* From the governor’s office…

Good morning, Rich!

The following have passed the resolution:

Elk Grove Village
Noble
Logan County

Best,
ck

* The Illinois AFL-CIO claims that Elk Grove Village passed a “modified version of the anti-worker resolution despite a standing room only crowd protesting the move.”

From the village’s website…

Consideration to adopt Resolution No. 20-15 (attached) supporting portions of Governor Rauner’s “Turnaround Agenda” for government empowerment and reform.

(By approving this Resolution, Elk Grove Village is supporting certain reforms in State government that will encourage local control, reduce costs on local governments, empower local voters, and increase competitiveness in our community.)

I couldn’t find the resolution online.

*** UPDATE *** From IUOE Local 150…

Attached is the resolution approved last night in Elk Grove Village. The mayor repeatedly stated at the meeting that this was not the Governor’s resolution and that it had been substantially altered, though the portions considered to be veiled attacks on unions still appear in this version.

The resolution’s text…

WHEREAS, municipal government is the closest unit of Illinois government to their
residents and thereby the most responsive; and

WHEREAS, municipalities are front-line providers of critical government services to
residents and these services include police and fire protection, snow removal, refuse collection,
infrastructure, water, sewer and utility services among countless others; and

WHEREAS, unfunded mandates including the imposition of excessive pension benefits,
prevailing wage requirements, workers’ compensation laws, injury apportionment and
impairment laws, and certain labor laws and other such unfunded mandates have dramatically
and materially increased the costs to local taxpayers by billions of dollars; and

WHEREAS, addressing these matters will, through reducing the cost of providing local
necessary and essential government services, reduce the burden on local taxpayers, including
reducing the burden of property taxes and fees; and

WHEREAS, granting local elected officials and voters at the local level the choice to
create local empowerment zones may assist in making Illinois more attractive for future business
investment and enhanced job growth; and

WHEREAS, while local empowerment zones may not be the appropriate decision for
every community, the Village of Elk Grove is supportive of allowing voters and local officials,
who are in the best position to understand their local issues, to determine the future direction of
their community.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Village of Elk Grove Village
strongly endorses major reforms in State government achieved through aspects of Governor
Rauner’s Turnaround Agenda that will encourage local control, reduce costs on local
governments, and increase competitiveness in our and surrounding communities.

[ *** End Of Update *** ]

* From a union official…

Rauner resolution tabled in Mahomet — at the start of the meeting. They took public comment afterward anyway, because so many people had showed up. All speakers were opposed. I am told, “One guy in a suit signed in to speak, listing a Springfield address. After it was tabled he left without speaking. We think he was from the governor’s office.”

* From the Daily Herald…

Kane County Board Chairman Chris Lauzen insisted Tuesday — again and again — that the county board committee of the whole was not discussing a resolution supporting Gov. Bruce Rauner’s turnaround agenda.

Instead, he said, he wants the board to craft its own resolution that is positive in tone, calling for changes in how the state addresses its financial problems. He said it should be built by consensus and not be divisive.

“I don’t think that it is any secret that what Gov. Rauner has proposed is controversial, but what we are doing today is very different than that,” Lauzen said.

But many of the people in the audience, which spilled out of the room and its lobby, then down the stairs, still protested. Some said parts of the proposal were code for what Rauner has proposed, such as allowing counties and towns to establish empowerment zones with right-to-work regulations and to opt out of having to pay prevailing wage rates for public projects. Both are seen as anti-labor union measures. Leadership from several unions, including operating engineers, the Fox Valley Labor Council, an AFSCME retirees’ local chapter and two local teacher unions, spoke to the board.

* Tribune…

Union officials lodged their opposition Tuesday to Gov. Bruce Rauner’s proposed right-to-work zones as part of Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s effort to send a message to state lawmakers that City Hall opposes the idea.

The testimony came at a City Council hearing on a symbolic resolution sponsored by Emanuel to oppose the zones. It’s the latest bit of political posturing between Emanuel and Rauner on the topic. […]

After the hearing, Ald. Patrick O’Connor, Emanuel’s floor leader, said the council hopes to persuade Rauner to “rethink this.”

“Shouldn’t we all just be about creating more jobs, more good-paying jobs, more jobs that allow people to step up into the middle class, as opposed to basically saying, ‘I can offer you a whole bunch of, like, half jobs, but I can’t offer you a good job?’” said O’Connor, 40th.

The Cook County Board will take up a nearly identical resolution today.

* And from the Illinois Policy Institute’s news service…

The Governor got an earful during his presentation in front of an Illinois Department of Transportation listening tour stop in Springfield. Governor Bruce Rauner was addressing the IDOT gathering about his “Turnaround Illinois Agenda” when Sean Stott, the Director of Government Affairs for Laborer’s International Union, got up to say a few words. Afterwards Stott said the Governor’s statements on right-to-work zones are factually inaccurate.

“The federal government has said and the courts have ruled repeatedly for decades that local governments cannot establish local right-to-work zones as he would promote.”

But Governor Rauner says the federal law is clear.

“We’re highly confident that federal labor law allows local governments to decide for themselves labor issues if the state authorizes them to do it.”

Rauner says he’s pushing for a statewide law that would allow local governments the option of becoming a right-to-work zone and he expects any measure on right-to-work issues will be litigated. The Governor also says that he’s working with legislative leaders to hash out some of the proposals and hopes to have the package of bills introduced in the next few weeks.

Meanwhile nearly 30 local governments have approved non-binding resolutions supporting the Governor’s “Turnaround Illinois Agenda”. That’s according to the the Governor’s office. The resolution, shopped out by the Illinois Municipal League and other government association groups, includes employee empowerment zones which are also referred to as right-to-work zones. The resolutions also include proposed reforms to workers’ compensation, insurance costs, business regulations and issues concerning project labor agreements and prevailing wage. Unions oppose the resolutions saying implementation of the measures would mean disintegration of the middle class. But Governor Rauner says the reforms are necessary to make the state’s business climate more friendly.

* The Institute also published this…

At Forbes, Richard Epstein, a professor at both the University of Chicago Law School and New York University School of Law, said [Attorney General Lisa Madigan] has fundamentally mischaracterized federal law.

Epstein explained that the U.S. Supreme Court generally presumes that federal law does not preempt state law unless one of three conditions exists: there is an explicit conflict between federal and state law; the state law would frustrate a federal program; or the federal government has completely occupied the field in question.

Epstein explained that “[n]one of these is remotely plausible” in the case of local Right-to-Work laws because “the federal government has explicitly recognized the state’s authority on this key point” by explicitly allowing states to enact Right-to-Work laws. So there is no conflict between federal and state law; there is no federal program that would be frustrated by local Right to Work; and the federal government has explicitly declined to occupy the entire field.

Whether a state adopts a statewide law or just allows local governments to adopt their own Right-to-Work laws is irrelevant. “In general,” Epstein wrote, “the federal government has no power to tell states how it is that they should divide up their powers of government.”

It also shouldn’t matter that Illinois has no state law specifically authorizing local governments to enact Right-to-Work laws (although Rauner wants such a law). The Illinois Constitution allows home-rule units to exercise any governmental power the state government has not explicitly reserved to itself. Therefore, because state law does not explicitly forbid home-rule units from adopting Right-to-Work laws, they may do so.