Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Today’s quotable
Next Post: It’s just a bill, part infinity…
Posted in:
* Greg Hinz looks at the governor’s proposed cuts to local government funding…
In a nice little file posted on its website, Voices for Illinois Children, a Chicago-based advocacy group, combined state records with Rauner’s proposal to detail—town by town, county by county and city by city—just how much each of 1,400 local governments stands to lose in the year that begins July 1 if lawmakers adopt the governor’s proposal.
As previously reported, the total, $634 million, is impressive enough. But for those familiar with municipal budgets, the breakdown is meaningful.
For instance, though Chicago leads the list as expected with a potential $133.2 million hole punched in its budget, dozens of Chicago suburbs stand to lose more than $1 million each.
Algonquin would lose $1.5 million, Arlington Heights $3.7 million, Batavia $1.3 million and Berwyn $2.8 million. Bolingbrook would take a $3.6 million hit, Glenview $2.2 million, Hanover Park $1.9 million, Woodstock $1.2 million, Evanston $3.7 million, Oak Park $2.6 million, Schaumburg $3.7 million and Naperville $7 million.
At the county level, Cook would lose $5.2 million, DuPage $4.8 million, Kane $3.0 million, Lake $4.1 million and Will $5.2 million.
You can see the entire list by clicking here.
And if you want to watch a really harsh Daily Herald video editorial about the proposal, click here. Wow.
…Adding… Just for fun, you might wanna click here and read a resolution passed by the Downers Grove village board in 2011 blasting a proposal to slash municipal revenue sharing. The village’s mayor at the time was Ron Sandack, who is now one of Gov. Rauner’s fiercest fiscal defenders.
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 9:37 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Today’s quotable
Next Post: It’s just a bill, part infinity…
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
This will really be a big deal for these communities because many have built these funds into their operating budgets. If a cut this large is sustained we could see major layoffs and service reductions in local government throughout the state. So much for job creation.
Comment by NIUprof Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 9:47 am
Just raise local taxes to cover the gap, right? There hasn’t been any local tax increases since 2015.
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 9:47 am
The bandwagon called “Mayors for Rauner” seems a bit emptier…
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 9:48 am
Video was harsh but I sure got a good chuckle out of it!
Comment by Former Merit Comp Slave Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 9:49 am
If everybody is unhappy with the cuts then that will be the true definition of shared sacrifice.
We cannot continue on the same fiscal path. There has to be pain across the board, including additional taxation.
Comment by Cassiopeia Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 9:51 am
I understand we are in bad shape. But think about these cuts, and the impending cost shifts to these communities for Pensions? I know the Tea Party has been demonized, for some rightly so. But the original “movement” was just regular folks that rose up about unfair taxes. Me thinks a new group or re-branding will begin.. Nobody is looking out for us little guys..
Comment by Walter Mitty Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 9:52 am
Every GA member has a district chock fulla local governments.
He’d have a better chance pushing some teacher pension costs off to suburban and Downstate districts. There’s at least a legislative base in Chicago to build on.
Comment by Wordslinger Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 9:52 am
As Rauner has stated in the past, he is trying to right the financial mess in Illinois and he is not running for a popularity contest. Looks like lots of these communities will have to put a freeze on salaries and ask for employees to chip in to pay for some benefit costs. In the end, the reductions will be much lower and the local governments will give a sigh of relief. There is fat in those local budgets.
Comment by Apocalypse Now Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 9:55 am
Isn’t it time that Chicago raised its property taxes. Seems like the rest of the state is subsidizing Chicago’s liberal but not that liberal Democratic reluctance to do so.
Comment by Cassandra Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 9:56 am
This is just outstanding:
=As a voice for the nearly 50,000 taxpayers of Downers Grove, I urge you to protect local governments from further
harm by resisting any reduction to the local government portion of the income tax.=
Comment by chi Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 9:58 am
===If everybody is unhappy with the cuts then that will be the true definition of shared sacrifice.===
Um, Cuts roll downhill. While people midway down the hill might be “unhappy with the cuts”, the people at the bottom of the hill, the ones losing dollars out of their pockets through evisceration of programs, or loss of a job are the ones bearing the brunt of the cuts. So, Cassiopeia, while you may be “unhappy with the cuts”, since they represent no skin off your back, there’s a big difference between you and the people at the bottom of the hill.
Comment by PublicServant Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 9:58 am
- Apocalypse Now -,
Yeah, you’re right.
Except for the Owl, Rep. Sandack is running the bill for Municipal Bankruptcy, which completely undercuts your “fat” … “baloney”, but allows the Owl Sandack to help Rauner brubg Muni funding to real be “Muni bust-out escape hatches”
But I’m sure your right - Apocalypse Now -, it’s because of the waste, not the Bankruptcy off-ramp…
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 9:59 am
“help Rauner bring Muni funding to really be “Muni bust-out escape hatches”…”
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 10:01 am
“As Rauner has stated in the past, he is trying to right the financial mess in Illinois and he is not running for a popularity contest.”
These cuts force local tax increases, while the state is unwilling to raise taxes at the state level. He is running for a popularity contest. He’s trying to shift the blame for the inevitable higher taxes somewhere off of him.
Comment by Timmeh Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 10:01 am
Wow, it looks like a lot of village trustee and mayoral relatives will be looking for work after these cuts. Maybe towns of 50,000 won’t be able to hire their political buddies as “consultants” and “Village Managers” for $150K-$250K anymore.
What was that “golden parachute” deal that Naperville VM got, something like $400K?
While I don’t know that going “cold turkey” on this is the best thing in the world, but the way this should work is that towns should be given the time to plan for this revenue loss (the GA had since 2011 but squandered the time without developing a serious downsizing plan), have referendum for increasing the tax rates (even for those home rule municipalities) then try to show to taxpayers that they’re spending efficiently and prudently before the referendum vote.
When you’re spiking salaries for pensions and paying some ridiculous salaries for administrators, police, firefighters and streets and san workers, that should be an interesting debate!
Comment by Arizona Bob Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 10:09 am
Oswego, if you don’t think there is some fat in local government budgets, you haven’t a clue.
I seen some governments running with 50% reserves for their operating budgets. And what is the chance of the bankruptcy bill getting thru the GA?
I guess you assume all these communities will be taking bankruptcy. Sorry, Osewego, but it isn’t that easy to take bankruptcy.
Comment by Apocalypse Now Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 10:12 am
Something had to give and everyone needs to get onboard to find ways to work through this necessary, though painful, process…
Comment by scotty in Chicago Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 10:12 am
These aren’t spending cuts. It’s raising state revenue and avoiding spending cuts by grabbing someone else’s money.
It’s just like grabbing the money you pay on your utility bill for the needy.
I’ll gladly pay a surcharge on my utilities to help some keep the heat on. But not as a new tax for GRF.
Rauner said he didn’t need new revenue. So get to it.
Comment by Wordslinger Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 10:13 am
******There is fat in those local budgets.*******
How much fat can there be when for the past several years costs have increased? Have you seen what some of the towns are paying for road salt? or the large increase in water rates? Since the housing bust, many towns have had to pare the budgets as empty foreclosed homes do not pay any property taxes. So please share with me what the fat is.
Comment by Cable Line Beer Gardener Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 10:13 am
Remember when the Daily Herald editorialized against making the 5% permanent and also against a Fair Tax? They didn’t want the revenue. Now they don’t like the cuts.
http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20140327/discuss/140328751/
http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20130910/discuss/709109950/
Comment by Compassionate Not Conservative Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 10:14 am
Apocalypse Now: You make it sound as though what you propose is not happening.
The fact is that local governments across Illinois are still feeling the effects of the 2008 recession. They have acted in a fiscally responsible manner during the economic downturn and have been reducing personnel, cutting services and controlling spending to balance their budgets over the last several years.
Additionally, the locals have asked their employees to chip in more for their health insurance benefits. This goes back to the early 1990s as insurance premiums increased routinely by double digits each and every year.
Pension benefits, however, are established by the General Assembly. Any change in employee share will have to be legislated. Then it will likely have to stand a court challenge on its constitutionality.
Comment by GA Watcher Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 10:14 am
“If everybody is unhappy with the cuts then that will be the true definition of shared sacrifice.”
Of course.
As @GovernorOnePct tweeted: “What does “shared sacrifice” mean? It means Winnetka sacrifices ALMOST as much as Markham!” http://tinyurl.com/ljgus7t
– MrJM
Comment by MrJM Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 10:15 am
” If a cut this large is sustained we could see major layoffs and service reductions in local government throughout the state. So much for job creation.”
————–
There hasn’t been much job creation in local government over the last few years. What really needs to be done is less state regulation (state mandates) imposed on local governments. All the stuff costs money, and it builds up.
The argument always was, the state provides revenue sharing to compensate for state regulatory duties ‘transferred’ to units of local government.
Well, if the state is pulling 50% of the income tax revenue sharing from local governments, what regulations/laws (state mandates) are you repealing so we (the locals) can keep functioning?
Comment by Judgment Day (on the road) Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 10:15 am
Arizona Bob… Actually, I think you are absolutely wrong. You visit Naperville, Geneva, or Arlington Heights lately? These are places people want to live, work, and shop. Residents are very aware of the cost of services in these places. This concept only puts a burden that the state should bear but hasn’t and shift to the local tax payer. One red herring does not make the debate. These communities are fine with the salaries and I would be shocked without State Government meddling, support higher wages for these people that keep us safe, clean, and educate our kids.
Comment by Walter Mitty Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 10:16 am
Apocalypse Now
“I seen some governments running with 50% reserves for their operating budgets.”
Documentation of your statement, please.
Comment by Anyone Remember Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 10:17 am
AS for Mayor/Representative Sandack’s position on LGDF, what’s the old saying? Where you stand depends on where you sit.
Comment by GA Watcher Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 10:18 am
Ummm Greg, Aurora is the second largest city in the state, not sure why you decided not include them (they are also a suburb and looking to lose 9.7 million)
Comment by OneMan Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 10:18 am
@ Cassiopeia - Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 9:51 am:
=If everybody is unhappy with the cuts then that will be the true definition of shared sacrifice.
We cannot continue on the same fiscal path. There has to be pain across the board, including additional taxation.=
where is the shared sacrifice (pain) when it comes to the wealthiest among us? I am not into class warfare — I think wealth is wonderful and this country is all about each achieving their dreams and taking their talents and desires as far as each wish to take it. I keep hearing Rauner talk about shared sacrifice, but I just don’t see it yet in his staff (his wife has a chief of staff for a $100,000 salary) which is very well paid. I have no problem with good salaries, but he seems to be all about sacrifice for some and not for others. He says he is for working families but smashes and rails against union workers who are certainly working families. He wants to freeze property taxes, but proposes cuts to local governments. We do need spending restraint and we certainly need new revenue, but he seems to be determined to crush some and turn Illinois into Kentucky and claim victory.
Comment by facts are stubborn things Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 10:20 am
===I seen some governments running with 50% reserves for their operating budgets. And what is the chance of the bankruptcy bill getting thru the GA?===
Those operating cost? If there are 50% in reserve, where is all that fat you are talking about?
Dope.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 10:22 am
The Owl, that use to be Rep. Sandack is so afraid of Uihline and Rauner, he’d change his name to Don from Ron if it meant they would “like” him.
Rep. Sandack broke my heart.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 10:24 am
The muni cut is a painful one, no doubt about it. When John Cullerton was looking at “all” of it like a juicy porkchop, I don’t remember the outrage here.
If every level of government is going to be involved in this effort, all of them are going to have to reveal what the actual reserves are. There are some cases of hoarding around the state, and many towns that are truly strapped. This exercise will certainly identify who’s who.
The unfunded state mandates really do have to go. Everything was too easy in pushing fiscal accountability downward. This is part of a structural reform. It won’t be easy. Layers of problems over decades will invoke hysteria over just about everything. It’s going to be a bumpy ride
Comment by A guy Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 10:29 am
@Walter Mitty
As someone who’s knocked on doors on in a lot of precincts, I can assure you that you’re wrong about taxpayers and voters knowing how much their “public servants”, teachers and school administrators are making. When they find out, they’re generally outraged, especially in middle class neighborhoods.
This will be a good thing overall. Those communities that have been ripping off the taxpayers will be exposed, and those who’ve been diligently serving the public at rates that are fair will have communities willing to sacrifice to keep what they have going.
Like I said, it should be interesting…but NECESSARY to get this financial crisis under control.
Depending on the state as dysfunctional as it has been has always been a bad idea. Now local governments will have more local control, as is the case in schools, which overall is a good thing.
Comment by Arizona Bob Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 10:29 am
=== The village’s mayor at the time was Ron Sandack, who is now one of Gov. Rauner’s fiercest fiscal defenders. ===
Funny Rauner was up-in-arms about how the Manar bill would undermine school district budgets by reducing state revenue, not a word on Rauner’s plan to do the exact some thing to other units of local government.
Comment by Juvenal Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 10:33 am
I meant Sandack was up in arms ;-P
Comment by Juvenal Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 10:33 am
Is Team Rauner just seeing these numbers for the first time?
Comment by Juvenal Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 10:34 am
Guy, when did Cullerton propose the state grab back all of the local income tax share? Was there a bill or something? No one minded?
Comment by Wordslinger Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 10:40 am
If there are 50% in reserve, where is all that fat you are talking about?= Obviously you have no concept of municipal fund accounting or financial is general. Your are indeed obtuse. A 50% reserve ratio for operating fund indicates the taxpayers or being over taxed and funds from the reserves could be used to cover some of the shortfall. It is very clear to most the 50% cut in funding to local governments is the first shot across the bow. The actual number will be much lower and less of a burden to the local governments.
Comment by Apocalypse Now Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 10:43 am
Some local governments (they know who they are) have a little bit of fat, others are already skin and bones.
Comment by DuPage Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 10:45 am
=== A 50% reserve ratio for operating fund indicates the taxpayers or being over taxed and funds from the reserves could be used to cover some of the shortfall.===
Hmm.
Now they are overtaxed? I thought there was fat?
You said fat?
Whose being obtuse, lol?
Dope.
BTW, those reserves, Munis have them so they aren’t living “paycheck to paycheck” in case they need a new truck, unforeseen repairs are needed, any and all emergencies.
So..,is it being taxed too high or fat going on? “Obtuse”…lol
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 10:49 am
Can all the members of the “Pain Caucus” just go watch Hellraiser for a little while? Basic logic would dictate that we confine the suffering to as small and hardy a group as possible.
Comment by Arsenal Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 11:05 am
keep in mind, that all the low hanging fruit has already been picked. yes, believe me there is still waste and some fat in state government, and we should get at it, however, the real issue in Illinois is and has been revenue. I worked in state government for 30 years, and the only thing that works to control spending is to limit the amount of funds an agency gets to last years plus inflation and it is amazing how much more efficient they become. You cannot however, cut 25% and expect that agency to continue with the services it has in the past. If we would hold spending to expected revenues and change our tax system to a progressive system to include taxing of services we could pay the pensions (re-amortize the debt)pay old bills and properly fund and operate this state. Shake up Illinois? How about a “hand shake” with Illinois to be honest with what we need. We get the government we deserve! The GOP did not want a Kirk Dillard so we got a Bruce Rauner. Calm, competent, moderate, and pragmatic don’t seem to win races in Illinois.
Comment by facts are stubborn things Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 11:07 am
Why do the DH folks, and folks in general, think it’s so impossible to cut spending in lieu of tax increases at the local level, while loudly demanding that the state do just that?
It’s a case of “those people,” not my neighbors and business associates, being always the bad actors.
IMHO there are more cuts and efficiencies to be had locally, than at the state level. No one has got very much fat, but if we must cut, Rauner is right to focus pressure on the locals as part of his approach.
After spreading the pain with this confiscation of funds previously distributed to the locals, we still need to get more state tax revenue to be healthy fiscally. One doesn’t replace the other.
Still waiting for Rauner-supporters among local mayors and county boards, to announce their tax levy freezes. He promised!
Comment by walker Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 11:10 am
==- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 10:24 am:
The Owl, that use to be Rep. Sandack is so afraid of Uihline and Rauner, he’d change his name to Don from Ron if it meant they would “like” him.
Rep. Sandack broke my heart.==
You have company. More than a few GOPers (judging from the last primary) feel the same way, OW.
Add on his dogmatic support to only allow property taxes to go down, it almost seems like Rauner’s game plan is to force municipal bankruptcies. Interesting way to govern…and make Madigan look like a hero blocking this craziness.
Comment by Toure's Latte Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 11:29 am
Walter Mitty: Always enjoy your perspective, but with AZ Bob on this one.
When residents in Arlington Heights complain about taxes being out of control, it’s always local property taxes first. That is spending by local governments, of course. But they are not very aware of actual spending choices by the locals, and are indeed outraged when they are informed. To the credit of the local Tea Party folks in the suburbs, many of them have figured out where the “too much spending” is, and have begun to look hard at villages and other local entities more than at the state.
Comment by walker Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 11:35 am
Bob:
Really? Now you are going after police and firefighter salaries? Is there anybody that you don’t think is overpaid Bob? Your comments suggest you think everybody is overpaid (well, I’m guessing everybody but you). Go be a firefigher or a police officer for just one day Bob. Let us know how it goes and then tell us they are all overpaid. Dope.
Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 11:37 am
==When John Cullerton was looking at “all” of it like a juicy porkchop, I don’t remember the outrage here.==
Please don’t tell me you’ve turned into a victim too.
Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 11:38 am
===Wordslinger - Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 10:40 am:
Guy, when did Cullerton propose the state grab back all of the local income tax share? Was there a bill or something? No one mind====
Dude, JC was at the center of what “then Mayor Sandack” was speaking to. He was looking at this honey pot long before anyone else. You’re astute. How do you not know this? (Never mind, I know the answer)
Comment by A guy Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 11:39 am
This is just an observation- Maybe he’s paving the way for IL to be more like IN and eventually propose to constitutionally allow(big stretch this ever happening) counties and municipalities to collect their own income taxes (I currently pay 1.5% county tax on top of the 3.4% state income tax). That would then go in accordance with his proposed property tax freeze- similar to IN property tax caps. Of course that was after property taxes went through the roof in IN compared to what they were- ex: some people went from paying a few hundred a year($600) to paying a couple thousand($2300)or in worse cases from $2K/yr to $8k/yr or more and then they put caps on them. If enough pain is inflicted on the locals from the reduction in their share of state income taxes, that idea may be floated as their way out.
Comment by carbaby Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 11:45 am
Bob
I would bet there are more than a few people who think you’re overpaid. Let’s all debate your value.
Comment by AnonymousOne Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 11:50 am
Guy, the google is no help in supporting your contention. Maybe you have some links.
Comment by Wordslinger Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 11:53 am
===Add on his dogmatic support to only allow property taxes to go down, it almost seems like Rauner’s game plan is to force municipal bankruptcies. Interesting way to govern…and make Madigan look like a hero blocking this craziness.===
@FakeRonSandack - As long as it’s ok with Mr. Rauner and my really good friend Mr. Uhiline, I’ll say whatever they want!
#IndependentLemming #PastWordsOnlyMatterWhenUhilineSaysSo
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 11:55 am
===Demoralized - Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 11:38 am:
==When John Cullerton was looking at “all” of it like a juicy porkchop, I don’t remember the outrage here.==
Please don’t tell me you’ve turned into a victim too.===
C’mon Demo, really? The state is in dire straights financially. Every rock needs to be turned over before someone closes an orphanage, right? Some munis have huge (over 50%) reserves and have coaxed all kinds of money out of the state over the years. 25% is the standard. Most went through a pretty lean economic time and had a lot of opportunity to cut fat, do early retirements, negotiate new contracts, etc. This so called “sweep” is very broad. There will be things that are swept and things that are spared. It’s very difficult to defend anyone sweeping, but at the same time, this is one of the only opportunities in my lifetime that everything is under review.
It’s not victimhood. When things weren’t as much of a crisis, Cullerton was the champion of taking away the local share of munis. Most were on notice that this would come up again, no matter who was at the helm. The smart ones got ready. The less reliance they had on the mother ship, the better off they’d be. She gives, she takes. And right now, she’s taking.
Comment by A guy Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 11:56 am
===Wordslinger - Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 11:53 am:
Guy, the google is no help in supporting your contention. Maybe you have some links.===
Forget Google Sling. Call Sandack yourself. He’ll take your call.
Comment by A guy Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 11:58 am
- (Never mind, I know the answer) -
After you provide links, can you also share your “answer”?
It’s one thing to be ignorant, quite another to be an ass about it.
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 11:58 am
- Forget Google Sling. Call Sandack yourself. He’ll take your call. -
Translation: I rely on partisan nonsense rather than documented facts to support my ideology.
Explains a lot.
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 12:00 pm
- Toure’s Latte -,
To your Comment,
This Municipal Bankruptcy thing Rep. Sandack is running is very “Owl-like”.
Rauner sees going after the Munis…
“Have the towns go belly-up. Call that ‘Don’ Sandack and tell him Mr. Uihilne wants to help me with Muni bankruptcies and he was the first Owl we thought of…”
Now “a Mayor, Ron Sandack”, he might look at the proposal that is starting all this different. Too bad we don’t haveca record of “a Mayor, Ron Sandack” opposing revenue sharing….
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 12:03 pm
@anonymousone
Bob
=I would bet there are more than a few people who think you’re overpaid. Let’s all debate your value.=
That’s fine. As soon as I get paid from taxpayer dollars form your pocket, that would be your right.
My salary and performance are reviewed every year. I’m not in some extortion based salary schedule forced on local governments. If those paying me don’t think I’m worth it, I guarantee it they’ll let me know on my way out the door.
Comment by Arizona Bob Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 12:12 pm
===There will be things that are swept and things that are spared.===
How do you know this? What can be spared, and why would, say, Winnetka, be spared, and let’s say, Carbondale won’t be spared. “Who” decides?
Is this where Rauner then tells the Munis;
“Don’t you dare raise property taxes, they need to be frozen. Someone will come by to explain the freezing of property taxes and the check for the state, and they will give you the info on declaring bankruptcy when they leave…”
Lunacy.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 12:15 pm
===I’m not in some extortion based salary schedule forced on local governments.===
I’ve never heard of “agreed to contracts” as “extortion”
That word “extortion”, I don’t think it means what you think it means..,
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 12:17 pm
AZ Bob,
No one in Naperville got a $400,000 buyout. Don’t just throw BS out there, do your homework.
Comment by Big Muddy Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 12:18 pm
Nice to see some commenters are seeing Sandack for what he has always been. An ambitious opportunist whose civic mindedness is secondary to his self interest. Don’t let the statesmanlike demeanor fool you, Ron is about Ron.
Comment by Galahad Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 12:24 pm
I know from speaking with local elected officials in Southern IL that these cuts–or anything close to them–would cause major problems for them and their ability to provide services to their residents.
I can’t help but think about how these same elected officials and their public employees voted overwhelmingly for Rauner. I wonder how they feel about “their guy” now. If anything close to these cuts become reality Quinn may end up not looking so bad after all.
And I am still waiting for the GOP state legislators to publicly support–or even comment about–these and the other proposed cuts. Instead, they just tout the proposed “increases” to K-12 education and ignore everything else. A few days ago I e-mailed my GOP state senator to comment about the cuts and his office just ignores my inquiry although in years past his office always replied promptly to my inquiries.
Comment by Huh? Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 12:28 pm
=== An ambitious opportunist whose civic mindedness is secondary to his self interest===
Meh.
I think he had to move hard fiscal right after voting for gay marriage. That doesn’t excuse his behavior, but does explain it.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 12:30 pm
===I think he had to move hard fiscal right after voting for gay marriage. That doesn’t excuse his behavior, but does explain it.===
That’s my beef, but my question too to Rep. Sandack;
You beat back the challenge from Uihilne and the Right, you had loads of goodwill and a reputation of taking a “tough vote” (in conservatives’ eyes) and standing for election with that vote…you were a hero…
Is it worth asking “who” questions to an appointee and look foolish, and contradicting your own words on an issue to be seen as acceptable to the governor and his $20 million patron, Mr. Uihline?
Is the shift to Right agenda points, Rauner agenda points, speak to who you are now, and what you believe, or do they point to who you have to be?
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 12:39 pm
A Guy, the proposal in 2011 to cut LGDF by $300 million came from the Senate GOP plan, not from the Senate President.
Comment by Juice Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 12:55 pm
Bob:
The huge hole in your logic is that you assume people in the public sector don’t deserve what they are paid. You always paint with a broad brush and berate the entire public sector. Like any other place, most people who work in the public sector do a good job and deserve their paycheck. Unfortunately complainers like you like to, well, complain about everything. If you didn’t have this to complain about you’d find something else because that’s what people like you do. You know best. Everyone else is stupid. That about sums up your viewpoint.
Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 12:56 pm
@A guy:
My comment was referencing this specific phrase in your comment:
“I don’t remember the outrage here”
That was the victim statement I was referring to. I have little tolerance for these “yeah, but” comments.
Everything else you said I agree with.
Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 12:58 pm
“As soon as I get paid from taxpayer dollars form your pocket”
And this rhetoric, of course, falls apart when we remember that public employees pay taxes, too…
Comment by Arsenal Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 1:00 pm
A guy, the Google finds me this from 2010.
Area municipalities shouldn’t fear losing their local portion of the state’s income tax revenue, according to a top state official.
Senate President John Cullerton knocked Gov. Pat Quinn’s proposal to cut the share of income tax municipalities typically receive to 7 percent from the 10 percent.
“I told the governor I didn’t think it was a good idea to not give money to local governments. If we’re going to have to beg, borrow and steal, we can borrow another $300 million instead of not giving it to local government,” Cullerton told the Journal Star editorial board on Tuesday.
http://www.pjstar.com/article/20100407/News/304079812
Comment by Michelle Flaherty Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 1:07 pm
So in 2011 the city of Chicago had 34,219 municipal workers costing $2.5 billion a year for just salary compensation. That is an average salary of about $73,000 a year. As I indicated the other day Governor Rauner assumes that the average salary needs to decline significantly in order for Chicago or any other city to function under the cuts he is proposing. He hasn’t indicated how much such a cut (what he calls compensation restructuring) would have to be.
So if we apply Voices estimate of the cut in funds to Chicago, $133.2 million to the number of city employees back in 2011 we can get an average salary cut of about $3,800 per employee lowering that average salary down to $69,200 ( about a 5.2% reduction ) for all Chicago municipal workers. The current numbers may be different than these old numbers, but conceptually the thinking on the Governor’s part is the same.
Again I will return the relevant quote from the Governor’s budget speech in relation to the reduction in local government revenue sharing: “Along with this modest cutback, our turnaround reforms will reduce unfunded mandates, and give local governments and voters the tools to save hundreds of millions of dollars through consolidation, employment flexibility and compensation restructuring.”
In order to get a 5% reduction in the average salary in Chicago it is my contention the unions would have to be broken. Which is exactly what Scott Walker did to public sector workers in Wisconsin and in fact is attempting to do today for private sector workers by implementing right to work legislation.
Comment by Rod Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 1:21 pm
==In order to get a 5% reduction in the average salary in Chicago it is my contention the unions would have to be broken. Which is exactly what Scott Walker did to public sector workers in Wisconsin and in fact is attempting to do today for private sector workers by implementing right to work legislation.==
Which raises the question–why on earth would a governor of any state be interested in reducing private sector wages?
Comment by Concerned Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 1:35 pm
Someone has to be Rauner’s guy. Durkin can’t and many others won’t. Someone from leadership needs to be in lockstep with BR, just so happens Ron is probably the best choice to get the agenda pushed through. He’s excellent at the spin, he’s liked by many on both sides and he’s a fighter in campaigns, these positives are what Rauner needs, more like him not less.
Comment by DuPage Bard Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 1:45 pm
- DuPage Bard -
With respect,
The Owl Sandack was an “owl” before Rauner was in the Big Chair.
Sandack and the “who, who” questions to Barbara Shaw well before the oath.
Rep. Sandack understood. Uhiline is with Rauner, I need to be with AND for Rauner…
With Sandack, his “owl” behavior is about his district, and not facing a Uihline challenge, both in philosophy and financially.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 1:53 pm
Juice, thanks, that’s correct. Michelle, thanks as well.
Google “Illinois Senate GOP Facing Fiscal Reality Plan” and there it is. The plan notes that the claw back of local revenues is supported by IPI.
Curiously, Cullerton is not mentioned in the plan.
Guy, keep up the good work that you’re known for.
Comment by Wordslinger Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 1:58 pm
Little Ronnie the Rauner Lap Dog. How does it feel to be kept warm inside Brucey’s Carhartt Ronnie?
Comment by Precinct Captain Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 2:12 pm
===Guy, keep up the good work that you’re known for.===
Sling, make the call. He’ll tell you he was in the Senate President’s office with DuPage Mayors and Fox Valley Mayors pleading their case during their Spring Drive Down. Along with Alderman and Councilmen from 30 different municipalities. This was the President’s honey pot at the time. Could care less if you believe me or not.
Comment by A guy Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 2:54 pm
===This was the President’s honey pot at the time. Could care less if you believe me or not.===
Just find a cite, - A Guy -…
You should care that what you say should be true…
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 2:56 pm
This occurred before 2011. Had to read the Juice comment to get the time reference. Sandack was in the GA by 2011.
Comment by A guy Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 2:56 pm
Guy, you’re immune to facts.
Comment by Wordslinger Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 2:57 pm
Guy, the DG resolution from May 2011 references the $300 million take back from the Illinois Senate GOP plan of March 2011, not some phantom plan you’ve attributed to Cullerton, as you wrote.
Comment by Wordslinger Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 3:10 pm
Guy, Sandack was sworn in to replace Cronin in late 2010. LGDF was being debated then. Hence the letter referenced in the post.
http://www.mysuburbanlife.com/2010/11/30/downers-grove-mayor-ron-sandack-sworn-in-as-state-senator-will-continue-to-serve-as-mayor/zkuw4z/
How much before then do you think this happened?
Comment by Michelle Flaherty Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 3:10 pm
=== Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 2:56 pm:
===This was the President’s honey pot at the time. Could care less if you believe me or not.===
Just find a cite, - A Guy -…
You should care that what you say should be true…===
I was 8 feet away from him when he said it. In an answer to a question from the Mayor of Elgin.
Comment by A guy Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 3:11 pm
- A Guy -, I don’t think the time frame is matching up.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 3:23 pm
Well Guy, as always, you’ve got the inside dope no one else does.
You’d think that, as you contend, the Illinois Senate president made a play for the whole magila of local income tax revenue, it would have gotten some press, especially since that would have been a 180 from his public position on the issue.
Comment by Wordslinger Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 3:47 pm
Less is more,raunerspeak 2015 can you feel the compassion?
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 3:50 pm
- A Guy -,
I guess next time you get one of those meetings that contradict public positions, try to get something in writing.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 7:23 pm
Shared pain is an illusion. These municipalities have amassed millions in reserve budget funds. Planned for years in advance. All this from the aristocrats that are trying to swindle teachers and the working families of Illinois earned and constitutionally protected contractual benefits!
Comment by Truth Tuesdays Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 7:49 pm
http://www.bettergov.org/investigations/why_townships_dont_add_up_part_two_cash_cushion.aspx
Comment by Truth Tuesdays Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 7:55 pm
I think the proposal is great. Put the responsibility for paying for this stuff at the local level rather than the state level where it becomes a black hole. If people want the programs in their communities they can pay for them, if not, then get rid of the program. The state can not pay for everything. While nothing is perfect, this is at least a step.
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 8:29 pm
Sorry, the above post was mine, it was not meant to be “Anonymous”.
Comment by sloman Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 8:30 pm
does anyone remember back to when the feds did “revenue sharing” and the bottom line reason it ended? A government that is running a deficit has no revenue to share.
Comment by steve schnorf Tuesday, Feb 24, 15 @ 9:18 pm
Steve, you talk as if the deficit is immutable. In a demand-starved economy, the state just let annual revenues decrease by 6 billion dollars a year. You seem to be accepting of that as unchangeable. Here’s a question for you. Which do you think would be better for the state’s economy, citizenry, and business climate? Reinstating a 5% tax rate, or forcing draconian cuts that will cripple the state’s economy, destroy Illinois social contract, and benefit the rich at the expense of the rest of us? Come on man. A 5% tax rate, or even more austere cuts in the face of a economy hobbled because no one has the money to buy anything, or the certainty that they’ll even have a job next week?
Comment by PublicServant Wednesday, Feb 25, 15 @ 6:17 am
PS, you left out have I stopped beating my wife
Comment by steve schnorf Wednesday, Feb 25, 15 @ 10:54 am