not our bills, we still need $400,000.”
How did the county fall into crisis? Shrinking revenue and growing pension demands appear to be at the heart of the crisis.
Maybe we could address some of these problems by consolidating some of Illinois’ 102 counties. We talk about eliminating townships all the time, but counties spend real money and they’re all required by law to elect their own state’s attorneys, clerks, etc.
Tiny little Perry County has only 22,350 residents. That’s not even half a Chicago ward. Putnam County, the state’s smallest, has just 6,006 people.
The General Assembly could step in and redraw boundaries, but there is another way.
Sec. 1-4001. Petition to unite counties. Whenever any number of legal voters, not less than two hundred, one-half of such number being owners or life tenants of real estate, residing in any county in this State, shall petition the county board of their own county, for leave to have their own county united and annexed to any adjoining county, and shall also petition the county board of the adjoining county, to which they desire their county to be united and annexed, for leave to have their own county united and annexed to such adjoining county, it shall be the duty of the several county boards so petitioned, to order that the propositions provided for in this Division shall be submitted to the legal voters of their respective counties. The several county boards shall certify the propositions to the proper election officials who shall submit the question at a general election in accordance with the general election law. … Provided, that such proposition shall not be submitted or voted upon more often than once in 5 years.
Life tenants are defined here. The procedure for handling the mergers if approved by voters is here.
If nothing else, it would be fun to watch the hostile takeover attempts.
…Adding… The land-owning requirement probably isn’t constitutional for obvious reasons, but somebody ought to see if this could work.
A diamond engagement ring that former Gov. Pat Quinn’s campaign manager bought for Quinn’s press secretary has become part of the federal investigation that’s resulted in extortion charges against longtime Chicago Teamsters boss John Coli Sr., the Chicago Sun-Times has learned.
The FBI is trying to determine who paid for the ring, which former Quinn press secretary Brooke Anderson got nearly four years ago from her husband Lou Bertuca, the governor’s 2014 campaign manager.
The key witness against Coli, Alexander S. Pissios, whose Cinespace Chicago Film Studios got millions of dollars in state grants under Quinn’s administration, has told the FBI he contributed $500 towards the purchase of the ring.
Pissios, president of the West Side studio where TV shows including “Chicago P.D.” and “Chicago Fire” are shot, secretly agreed to cooperate with federal investigators to avoid being charged with bankruptcy fraud. He has an unusual “non-prosecution” deal in return for his cooperation.
Pissios told the FBI that he helped pay for the ring at the suggestion of his lobbyist Frank Cortese, who helped convince the Quinn administration to award Cinespace state grants totaling $27.3 million. […]
But the new governor forced Pissios to give back the [last $10 million grant] after the Sun-Times reported that the land Cinespace said in its grant application it needed the money to buy wasn’t for sale. […]
The federal grand jury that indicted Coli issued subpoenas to the governor’s office last August, seeking personnel files for Bertuca, Anderson and John D’Alessandro, another former Quinn official. Pissios has told authorities D’Alessandro was helpful in securing the state grants.
After conducting a national search to continue building a strong team of diverse experts in their fields, Governor JB Pritzker announced the following appointment:
Rob Jeffreys will serve as Director of the Illinois Department of Corrections (IDOC). Jeffreys is a nationally-recognized criminal justice expert with correctional experience spanning more than two decades. He spent 21 of his 24 years in corrections management at the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections.
Jeffreys currently serves as the agency’s chief of staff and directs its Information Technology and Strategic Initiatives bureaus as well as the Office of Human Resources that supports more than 12,000 employees. Previously as ODRC’s Regional Director, he managed the operations of eight adult prisons and the Adult Parole Authority across 20 counties, oversaw 25,000 offenders and 3700 staff and managed an annual budget of $340 million.
As Bureau Chief of Classification and Reception at ODRC, Jeffreys provided population management for over 50,000 offenders based on trends, research, and data analysis variables. From 2007 to 2010, he was sent on a special assignment under the Intergovernmental Personnel Act (IPA) as a National Prison Security Program Coordinator with the National Institute of Corrections in Washington D.C., developing programs and assessments for over 26 federal and state agencies in the areas of security operations, security audit training, staffing analysis, emergency preparedness, prison management, and technical assistance.
He also served as Warden for correctional institutions in Chillicothe and Marion, Deputy Warden in Toledo and in various positions at ODRC’s St. Clairsville facility. He began his career as a corrections class specialist in ODRC’s Bureau of Research. Jeffreys received both his Master of Science and Bachelor of Arts in Criminal Justice from Marshall University in Huntington, West Virginia.
If the state of Illinois wants more revenue from video gambling, one gaming industry executive said Thursday, lawmakers should loosen betting restrictions rather than raise video gambling tax rates.
Ivan Hernandez, who heads the Illinois Gaming Machine Operators Association, offered that proposal to the state House Executive Committee, which is considering several alternatives for increasing state revenue from video gambling. […]
Video gambling machines are taxed at 30%, with the remaining money split evenly between the machine operator and the establishment housing the machines. Pritzker’s plan would increase the state’s tax rate to 50%, resulting in more than $100 million in new revenue for state and local governments. […]
Elements of Hernandez’s proposal include raising the bet limit on single plays from $2 to $4, increasing the maximum winnings on a single play from $500 to $1,199, allowing games with higher jackpots, and increasing the number of gambling terminals allowed at one location from five to six.
Those measures, Hernandez said, would create $210 million in new tax revenue the first two years, without changing the tax rates.
I dunno. Maybe they can combine the two ideas somehow, while exempting small establishments from an increase and then give local governments a bigger share of the take for property tax relief or something.
As with sports betting, cannabis, etc. I think the more they’re talking about details, the better the prospects are. But only up to a certain point. May 31st is three weeks from today. That’s almost an eternity in General Assembly World, but it’s still just 21 days away.
…Adding… It’s Ivan Fernandez, not Ivan Hernandez. Hannah Meisel got the name right and has this context…
Along with the revenue enhancements, video gaming operators also floated the idea of allowing the state to use additional revenues to plug budget holes for the first two years, and assuming a progressive income tax passes — Pritzker’s number one priority — the money could then be funneled to “vertical” infrastructure projects, like building and maintenance of new construction projects around the state.
Those vertical projects are being pushed hard by colleges and universities, who point to old buildings as evidence the state hasn’t properly invested in every aspect of higher education.
QUESTION: Currently, possessing 10 grams of marijuana – enough for about 30 joints - is not a crime in Illinois. Instead, it is a civil violation like a traffic ticket. Many people call this policy “decriminalization.” Medical marijuana use is also legal in Illinois. Knowing that personal marijuana possession is already decriminalized in Illinois, which one of the following marijuana policies do you prefer:
- Keep the current policy of decriminalization and medical marijuana
-Keep the current policy of decriminalization and medical marijuana but also allow for past misdemeanor marijuana convictions to be expunged
-Change the current policy of decriminalization by legalizing commercial production, use and sale of marijuana for recreational use
-Make all marijuana use illegal
Allow me to try.
1) Thirty “joints” in ten grams (about three-eighths of an ounce)? I haven’t rolled one of those in a very long time, but that seems like a lot. I checked the Google and California retail establishments sell pre-rolled joints of 1 gram each. So 10 grams would produce 10 California pre-rolls. I did see some articles about how joints are as small as .33 grams, but I think those would be what are commonly known as “pinners.”
2) That’s a pretty darned detailed setup question, but it doesn’t mention that decriminalization leaves the current criminal growing and distribution network in place. Maybe I’m just asking too much on this one, though.
3) Decrim and medical are explained in the setup, but not legalization. This is truly a classic push question.
4) As far as I know, nobody has introduced a stand-alone exoneration bill, so I’m not sure why that was even tossed in there.
5) Exonerations are included in the legalization bill, but that isn’t mentioned for some mysterious reasons only known by the pollster and its anti-legalization sponsor. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ And no mention of tax and fee income and new jobs from legalization even though everybody knows the state needs more revenue and employment?
Yeah. Totally reliable. The pollster is good, the question is most definitely not.
Also, they didn’t release their other questions, so we don’t know what came before that one. Some polls intended for media consumption ask highly leading questions before dropping the big one on respondents.
Just under half (47%) of those under 50 favored legalization, while a little over a third (36%) of those over 50 supported it. Both Democrats and independents were more likely to favor legalization than Republicans. The favorability was almost evenly split between white and African-American respondents, with 41% of white voters saying they support it, and 44% of black voters saying they support it. But there were more white respondents polled than African American — 74% to 16%.
The favorability rating is down from a poll of 1,000 registered voters conducted in March by the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute at Southern Illinois University in Carbondale. In that poll, the highest level of support for legalizing marijuana came from Chicago, where 75% favored it, and 24% were opposed. Statewide, 66% of respondents favored or strongly favored legalization, while 32% opposed it, the Simon institute poll found.
Different pollster, much different questions, hugely different reasons for the two polls, so you cannot compare the two.
Researchers who in 2015 correctly predicted where the Zika outbreak would strike in the U.S. say they think the country’s next big measles outbreak is most likely to happen in Cook County.
A research project spearheaded by Sahotra Sarkar, a University of Chicago-educated professor at the University of Texas at Austin, revealed the 25 counties most at-risk for a widespread measles outbreak, like those seen in Washington, Oregon and New York. Sarkar and his former student, Lauren Gardner of Johns Hopkins University, determined Cook County was the most at-risk for an outbreak. That’s based largely on the number of airplane flights to Chicago from global destinations where parents increasingly don’t have their children vaccinated, he said.
“Cook County turns out to be as important as it is, mainly because of the presence of O’Hare Airport,” Sarkar said.
The study was published Thursday in The Lancet Infectious Diseases. The research took about six months to complete, using risk assessment models similar to one Sarkar and Gardner used when they determined Zika, a mosquito-carried virus that can cause serious birth defects, would first affect Texas and Florida when it emerged as a global threat to pregnant women.
Rachel Rubin, a senior medical officer with the Cook County Health Department, wasn’t surprised by the study’s findings. The seven measles cases reported in Illinois this year likely stemmed from one person who was infected overseas and traveled back to Illinois, she said.
* The governor’s decision to use all of the projected FY20 revenue growth resulting from the unexpected April revenue spike to make the state’s full statutory pension payment and not short it by $900 million is going over well in New York, reports Karen Pierog at Reuters…
Carol Spain, an analyst at S&P Global Ratings, which rates Illinois BBB-minus, said the stronger revenue projections and the decision not to extend the pension amortization period “increases the likelihood of near-term credit stability.”
“However, the state still faces rising pension costs beyond fiscal 2020, and we expect that the state will continue to struggle to structurally balance its budget while making progress on its bill backlog absent any significant revenue increase or cuts,” she added.
Ted Hampton, an analyst at Moody’s Investors Service, which rates Illinois Baa3, said, “putting more money into Illinois’ pensions sooner, in our view, would prove better for the state’s credit than any form of financial engineering that reduces near-term contributions.”
Eric Kim, an analyst at Fitch Ratings, which rates Illinois BBB with a negative outlook, said that lowering or delaying payments under the current inadequate pension schedule “was going to be negative from our perspective.” Suspending the plan for at least a year “is a good step,” he added. He also welcomed news that the higher April revenue will help address a $1.6 billion deficit in the state’s current budget.
Illinois is nowhere near out of the woods yet. But credit where credit is due (pun intended).