Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Campaign notebook
Next Post: Irvin, who threatened to crack down on Aurora businesses for not enforcing mask mandates, now says “I’ve always been opposed to mandates”
Posted in:
* Crain’s…
When the income tax was approved decades ago at the request of then-Gov. Richard Ogilvie, the locals were supposed to get 10% off the top, money they could use to hire police, pay pensions, pave streets or whatever. But the state gradually has clawed that back and, according to the Illinois Municipal League, its members collectively get only 6.06% of tax proceeds, not a tenth. […]
League allies are pushing two bills, both sponsored by Rep. Anthony DeLuca, D-Chicago Heights. One would gradually bring the municipal share back to 10%; the other would split the difference, allotting 8% of tax receipts for the fund.
What’s interesting is who’s a chief co-sponsor of the second bill: House Speaker Chris Welch. I’m told his interest is real, but how real depends on a few other things. Like what the munis say they’ll do with the influx, and whether this spending would impact Pritzker’s proposed tax cuts or other budget priorities, like replenishing the state’s deeply indebted Unemployment Insurance Trust Fund.
So … we’ll see. But big money is involved. According to the league, raising the rate to 8% would cost an additional $500 million a year. Going back to 10% would divert $1 billion from other spending.
I understand where they’re coming from, but local governments are flush right now, so it’s not a great argument this year.
* Alison Bowen at the Tribune…
Although survivors legally cannot be held financially responsible for rape exams, in Illinois, private insurance can be billed, which could mean an assault inadvertently disclosed to someone through, for example, insurance records.
Proposed state legislation would provide a way to let rape survivors opt out and avoid this. […]
Illinois is one of few states to require that private insurance be billed for a medical forensic exam. Patients who do not have insurance still do not have to pay for services; health care facilities submit a request for reimbursement to the Department of Healthcare and Family Services.
But advocates say this can create situations where a rape survivor might be hesitant to go ahead with an exam if they feel the insurance policy holder — a parent or a spouse, for example — will find out.
Morrison said the bill was a response to issues raised by advocates and health care workers. “It does hopefully provide a little bit more safety for the victim and gives, usually, her a little bit more peace of mind,” she said. “It’s got to be pretty traumatic to go through this procedure and then have to worry about, is dad or my husband or whoever going to see this, and are they going to know?”
* Capitol News Illinois…
Natural gas utilities in Illinois warned of job losses and possible risks to public safety if state lawmakers repeal a law allowing them to add a surcharge on customer bills that consumer advocates say is being used to gouge customers.
“This provides around 500 good jobs annually and creates opportunity for diverse contractors,” Eric Kozak, vice president of gas operations for Ameren Illinois, told a House committee Wednesday. “And modernizing the system sets the stage for the state of Illinois to become a leader at utilizing renewable natural gas, synthetic natural gas, and even hydrogen, which can attract new businesses and retain industry.”
At issue is a 2013 amendment to the Public Utilities Act that allows large natural gas utilities – those serving more than 700,000 customers – to add a surcharge onto customer bills to recover costs associated with investments in “qualifying infrastructure plant,” or QIP. […]
That law is scheduled to sunset at the end of 2023, but House Bill 3941 would move that date up one year, to Dec. 31, 2022.
Members of the Illinois Senate Education Committee heard testimony Tuesday on legislation that would require schools to give teachers specific reasons for termination.
The bill would apply to teachers who are terminated after finishing their probationary period while also having shown proficient performance while teaching.
Senate Bill 3981 was filed last month by state Sen. Elgie Sims, D-Chicago. Sims said the bill hopes to address a growing issue the state is facing.
“This legislation is aimed at addressing the teacher shortage crisis we have before us and giving school districts the opportunity and ability to get teachers into the classroom,” Sims said.
* Press release…
Youth in the care of the Department of Children and Family Services are one step closer to receiving the financial resources they need to be ready for adulthood thanks to a measure championed by State Senator Robert Peters (D-Chicago).
“The state needs to be proactive at helping youth in care build a strong future during their final years of care,” Peters said. “We need to do all we can to ensure that they have access to a financial head start before they have to live on their own.”
Senate Bill 3470 would require DCFS to save or invest a minimum percentage of a youth’s benefits once they reach the age of 14. This will ensure that when DCFS no longer serves as the financial representative of the youth, they will have some money to help them transition into a successful adult life.
The minimum percentages that DCFS will be required to invest are:
● 40% for youth between the ages of 14 and 15
● 80% for youth between the ages of 16 and 17
● 100% for youth between the ages of 18 and 20Senate Bill 3470 would also require the DCFS to take defined actions when applying for and managing certain federal benefits that the department receives on behalf of any youth in care.
“State services should help empower youth and give them strong support to enter our society,” Peters said. “We should not be sending young people out into the world without the resources they need to live independently, and we must ensure that they are able to make the transition into adult life.”
The measure passed the Senate Judiciary committee on Tuesday.
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Feb 10, 22 @ 1:36 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Campaign notebook
Next Post: Irvin, who threatened to crack down on Aurora businesses for not enforcing mask mandates, now says “I’ve always been opposed to mandates”
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
==but local governments are flush right now==
Most police and fire pensions are certainly not. I bet they could add a provision that any muni under x% funding in local pensions must used this additional funding towards pension debt.
Comment by City Zen Thursday, Feb 10, 22 @ 2:05 pm
“The bill would apply to teachers who are terminated after finishing their probationary period” You know why they get terminated then? They become more expensive.
Comment by Skeptic Thursday, Feb 10, 22 @ 2:17 pm
==Like what the munis say they’ll do with the influx==
Here’s what they can’t do. Give any of that money to school districts, which make up about 2/3rds of property taxes.
I’d rather the state continue to increase the payments to local school districts, instead of just handing blank checks to municipalities, which generally only make up 5% of property tax bills. Seeing how most municipalities have abused TIF, giving them more money isn’t going to solve anything.
There’s more bang for the buck in increasing school state funding, than handing state money to municipalities.
Also related, when the state income tax was first started with the LGDF at 10%, the income tax was 2.5%.
For the same dollar amount collected, with the current income tax rate, the LGDF share would be around 5.2%. Instead, the LGDF fund in dollar amount has been increasing each time the state has increased income taxes. To hear complaints from the IML that it the LGDF fund is ‘only’ at 6.06% either shows them to be terrible in managing the money already given to them, or unaware how these formulas work in terms of real dollar amounts. Both prove to me that no more state money should be sent to municipalities than already is.
The IML can’t complain of wasteful state funding on one hand, and on the other hand state they should be increasing their spending at the same rate as the state.
“Going back to 10% would divert $1 billion from other spending.”
That would be a respectable increase to school funding. Or a problematic amount to remove from existing school funding.
Perhaps Welch is playing the long-game here, and plans to have this discussion in debate, using this to prime the pump on that discussion.
Comment by TheInvisibleMan Thursday, Feb 10, 22 @ 2:28 pm
==but local governments are flush right now==
The ones that have a large sales tax base might be flush, municipalities that rely largely on property taxes are not.
Comment by Donnie Elgin Thursday, Feb 10, 22 @ 2:37 pm
===municipalities that rely largely on property taxes are not===
You appear to be forgetting about the federal aid. Everybody is sitting on a pile of money.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Feb 10, 22 @ 2:56 pm
TheInvisibleMan makes a good point.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Feb 10, 22 @ 2:57 pm
- TheInvisibleMan makes a good point. -
Seconded.
Comment by Excitable Boy Thursday, Feb 10, 22 @ 3:00 pm
“Everybody is sitting on a pile of money.”
It’s a pile every taxpayer should keep their eye on…as it moves.
Comment by Dotnonymous Thursday, Feb 10, 22 @ 3:09 pm
I completely agree with TheInvisibleMan. Schools need more financial help from the state than local governments and face many more funding limitations. Start fixing that. If local government needs more money they can be more fiscally responsible or try and raise property taxes and finally get on the radar of residents.
Comment by The Velvet Frog Thursday, Feb 10, 22 @ 3:26 pm
Instead of sending more to local governments, the state should leverage that money to build the Iliana expressway, and other road and bridge projects that have federal matching funds.
Comment by DuPage Thursday, Feb 10, 22 @ 3:28 pm
Velvet Frog, I think it’s important to note that the state has already “started” fixing school funding. State funding for the evidence based funding formula have gone up hundreds of millions a year for several years now. Is it enough? Idk, but the state’s trying to change directions
Comment by Perrid Thursday, Feb 10, 22 @ 3:34 pm