* J.P. Harris and The Tough Choices are playing at 8 tonight at the Hoogland Center. From WUIS…
When The Tough Choices began, there were only two rules: keep it country, and keep it simple. They have done both, yet still weave burning pedal steel leads and painfully genuine guitar solos with the cool calm of a Spaghetti-Western Clint Eastwood. The Tough Choices have been described as such: “…imagine that somehow, defying the laws of nature, Hank Williams and Lemmy Kilmister hatched an egg…this egg was incubated under a neon light for twelve years (which is approximately the time Wild Turkey ages in the bottle), and were hatched in a juke joint…” These ruffians draw on influences ranging from early Western Swing to rough-edged Truck Driving ballads; Bob Wills all the way to Merle Haggard 15 or so years after that funny album cover with the Chihuahua in his arms. Think of them as the perfect gentlemen to bring home for Christmas, if only you could get the stains off their Wranglers and the cheap whiskey off their breath.
In voting completed yesterday, frontline employees of the state of Illinois represented by the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) Council 31 elected to implement their new collective bargaining agreement with the state.
It was the second time that state workers have voted on the agreement. The re-vote was necessary because a condition of the first ratification vote—that the state would drop its appeal of a court ruling on the matter of back wages owed to employees since July 2011—has not yet been met. While the Quinn Administration sought to drop the appeal, Attorney General Lisa Madigan holds final authority on such matters and has indicated she will not yet do so.
“Frontline state employees have done their part,” AFSCME Council 31 executive director Henry Bayer said. “They work, often without adequate staff, in state parks and prisons, to care for the most vulnerable and protect children from abuse.
“We urge legislators to act now to pass House Bill 212, House Amendment 2, to pay state workers the back wages they are owed.”
* If you’ve been watching the live session coverage post, you already know that the medical marijuana bill (HB 1) just passed the Senate on a vote of 35-21. The bill now goes to the governor.
* The Question: Your thoughts on this bill passage?
* Ever since the Tribune poll came out last week which showed Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s poll numbers slipping, particularly with African-Americans, the Chicago media has seemed to really amp up the criticism.
Down was up and up was down as Emanuel joined business and labor leaders at McCormick Place to begin the formidable job of selling the concept of using more than $100 million in public money to bankroll a 10,000-seat arena near McCormick Place. It will become the new men’s and women’s basketball home of the DePaul Blue Demons.
It’s a tough sell. Aldermen, union leaders and local residents have questioned the mayor’s priorities at a time when Emanuel is closing 53 elementary schools, phasing out the city’s 55 percent subsidy for retiree health care and using millions in overtime to mask a shortage of police officers.
Aldermen, have your heads stopped spinning over all the details in that McCormick Place/Navy Pier megadeal announced Thursday?
If so, we have some questions for you. No, not about that megadeal. About the last megadeal. The one on revising the parking meter contract that was announced 19 days ago.
The Elevate finance scheme may be quite different from the Soldier Field deal, but the question is the same: Who, exactly, would be responsible in the event of cost overruns, or runaway operating expenses, or insufficient hotel tax revenue, or the financial collapse of one of the players in this project — or if the facility just turns out to be a white elephant nobody patronizes?
There’s nothing inherently wrong about public-private partnerships. But tell us now: If this thing flops, who is the ultimate guarantor? Because if it’s Tommy and Tammy Taxpayer, they’re already partners in one risky financing deal on the lakefront.
We’re not convinced that his big, new addition to McCormick Place — a 10,000-seat sports arena where the DePaul Blue Demons would play basketball — makes sense. Especially when $103 million in taxpayer dollars is involved. If DePaul were to use it 18 nights a year, who are these corporations, schools and conventions just dying to use it the other 347 days?
Mayor Rahm Emanuel on Thursday defended his decision to save $108.7 million-a-year by phasing out the city’s 55 percent subsidy for retiree health care and forcing 30,000 retired city employees to make the switch to ObamaCare.
hey
“There’s another way to upset people, which is saddle `em with a half-billion dollars worth of costs with no way to pay it. That, too, will have a lot of other people upset,” Emanuel said.
Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle broadly criticized Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s education agenda Thursday, saying the Chicago Public Schools teachers’ strike last year had provided the excuse for a sweeping school-closure plan that “weakens our public schools.”
In an exclusive interview with the Chicago Sun-Times, she suggested the mayor and his handpicked schools officials refrain from shuttering 13 of the 54 schools marked for closure. She noted that hearing officers hired to oversee the process recommended that those schools stay open. […]
“I think he came into office critical of the teachers,” she replied. “If you spend the whole year before you have to negotiate a contract insulting your teachers, I don’t know what you expect. They had a contract that said they were entitled to a raise, and then the Board of Education that he appointed refused to give it to them. That was the first summer that he came into office.”
Asked if she expected closing so many schools would trigger teacher layoffs, Preckwinkle replied, “How could it not? How could it not? It weakens the teachers’ union and I would argue it weakens our public schools. You know, one of the people in the public schools who I admire most talked to me a couple months ago — it was so depressing — the comment was, ‘I think they’re deliberately trying to destroy our public schools.’ ”
The Chicago Teachers Union’s decision to go to court to try to stop the city from closing 53 elementary schools, while not unexpected, makes clear that the Board of Education’s vote on the proposal next week will not put an end to the controversy.
The two lawsuits, filed on behalf of parents and their special needs children, say the proposed school closings are unfair, will harm students with disabilities and are discriminatory because almost all the students affected are African-American.
Making the case to close Ericson Academy on the West Side, Chicago Public Schools officials stressed that it would cost $9.6 million to fix the 51-year-old building. What they didn’t point out in materials provided to parents was that they planned to spend nearly as much this summer on repairs to Sumner Elementary, where Ericson students would be reassigned.
District officials said one downside of Calhoun Elementary, also slated for closing, was its lack of air conditioning in every classroom. Yet records that were not part of the district’s presentation on closings show the designated replacement school, Cather Elementary, would require the installation of 33 window units to bring cooling to every room.
Mayor Rahm Emanuel has returned a $10,000 campaign donation from a lobbyist for a tech firm disqualified from a city program this week after the Tribune raised questions about potential violations of the mayor’s self-imposed limits on political fundraising, an Emanuel spokeswoman confirmed Thursday.
The action by Emanuel came a day after he announced he would return $15,000 in donations from several key figures behind the CityScan tech firm that potentially violated the mayor’s executive order banning contributions from vendors seeking city business. The company was also removed from the list of firms prequalified to get a city contract under Emanuel’s municipal marketing program.
* The truly big state money is spent on employer pension costs at the Teachers Retirement System. Higher education pension costs are a relative drop in the bucket…
Illinois’ public colleges and universities will gradually begin picking up the costs of their employees’ pensions starting next year under an agreed plan announced Thursday by House Speaker Michael Madigan and higher-education representatives.
“It’s only the right thing to do,” Madigan (D-Chicago) told reporters after the open meeting. “Whenever one person spends money and another person pays the bill it’s a bad policy, especially for government.”
Madigan’s long-sought pension ‘cost-shift’ bargain - an idea not contained in either of the two major pension reform bills floating in the Legislature - comes in the second week of his formal discussions with higher education institutions.
Under the plan, the state’s public universities and community colleges would pay an additional one-half percent of payroll costs into the pension system each year starting in fiscal year 2015 until the colleges cover all costs. Madigan indicated similar changes to elementary and secondary school districts were coming but did not discuss details.
Universities and colleges privately signed on to this concept months ago. So this isn’t completely “new.”
The proposal also allows community colleges and universities to opt out of future pension enhancements that might be approved by the General Assembly, since they would be responsible for picking up any additional costs associated with it.
* While this initial agreement won’t save a ton of money for the state, it will cost the colleges and universities a noticeable sum…
Republicans opposed to the change contend the move could drive up property taxes as community colleges seek to offset the extra burden. Representatives for the state’s universities and community colleges acknowledged they will have to reduce positions, cut programs, and raise tuition and fees to make ends meet.
Tuition across the state already has been on the rise in recent years. The base annual tuition for new students at the University of Illinois’ flagship Urbana-Champaign campus starts at $11,834 — a 112 percent increase from 10 years ago. With fees and housing costs, the yearly price tag grows to at least $24,729.
The pension shift will cost the U. of I. an estimated $5 million to $6 million each year, President Robert Easter said. Southern Illinois University would need to set aside a projected $3 million to $3.5 million each year, President Glenn Poshard said.
But the two leaders contended that they would rather be forced to make tough spending decisions than face additional cuts to general state spending. Those cutbacks have been the norm in recent years as the state struggles to get its finances in order.
Rep. Elaine Nekritz, D-Northbrook, said the plan for universities and community colleges will be discussed with public school districts.
“We want to have a discussion with the local districts and those representing the local districts here to see whether this program works for them, doesn’t work for them,” Nekritz said.
* Caterpillar’s CEO Doug Oberhelman sat down for an interview with Business Week…
Oberhelman paid his way through Millikin University, a small private college in Decatur, “by working at a bank, where he did everything from sign home mortgages to repossess cars.”
“It was a fabulous experience,” he told Businessweek. “You knock on the door, and you tell somebody you’re gonna take their car away — and usually they’re down on their luck, and their car is the last thing they have. So I learned to deal with that.”
I prefer to charitably interpret that remark as meaning the experience gave him the ability to “deal with” human suffering. Others may not be so charitable.
* It’s been a very long, difficult week and it ain’t over yet, but let’s lighten it up a little.
My former intern Barton Lorimor and his wife Jen came over to the Capitol Fax International Headquarters (my house) Monday night and met Oscar the Puppy. Oscar loved them both, but he was particularly fond of Barton. Watch that little tail wag…
Sponsoring Sen. Kwame Raoul said he believes the restrictions in HB 183 are needed to protect public safety by keeping guns out of the wrong hands and out of sensitive places.
But many lawmakers expressed concerns over a provision that requires a person to have “good moral character” — the basis on which local law enforcement could object to a person’s application — and “proper cause” to carry a weapon in Illinois.
“What are you looking for? The guy didn’t go to enough of his kids’ softball games …? That someone drank too much, that they didn’t spend enough time at home? … What is it that you’re looking for in that?” asked Sen. Dale Righter, R-Mattoon.
Illinois State Police Lt. Darrin Clark cited as an example a person who has had repeated run-ins with police despite never having been charged with a crime.
“There’s a number of individuals that are ‘on the bubble,’ so to speak, that are not a risk at this point, but there’s just something not quite right,” Clark said. “There would have to be a pattern of behavior that had been documented.”
But Righter argued the bill’s language is too vague and could lead to law enforcement denying permits to basically anyone they wish.
By Thursday night, however, Raoul said he was drafting an amendment to be considered Friday that would remove the “good moral character” criterion.
Raoul said he would keep intact the consideration of a “proper reason for carrying a firearm” because it has been tested in Indiana and gives leeway to reject an applicant whose desire to carry a gun is “inconsistent with public safety.”
In addition, Raoul said, he plans to amend phrasing to tighten up the language so that “there would be less fear of an arbitrary objection from a local sheriff.”
After Thursday’s committee vote, Senate President John Cullerton (D-Chicago) said the concealed-carry legislation could surface for a floor vote as early as Friday, but the top Senate Democrat stopped short of predicting its passage.
If it’s adopted and moves to the House, it will compete with an NRA-backed plan that fell seven votes short of passage last month but could resurface. That plan got significantly more support than a more restrictive measure, more in line with Raoul’s, that also failed last month.
House Speaker Michael Madigan, D-Chicago, said he discussed the issue with Raoul and acknowledged large differences among various proposals.
“It won’t be easy,” Madigan told reporters Thursday. “People are going to be asked to compromise, they’re going to be asked to do some things they really don’t want to do.”
No one is happy with a bill permitting the concealed carrying of weapons that passed out of the Illinois Senate Executive Committee Thursday by a 10-4-1 vote.
But the bill — the result of a months-long effort by state Sen. Kwame Raoul to find a middle ground — is the best option on the table for resolving this issue. It could come to a vote as early as Friday in the Senate, and the vote is expected to be close.
* And the Tribune has a good infographic that breaks down the components of Raoul’s bill. Check it out. From that page…
Legislation lowering Illinois’ voting age to 17 for primary elections has passed the Democrat-controlled state legislature and is on its way to Gov. Pat Quinn (D) for his signature.
Many believe the law is designed to create a permanent Democrat majority in Illinois using young Hispanic voters.
Illinois is home to two million Latinos and 773,000 Hispanic eligible voters. More than a third of that are between the ages of 18 and 29.
Um, OK.
I’m not gonna take a position on this particular bill either way because I really don’t care one way or the other. But the measure only applies to primary voters. If somebody is 17 at the time of the primary, but will be 18 at the time of the general election, then that person can vote in the primary. I really don’t see how this is some sort of “brown people conspiracy.” C’mon, man.
And secondly, even if it is a vast and nefarious conspiracy, why not start competing for those votes instead of complaining? Didn’t most of the voting restrictions that the GOP tried to put in place in other states before last year’s presidential election backfire? How about just getting out there with a winning message?
…Adding… Apparently, lots of Republicans are participating in this alleged conspiracy…
The Senate recently approved the bill 43-9. The House approved the bill 95-22 in April.
A controversial measure that would change how the U.S. Census counts Illinois prison inmates is advancing in Springfield.
The census counts Illinois’ prison inmates as residents of the town the prison is in, not the town they came from.
That population can affect a region’s eligibility for government money.
State House members narrowly approved a bill Wednesday saying the state will start keeping track of an inmates’ last known address for census purposes.The measure passed with the bare minimum of favorable votes, 60-55.
The bill’s passage upset Republican State Rep. Chad Hays from Danville, which has a prison that currently holds about 1,800 inmates, according to the Illinois Department of Corrections.
“I just lost 2,000 residents,” Hays said after the vote.
* The Question: Should prisoners be counted by the Census at their current prison address or at their last known home address? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
Um, actually, that’s not true. Retirees are most definitely impacted. They’d have to choose between continuing with subsidized government health insurance or taking a reduced COLA.
How the heck did she not know that retirees would be impacted before she trumpeted her own support?
*** UPDATE *** I had the following e-mail exchange with an AFT spokesperson today…
AFT: Rich- I wanted to make sure you saw that Randi sent Fred Klonsky a longer comment off twitter to clarify why she and IFT support the pension proposal. He made it a separate post.
Miller: Yes, I saw that. She doesn’t address the issue about how she got her facts wrong. Can you?
AFT: She quickly corrected her tweet. Then she sent Fred that longer message since she didn’t feel like twitter’s 140 characters was sufficient to detail her thoughts on the bill
Miller: But why was she wrong in the first place?
AFT: 140 characters is an art, not a science and didn’t effectively capture her thoughts—hence the longer blog comment.
I was told by somebody else that Weingarten has been in transit and tweeting on the go. She knew that retirees were in the bill, but that the inclusion wasn’t unreasonable.
The Senate’s Assignment Committee has just assigned Amendment 1 sponsored by Sen. Raoul to House Bill 183 to the Senate’s Executive Committee.
Earlier this session, Senate President John J. Cullerton designated Senate Judiciary Chairman Kwame Raoul to negotiate a legislative proposal for concealed carry.
Senate President Cullerton issued the following statement regarding House Bill 183:
“I want to commend Sen. Raoul for negotiating another tough issue on behalf of our caucus. The framework of this proposal acknowledges the diversity of our state, embraces local control, and provides for sensible safeguards.”
The Senate’s Executive Committee will take up that proposal today. Once amended, House Bill 183 does the following:
· Directs State Police to give concealed carry licenses to people who meet certain qualifications
· Allows local law enforcement to object to a local resident’s application
· Allows a gun owner to carry a concealed weapon in Chicago only with a special endorsement; while applicants are subject to the same qualifications, Chicago police can conduct their own investigation
· Prohibits loaded weapons in certain kinds of places, e.g. schools, hospitals and public transit
· Allows home rule municipalities to ban guns in other kinds of places by ordinance
· Requires applicants to pass a firearm training course
· Closes the private sale and transfer loophole by requiring a seller to verify that the buyer’s FOID Card is still valid
· Strengthens mental health reporting requirements
· Requires a gun owner to report a lost or stolen gun within three days of realizing it is missing
* Reboot Illinois has a pretty good side-by-side comparison of House Speaker Michael Madigan’s pension reform bill and Senate President John Cullerton’s bill. Click the pick for a much larger image…
* The AP has a story up which breaks no new ground on the potential gubernatorial candidacies of Lisa Madigan and Bill Daley. Adlai’s quote at the end, however, is worth an excerpt…
While the all-in-the-family field of potential candidates may seem to some like yet another Illinois political oddity, it isn’t so striking to former U.S. Sen. Adlai Stevenson III, whose own Illinois family tree includes a vice president, secretary of state and a governor.
“My father used to say he was born with an incurable, hereditary case of politics,” Stevenson said. “You’re born into a life of service, and sometimes you’re just conditioned to carry on.”
Provides that if expenditures are incurred for hosting receptions, benefits, and other large gatherings held for purposes of goodwill or otherwise to influence executive, legislative, or administrative action and if the total number of State officials invited to such an event is equal to or greater than the number of State legislators in the smaller minority caucus of either the House of Representatives or the Senate, as defined in the rules of those chambers, then only the total amount of the expenditure, the date of the event, and the estimated number of officials in attendance shall be reported.
That language is specifically designed to help out the Senate Republican caucus. The existing statute allows the limited disclosure for events when there are “25 or more State officials invited.” Before last year’s elections, the Senate Republicans had 24 members, so lobbyists would invite another Republican official to make it 25.
But now the Senate Republicans have just 19 caucus members. That makes things a bit tougher, and any event with just the SGOPs requires full disclosure for each member. Something needed to be done, and it was. At least in the Senate.
Well, at least the vote didn’t end in a fistfight.
But the Illinois Senate did give state Sen. Mike Jacobs, D-East Moline, a good punch in the snout when it voted 52-1 last week to require that all lawmakers disclose relatives who are lobbyists.
Two years ago, Jacobs and state Sen. Kyle McCarter, R-Lebanon, got into an altercation after McCarter made an issue of Jacobs sponsoring a bill that Jacobs’ father, a lobbyist, was pushing.
During the scuffle, McCarter said he got punched.
Jacobs said he didn’t do it.
One thing is certain: it was an in-your-face confrontation seldom seen on the floor of the Illinois Senate.
The issue of lawmaker relatives lobbying re-emerged last Thursday when the Senate approved Senate Bill 1361. Jacobs was the only person in the chamber to vote against the measure that requires all lawmakers to disclose any relatives who are lobbyists.
“This is really just a baby step in the area of ethics, but it’s a step in the right direction,” said state Sen. Darin LaHood, R-Dunlap.
McCarter added, “It’s essential that everyone in government be transparent – even Mike Jacobs.”
For his part, Jacobs says he is the most transparent person in the state Senate.
“This is just a case of politicians trying to make themselves look better than they really are,” he said. “I refused to play along. This is just a game of Gotcha!”
Jacobs is up for reelection next year. He should’ve voted for that bill.
* Bloomington and Normal haven’t yet started talking about what could happen if home rule units are given the power to add areas to the state’s concealed carry off-limits list, as has been proposed by Sen. Kwame Raoul…
Bloomington Mayor Tari Renner said it’s premature to comment on Raoul’s idea.
“As a city, as a community, we haven’t even begun to have this conversation yet,” he said. “We don’t know what the repercussions of this would be.”
Normal Mayor Chris Koos said he couldn’t comment without having discussed the issue with the City Council or seeing the context of it within the overarching legislation.
* But the Springfield city council discussed last night what might happen if the General Assembly fails to act by June 9th and the state’s public carry laws are struck down as unconstitutional. From an e-mail sent to me by Springfield Ald. Sam Cahnman…
I along with a number of other Alderman plan to introduce an ordinance to regulate concealed carry in the event the General Assembly fails to act by the June 9th deadline.
As you know, we are a home rule unit. The ordinance would probably honor concealed carry permits from other jurisdictions and allow other Illinois residents to carry if they have a FOID card. It will probably allow business to prohibit carry in their establishment if they got on a computer list and posted the appropriate sign.
It may exclude certain public buildings from the right to carry, like the courthouse and maybe the Capitol Building, or we may just leave it up to the governmental entity that occupies the building, State or County.
We discussed this at our meeting last night of the Committee of the Whole of the City Council.
* By the way, Sen. Raoul penned a Sun-Times op-ed about his bill…
I have spoken with both victims of gun violence and Second Amendment advocates, and this week I will introduce the Gun Safety and Responsibility Act. This bill satisfies the court order, while meeting the critical need for reasonable gun safety laws in the communities most affected by violence.
In Chicago, where we experience the bulk of gun violence, this law would put in place additional layers of security before a person could receive a concealed-carry permit. Not only would the Illinois State Police have to approve the application, but the Chicago Police superintendent also would have to sign off on it.
This system would pose no threat to law-abiding citizens. People with criminal records or a history of mental illness still would be barred from owning firearms. People with licenses would be prohibited from carrying guns in sensitive areas such as schools, child-care centers, hospitals, sports arenas and establishments that serve alcohol. Private businesses and property owners could prohibit people from carrying guns on their property. […]
But the recent showdown in Washington over universal background checks has exposed the intransigence of extremist opponents of common-sense legislation. They stand in the way of any firearm regulation, no matter how reasonable. They count on an energized minority to thwart the will of the rest of us, but it won’t happen here.
Thursday, May 16, 2013 - Posted by Advertising Department
[The following is a paid advertisement.]
As financial cooperatives, credit unions function as economic democracies. Every customer is both a member and an owner. Each member has the opportunity to vote in electing board members and members also run for election to the board. A credit union’s board of directors consists of unpaid volunteers, elected by and from the membership – everyday people like you. Unlike most other financial institutions, credit unions do not issue stock or pay dividends to outside stockholders. Instead, earnings are returned to members in the form of lower loan rates, higher interest on deposits, and lower fees. Board members serve voluntarily. Speaking of volunteering, the credit union “People Helping People” philosophy motivates credit unions to get involved in countless community charitable activities and worthwhile causes. A credit union’s goal is to serve all members well, including those of modest means - every member counts. Credit unions exist solely for this reason, not to make a profit. Members know their credit union will be there for them in challenging times, as well as good – which is the reason why members are so fiercely loyal.
* From UCLA’s Williams Institute, which used US Census data in its estimates…
With the passage of marriage equality legislation in Minnesota, 18% of the entire U.S. population and 22% of same-sex couples now live in the 12 states, and the District of Columbia, where same-sex couples can legally marry. In 2009, only 3% of the U.S. population and 5% of same-sex couples lived in marriage equality states.
If Illinois extended marriage to same-sex couples, and the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Prop. 8 in California, more than 4 in 10 same-sex couples (or 41%) would live in the 14 states and the District of Columbia where they could legally marry. Thirty-four percent of the entire U.S. population would also live in marriage equality states.
Just like with abortion, we now see Catholic and Protestant politicians alike who defy the tenets of their own faith to pander to the well-funded Homosexual Lobby. Oh yes, when it’s campaign season, they’re “religious.” But down in Springfield, it’s another matter. Some day these phony-baloney politicians like Mike Madigan will learn the hard way that God is not mocked.
GROW-IL (Growing Resources and Opportunity for the Workforce in Illinois) coalition applauds business, labor, environmental and transportation groups for coming together this week to fashion an agreement to develop common-sense hydraulic fracturing regulations for Illinois. The Coalition believes this growing industry will create thousands of good, high paying jobs across Illinois, generate hundreds of millions of dollars for the state and put in place important environmental safeguards.
“GROW-IL is pleased that such a diverse group was able to come together and put forth well-rounded hydraulic fracturing legislation,” said Mark Denzler, Vice President & COO, Illinois Manufacturers’ Association. “After very long and detailed negotiations, everyone put the people of Illinois first and came together to establish a hydraulic fracturing regulations that will create jobs, stimulate the economy and provide regulations to protect our environment, all of which will have a significant impact on Illinois.”
“The working men and women of organized labor appreciate the hard work by all parties that has gone into this significant agreement,” said Michael T. Carrigan, President of the Illinois AFL-CIO. “This will result in good-paying jobs for working families in Illinois.”
* The Tribune once again rails against the gaming bill. For example…
It makes no sense to structure oversight so the Gaming Board doesn’t review matters as crucial as the choice of a company to operate a casino until after the city’s casino authority already has made its decision. At every other casino, the Gaming Board isn’t just a rubber stamp; its regulators walk the walk with the casino developer from the get-go.
The language doesn’t make the Gaming Board a “rubber stamp.” It gives the Board power to veto any operator chosen. That’s just a complete misrepresentation of the facts.
It reminds us of Senate legislation that House Speaker Michael Madigan recently amended to create a much better pension reform bill.
Speaker Madigan, take this rigged casino bill away from sponsors who plainly won’t write an expansion plan without weakened enforcement at Chicago-owned casinos. Maybe a Madigan casino plan, like the Madigan pension plan, would be a vast improvement on the Senate’s proposal.
Madigan is not involved with gaming negotiations because he has a conflict of interest. So, if he ignored his conflict of interest and interjected himself into the gaming bill talks, the Tribune’s reporters would likely write a series of stories about Madigan’s conflicts and the Tribune editorial board would denounce Madigan for being a walking conflict of interest.
After much contemplation and discussion with several Republican activists, I am withdrawing my name from future consideration. I look forward to working with the new Chairman and together focusing on rebuilding a Republican brand. As I have stated several times, we must be more inclusive to revive and revitalize our party.
* The Sun-Times initially broke the story about a mega-project near McCormick Place that would house DePaul’s basketball team, two major hotels and possibly a new casino…
Mayor Rahm Emanuel is expected to announce this week plans for a $300 million 12,000-seat arena for DePaul University at McCormick Place — a proposal that will call for millions in taxpayer dollars, sources tell the Chicago Sun-Times.
The mayor will also announce plans to build two mega hotels on McPier property in the hopes of aggressively growing convention and meeting business in Chicago. […]
“If I was a betting person, I would say McCormick Place is where you’re going to find a Chicago casino,” said an official who has taken part in development discussions. “I would guarantee you that’s where it’s going.” […]
A source with knowledge of the proposal said one of the mega hotels is slated for the site directly north of McCormick Place between Indiana Street and Prairie Avenue. The other would be on the north side of Cermak Road, which is owned by Centerpoint, a huge industrial real estate property owner, sources say. The west side of McCormick Place, near Cermak, is the area tentatively being considered for the arena.
Sources familiar with the plan said the city would attempt to sell the proposal as not just a basketball arena for DePaul but as a place to attract mid-size convention shows that are too small for McCormick Place and too large for Navy Pier. […]
Gov. Pat Quinn is ruling out any direct infusion of money from the state budget.
“We’re not discussing any scenarios where there would be direct state support. That’s not something the state can afford right now,” said Brooke Anderson, a Quinn spokeswoman said.
The facility would be partly funded with $125 million in public money — $55 million in special taxing district funds and $70 million in McPier bond funds supported by hotel taxes, a second source familiar with the deal said. DePaul University would chip in another $70 million, the source said. […]
Emanuel spoke with Illinois House GOP leader Tom Cross and told him the project would require state legislation so that McPier bond funds and city tax increment financing funds could be directed toward it, a spokeswoman for Cross said.
House Speaker Michael Madigan said he’s talked “a little bit, not a lot” with the mayor about the proposed project and said it’s uncertain what action the legislature might need to take to make it happen.
“It is certainly worthy of consideration because it’d be a huge construction project, but we’d like to get the details,” Madigan said.
Chicago will phase out its 55 percent subsidy for retiree health care by January 2017 but continue that coverage for the oldest retirees, under a mayoral plan that will free taxpayers from a $108.7 million a year burden. Thirty thousand retired city employees will be forced to switch to Obamacare.
“With an increasing retiree population, earlier retirement ages and longer life spans, the ability of the city to continue to provide these benefits is totally untenable,” City Comptroller Amer Ahmad told the Chicago Sun-Times on Tuesday.
“It’s far too expensive and could have an adverse impact on our credit worthiness and add a significant long-term liability to the city’s financials,” he said. “This is just a number that continues to grow over the years. We have to be financially responsible.”
*** UPDATE *** From AFSCME…
“AFSCME is gravely concerned that the Emanuel Administration has offered no details except to say non-Medicare retirees will have to seek private insurance through an exchange that hasn’t yet been launched. This uncertainty will cause anxiety and fear for tens of thousands of seniors who gave their working lives to public service—men and women whose retirement savings are already under attack in the name of ‘pension reform.’
“Our union will be working to get answers to our many questions, to ensure the City Council closely oversees the administration’s proposals, and to protect access to affordable health care for city retirees now and in the future.”
* Other stuff…
* Quinn on new FedEx facility: Best way to help people is with a j-o-b
* Voluntary school merger bill goes to Quinn: The measure comes out of Lt. Gov. Sheila Simon’s Classrooms First Commission, which studied ways for schools to save money by reducing duplicative practices and combining educational offerings.
* Allegedly drunk limo driver prompts House bill to boost DUI penalties: The proposal, sponsored by House Republican leader Tom Cross (R-Oswego) and Rep. Dennis Reboletti (R-Elmhurst) comes in response to limo driver Richard Madison taking 23 Oswego East High School students to their prom in Glen Ellyn last weekend while allegedly driving with a blood alcohol level that was three times the legal limit.
Secretary of State Jesse White believes the idea of reducing Illinois’ drunk-driving threshold merits “further study,” his office confirmed Tuesday after a federal agency recommended all states scrap their .08 DUI standards.
The National Transportation Safety Board urged all 50 states to lower their drunk-driving limits by nearly half from .08 blood-alcohol content to .05 blood-alcohol content.
“It’s an issue that needs further study. We commend them for looking into this and the work they’ve done. But we feel at this point, it needs more study to go to .05,” White spokesman Dave Druker told the Chicago Sun-Times. […]
A 180-pound man could drink no more than two 12-ounce servings of light beer in an hour to stay below a .05 blood-alcohol content, according to an online blood-alcohol calculator maintained by the University of Oklahoma.
* The Question: Should the DUI limit be lowered to .05? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
An Illinois senator seeking to keep some concealed carry limits in place after a federal judge found the state’s ban unconstitutional said Tuesday that his compromise plan would allow large cities to customize their lists of places that are off limits to concealed weapons.
Sen. Kwame Raoul, a Chicago Democrat, told The Associated Press that cities would be able to designate unique locales, such as a park or cherished landmark, as gun-free zones above and beyond what restrictions would be put into a law allowing public possession of firearms,
Raoul said that a community could have a “sensitive place” not recognized by a state law as not appropriate for people carrying weapons. But the Chicago Democrat predicted there wouldn’t be a great demand for customized places beyond those where concealed weapons already are prohibited under state and local laws.
“They would have to get pretty creative to think of something additional,” Raoul said. “It’s sort of a security blanket to some who are just nervous about concealed carry generally.”
Citing high-crime rates and a “different atmosphere” in places like Chicago, Raoul said it only make sense to limit guns in densely populated areas.
Sen. Tim Bivins, R-Dixon, who had been appointed to work alongside Raoul on the bill, said Tuesday he no longer supports the legislation with this added provision.
“The problem that you have is there are so many competing interests going on in a bill like this that when you try to satisfy a lot to get the votes, you end up satisfying no one,” Bivins said. “Sen. Raoul’s put a lot of work into this … but at this point in time, it’s not something we’re going to agree on.”
The concept of the bill is similar to Gov. Pat Quinn’s long-standing push to give home-rule units the power to create their own concealed-carry restrictions, Bivins said.
“The problem with that is becomes patchwork and you don’t know where it’s legal and where it’s not,” Bivins said.
If you think that would create a problematic patchwork, just let the courts strike down the state’s public carry laws and see how weird things get. There are over 200 home rule units in Illinois. You’d need an iPhone app to figure things out.
* Yesterday, we took a look at an analysis by legal expert and Supreme Court watcher Kurt Jenkins. I followed up with Jenkins later in the day with this e-mail…
I’m curious how you think the Supreme Court roll call will break out on a pension bill. Doubt you can speculate much without an actual law, but wondered anyway.
Jenkins said I was right that he’d be hesitant to speculate, but he did offer this…
I think a few things are clear from the Court’s recent history. I don’t agree that the Kilbride Court is a political court; I think their opinions show it’s a pragmatic and fairly cautious one.
It’s deeply ingrained in appellate judges to be reluctant to step in and strike down what the political branches have done. They’ll only vote to overturn a statute if they feel they have no other choice, and that’s particularly true in a case like this that’s clearly important to the state.
So those attacking whatever bill the legislature passes will certainly have the burden of proof before the Court; this isn’t a race that starts out even.
That said, I think we’ll get a much clearer picture of the Court’s inclinations relatively soon. As you know, they’ve got the Kanerva v. Weems pension case in front of them now. It may well be heard on the September docket – if not, then certainly no later than the November docket. We’ll know far more about what the Justices’ concerns in this area of the law after seeing the Kanerva argument.
* Meanwhile, some of y’all have wildly overreacted to the news that Speaker Madigan predicted his pension plan would get a majority of at least four votes on the Illinois Supreme Court. But Madigan has insisted that he didn’t have any contact with any of the justices, he was just speculating. So, you can probably remove your tinfoil hats.
Does Madigan really have that much clout, I asked [former state Rep. Bill Black], that he can practically tell the Supreme Court how to rule on a major constitutional issue?
That’s not it, said Black. It’s that Madigan knows the Supreme Court members’ backgrounds and how they interact.
“I don’t think Sherlock Holmes would ever be able to trace any indication, verbal, written in code or whatever, that Mike Madigan would ever suggest to a Supreme Court justice how they should find a certain case. And I don’t think he would do so,” said Black, who served for 14 years in the Illinois House with Madigan.
“But I do think he has a very keen knowledge how that court works. And he certainly has a keen knowledge of where those people came from. I think that gives him an advantage. If anybody could understand how they would react to anything, it’s probably Speaker Madigan.”
* Global Strategy Group has a new poll out about the parking meter deal. I’ve seen all of the questions before these questions and it doesn’t set up the issue one way or another. The poll of 501 registered voters was taken May 9-12 and had a margin of error of +/-4.4 percent. It was conducted for the Illinois Restaurant Association, which has ties to Mayor Rahm Emanuel…
* “As you may know, in 2009, the city leased control of Chicago’s parking meters to a private company for a one-time payment of one-point-two billion dollars. Do you support or oppose this parking meter deal?”…
90 percent opposed. That’s what you call a radioactive issue.
* “Recently, Mayor Rahm Emanuel renegotiated some pieces of the parking meter lease agreement and the plan is now waiting for approval by the Chicago City Council. Have you heard anything about this deal between the city and the company leasing the city’s parking meters? [IF YES] Have you heard a lot about this plan, some, or only a little?”…
* “And based on what you know, do you support or oppose the city’s deal to renegotiate the terms of the parking meter lease agreement?”…
So the “uninformed” total isn’t bad. Now onto the “informed vote.”
* “Now I’m going to read you a bit more about the city’s deal to renegotiate the terms of the parking meter lease agreement and afterwards, I’d like to ask you about what you’ve just heard…. As you may know, the city of Chicago and the private firm holding the parking meter lease were in a legal battle over compensation for lost parking meter revenue due to street closures and other issues. Mayor Emanuel recently settled that lawsuit and now the city will be paying 20 million dollars a year less than the company had demanded, amounting to more than a billion dollars over the life of the deal. As part of the settlement, there will be free parking on Sundays in the city’s residential neighborhoods, but metered parking hours will be extended by at least one hour - from 9 pm to 10 pm - the other six days of the week. There will also be a new pay-by-cell option so that drivers can pay with their cell phone rather than going to the meter. Based on this new information, do you support or oppose the city’s deal to renegotiate the terms of the parking meter lease agreement?”…
But…
* “As part of this new deal, some changes would be made to the city’s parking meters… Under the new plan, parking would be free on Sunday in Chicago’s neighborhoods outside of downtown and River North. In exchange for free Sundays, the new plan would extend parking meter hours by one hour to 10 pm the other six days of the week. Residential parking in neighborhoods that ends at 6pm will continue to end at the same time. Within downtown and River North, parking would not be free on Sundays and parking hours would be extended by three hours until midnight the other six days. . Which system do you prefer? Do you prefer the new plan with free parking on Sundays in most neighborhoods or do you prefer the existing system with shorter hours on the other six days?”…
While a majority supports the new plan, it’s not exactly overwhelming.
Opposition to the plan is limited to the 42nd Ward (52% prefer the existing system). However, even though residents in the 42nd Ward will not receive free Sundays and will have extended hours of operation, nearly a third of respondents in the 42nd prefer the new plan (30%).
* In other polling news, this is pretty much what I believe…
Chicago voters in a Tribune/WGN poll have a message for Cubs executives and Wrigleyville rooftop owners locked in a feud over the team’s proposed ballpark overhaul: A plague on both your houses.
Nearly half said they side with neither the Cubs nor the rooftop owners in the ongoing debate to renovate Wrigley Field, the poll showed. The team’s efforts were backed by 28 percent of voters while the rooftop owners were backed by 21 percent.
The wealthiest voters were more likely to side with the Rickettses. Among those making more than $100,000 a year, 40 percent sided with the North Side team owners while only 24 percent backed the rooftops. The remaining 36 percent didn’t take sides.
Younger voters ages 18-35 were almost equally split — 30 percent for the Cubs and 29 percent for the rooftop owners.
Geographically, voters in North Side wards sided with the Cubs, 43 percent, to 19 percent for the rooftop owners, while 37 percent sided with neither.
* Meanwhile, if the latest Chicago Tribune poll is correct, Chicagoans have been all over the map on a city casino for the past few years…
The latest poll found that 49 percent of Chicago voters surveyed support a casino while 43 percent oppose it. Those numbers are nearly flipped from an October survey that had 49 percent of city voters opposed to a statewide gambling expansion that included a Chicago casino, compared with 40 percent who supported it.
Historically, Chicagoans appear to have hedged their bets on the gambling proposition. In February 2012, 54 percent of city voters backed gambling expansion. In a December 2010 poll, 47 percent supported a city-owned casino.
So, support is up nine points since October, but down five since a year ago February, but about the same as December 2010.
The new poll indicated that younger voters by far were the most supportive of a Chicago-based casino. Fully 56 percent of voters ages 18-35 backed bringing gambling to the city, compared with 40 percent who disagreed.
The latest survey also found a racial gap in the support of expanded gambling. Among white voters surveyed, 54 percent supported a casino with just 38 percent opposed. African-American voters were evenly split at 46 percent, and Latino voters narrowly backed a casino, 49 percent to 46 percent.
* Before we begin, let us recall that Rep. Dunkin’s name appears twice on the “Century Club” trophy. He actually “won” the award three times, but since he did so twice in one year his name is only listed once. He’s the record-holder. And in case you don’t know what the Century Club is, it’s a trophy “awarded” to a House member whose bill receives at least 100 “No” votes.
Dunkin has grown in the past year or two, but I’m not sure he should be giving tactical advice…
In the waning days of the legislative session, at least one Illinois House member is getting antsy over the lack of movement on gay marriage.
Illinois Legislative Black Caucus Chair Ken Dunkin (D-Chicago) said he’s been urging the bill’s sponsor to call it for a vote.
“He needs to do something. The longer he waits, I believe, the less likely he’ll be to get a simple majority in our chamber. I also think he will pick up a few votes once people listen to the debate … This bill will be passed. There’s only 20 of us out of 118. It’s not a Black Caucus issue. The Black Caucus is not responsible for the bill not getting passed. This is Downstater’s issue, this is a rural area issue, a suburban issue.”
Rep. Greg Harris is the sponsor. He’ll move the bill when it’s ready.
And as far as the Black Caucus is concerned, yes, it is a problem. Just two BC members voted “Present” in the Senate, and another was absent due to a serious illness. The Senate’s Black Caucus was not an issue at all. It’s only now, when churches have ginned up the opposition, that the House Black Caucus is shying away from the bill.
The HBC has 20 members, but only a small handful have said they’ll vote for the bill. So, yeah, Chairman, the caucus is an issue.
In FY12, IDOT noted that Transportation Bond Series A Fund expenditures paid for $419.3 million in road construction costs, and over $2.67 billion over the 10 year audit period.
Yet the interest payments on those bonds were classified as “Non-Direct Road Construction Expenditures.” That seems odd.
* Also, the General Assembly stopped paying state police and secretary of state salaries out of the Road Fund a few years ago, so things are different now. There was a big problem, however…
In 2010, lawmakers stopped the practice of using road fund money to pay salaries in the secretary of state’s office and state police, but health insurance charges to the fund didn’t go down by a comparable amount, auditors said.
State officials said a single employee, who no longer works for the state, was responsible for calculating the health insurance charges that should be made to the road fund. Auditors said those calculations weren’t based on actual insurance costs.
Auditors also found the road fund was billed for $54 million more in workers’ compensation costs than it should have been during a three-year period. State officials said this was because lawmakers capped the amount of general fund money that could be used for workers’ comp costs.
I’m not so sure that throwing one guy under the bus is legit here. It seemed back then that it was a deliberate act. From the audit…
Department of Healthcare and Family Services
Road Fund expenditures by HFS during the audit period totaled more than $1 billion and were for Employer Contributions for Group Health Insurance. Payments for Group Health Insurance by HFS began in FY06 at a cost of $126 million. These expenditures increased in each of the next six years. In FY12, expenditures for Group Health Insurance were more than $165 million.
Gov. Pat Quinn’s office and the Illinois Department of Transportation disputed the findings, saying auditors should have included costs such as road construction bond payments, snow removal and other safety upgrades required by the federal government when they calculated the amount spent on “direct road construction.”
Spokeswoman Jae Miller said about 75 percent of the Road Fund goes toward IDOT expenses. She said that’s a “significant increase” over previous administrations.
Senate Resolution Number 788 asked auditors to examine the uses of the Road Fund, including the amounts used for “direct road construction costs.” Since IDOT did not have an established definition of direct road construction expenditures, auditors worked with IDOT and selected certain detail object codes established by the Comptroller and appropriation codes to identify direct road construction expenditures.
In addition to decreased funding available for direct road construction and an increase in non-direct road construction costs, the costs for road construction are also increasing. Exhibit 3-9 shows the average construction costs by type of work per mile. According to IDOT, between 2002 and 2012, the average costs for every type of construction increased.
New construction has more than doubled from $4.02 million/mile from 2002-2004 to $8.91 million/mile from 2009-2012. Increasing construction and non-construction costs combined with declining revenues has caused IDOT to express concern over the number of roads needing repair. IDOT stated that the backlog of State roadway miles in need of improvement is expected to grow significantly through FY18 unless additional revenues are made available. Even if Road Fund revenue was stable, the increase in construction costs would cause a decrease in the amount of direct road construction projects that could be completed.
The high price of commodities is surely contributing to this problem.
