By Jamey Dunn
The Illinois House today approved a constitutional amendment to eliminate the lieutenant governor’s office.
If approved by the Senate, HJRCA 18 would appear on the ballot before voters in the 2014 general election. If voters approved the proposal, the position would be eliminated in 2019.
Supporters pitched the idea as a cost saving measure. “It is a luxury that we can no longer afford,” said Rep. David McSweeney, who sponsored the amendment. The budget for Lt. Gov. She Simon’s office for the current fiscal year is $1.8 million. Under Gov. Pat Quinn’s proposed budget, the office would get $1.75 million.
Opponents said that the state needs a lieutenant governor to step in if the governor cannot fulfill the duties of the office. They pointed to just a few years ago when lawmakers impeached former Gov. Rod Blagojevich and removed him from office. Quinn was sworn in to the governor’s office the same day that the Senate voted to boot Blagojevich.
“The lieutenant governor does have some duties. First of all the lieutenant governor sits on several boards the lieutenant governor has some state duties this constitutional amendment doesn’t deal with those in any way and so there would be a hole in the law,” said Rep. Lou Lang, a Skokie Democrat. “Secondly and maybe more importantly it wasn’t too long ago in this state that we sent the governor packing and when we did that we had a lieutenant governor in place that took over with a reasonable system under the law to make sure that the duties of the governor were transferred to an appropriate person.”
Lang added as he spoke on the House floor: “I would urge you to think carefully about the role of the lieutenant governor—yes minimal under our statute, yes minimal under our constitution—but nevertheless we’ve just gone through a time in Illinois’ history when I think it’s been important that we had a lieutenant governor.”
McSweeney said that the attorney general could easily step into the governor’s office if the need were to arise again. “We are cutting basic social services. It’s a travesty. We have 8 billion to 9 billion of unpaid bills. How can we justify spending $2 million on this office when the attorney general is capable of taking the responsibility?” he said. “This is a message that we are serious about cutting spending. It will show the voters that we’re finally willing to eliminate an office.”
A spokesperson for Lt. Gov. Sheila Simon said that Simon doesn’t oppose the idea of giving voters a choice about the office. But she is against its elimination. She said Simon has cut during her time in the post. “In these tough economic times, Lt. Gov. Simon has made it her mission to do more with less for the taxpayers of Illinois. She has voluntarily cut her budget by more than 12 percent the past two years and gives back a portion of her salary each year,” Simon spokeswoman Annie Thompson said in a written statement. “Simon is working hard to improve the quality of life for Illinois residents as the state’s point person on education reform, an advocate for victims of domestic violence and our military families, and she is leading the effort to preserve our rivers.”
Simon has announced that she will not be seeking reelection in 2014, saying she wants a chance to do more for the state. “Serving as Lieutenant Governor has given me an opportunity to advocate on important issues that affect our state but it is time for me to do even more,” Simon said in a prepared statement when she announced she would not run for lieutenant governor again. “I want to serve the people of Illinois in a role where I can have an even greater impact.”
Thursday, April 11, 2013
Wednesday, April 10, 2013
Gaming board airs compliants over gambling expansion
By Jamey Dunn
Members of the Illinois Gaming Board faced a chilly reception when they appeared before a state Senate committee today to present their concerns about a gambling expansion bill currently being considered.
“Thank you for being here today. It’s about time. We’ve waited for a long time for this meeting to take place. I’ve heard myself being criticized on TV, radio, everywhere else by you, judge, but it’s the first time we’ve had a meeting. So I appreciate you showing up,” Sen. Terry Link said to Aaron Jaffe, a former judge and now chairman of the gaming board. Jaffe has publicly bashed gambling proposals backed by Link in recent years. Link is the sponsor of Senate Bill 1739, which would allow five new casinos statewide, including one owned by the city of Chicago. The bill would also allow slot machines at horse racing tracks and online gambling that would be administered by the Illinois Lottery.
Jaffe focused most of his complaints about SB 1739 on the plans for the Chicago casino. The measure creates the Chicago Casino Development Authority, which would own the casino. The authority would then contract with an operator that would run the casino. Jaffe said that he is concerned that the legislation is not clear on what entity would have regulatory power. He said the gaming board, which polices all the other casinos in the state, would have the ability to provide oversight in the same way for the proposed Chicago facility. Under the bill, the city’s license could not be suspended or revoked. The operator’s license, however, would be subject to the same scrutiny as the state’s 10 other casino licenses. But Jaffe said that he was worried that the Illinois Gaming Board and the Chicago Casino Development Authority would eventually end up in in a legal battle if there is disagreement about oversight. “I don’t want to be in the position of having to go through court battles with the Chicago authority because there’s conflict in our rules.”
Senate President John Cullerton said during the hearing that supporters of the expansion intend for the bill “to create a situation where [you] have the same authority that you have over every other casino in the state over Chicago.”
Jaffe said that he does not oppose Chicago getting a casino. But he said there could be unintended consequences associated with a city-owned casino, something he says does not exist elsewhere in the United States. “There can be conflicts that pop up that we will never dream about now,” he said. In addition to his complaints about the Chicago casino, Jaffe said the bill is too large and poorly written. “It contains so much junk in it from top to bottom,” he said. “It’s a Christmas tree bill. It’s something for everyone.” He said the board is not prepared to take on the task of vetting such a large expansion. “If you want that bill, properly enacted and properly regulated, we probably would need 300 more bodies,” he said. Gaming board officials said the board is understaffed by about 100 people and would need those positions filled, plus 300 more employees to administer to proposal.
Supporters argue that the measure will bring economic development to depressed areas, add more than $1 billion in revenue to the state’s struggling budget and help to prop up the state’s struggling horse racing industry. Link said that Jaffe and the board should have been working with him on the bill instead of complaining about it publicly. “If you had a problem with this bill you or your staff should have been in my office...and asking me ‘what can I do to improve the bill.’ And I would have listened to you.”
Jaffe said he would be willing to sit down with lawmakers to talk about the bill. But judging from the exchanges at today’s hearing, that could be a contentious meeting. Jaffe and committee members from both sides of the aisle traded barbs, and at few points things became heated between Jaffe and Link. “I don’t want to be insulting today, but I just think what you’re saying is preposterous,” Jaffe said.
Link responded, “Well, I think what you’re saying is beyond that.”
Part of the tension may stem from a provision in Link’s bill that would remove all the members of the gambling board. Gov. Pat Quinn would be free to reappoint them if they fit the bill’s requirements for board members. But Link said tonight that he does not plan to pass a bill with that component, and he plans to remove it from the bill when it is up for another committee hearing next week. Quinn today reiterated his support for the current board. “I have a lot of respect for the gaming board. I’ve put people on there that are upstanding and will get the job done for the public. Anything that lessens their independence, I think is very dangerous.”
He also rehashed his longstanding worries about the oversight of a Chicago casino, which he says he supports. “I think we have to be exceptionally careful in places like Chicago, where we must have over all the time so that we don’t have wrong people in gambling doing bad things.” But Quinn said he is “not excited” about allowing online gambling, which SB 1739 would also do. “This whole subject of Internet gaming, we’ve got to be careful here. This has to be analyzed very carefully. We just can’t pass things willy-nilly. It doesn’t have the proper review. It just was thrown in there at the last minute, and I don’t think that’s healthy. I think when it comes to gambling, you always have to be careful. I think everybody in Illinois knows that.”
Members of the Illinois Gaming Board faced a chilly reception when they appeared before a state Senate committee today to present their concerns about a gambling expansion bill currently being considered.
“Thank you for being here today. It’s about time. We’ve waited for a long time for this meeting to take place. I’ve heard myself being criticized on TV, radio, everywhere else by you, judge, but it’s the first time we’ve had a meeting. So I appreciate you showing up,” Sen. Terry Link said to Aaron Jaffe, a former judge and now chairman of the gaming board. Jaffe has publicly bashed gambling proposals backed by Link in recent years. Link is the sponsor of Senate Bill 1739, which would allow five new casinos statewide, including one owned by the city of Chicago. The bill would also allow slot machines at horse racing tracks and online gambling that would be administered by the Illinois Lottery.
Jaffe focused most of his complaints about SB 1739 on the plans for the Chicago casino. The measure creates the Chicago Casino Development Authority, which would own the casino. The authority would then contract with an operator that would run the casino. Jaffe said that he is concerned that the legislation is not clear on what entity would have regulatory power. He said the gaming board, which polices all the other casinos in the state, would have the ability to provide oversight in the same way for the proposed Chicago facility. Under the bill, the city’s license could not be suspended or revoked. The operator’s license, however, would be subject to the same scrutiny as the state’s 10 other casino licenses. But Jaffe said that he was worried that the Illinois Gaming Board and the Chicago Casino Development Authority would eventually end up in in a legal battle if there is disagreement about oversight. “I don’t want to be in the position of having to go through court battles with the Chicago authority because there’s conflict in our rules.”
Senate President John Cullerton said during the hearing that supporters of the expansion intend for the bill “to create a situation where [you] have the same authority that you have over every other casino in the state over Chicago.”
Jaffe said that he does not oppose Chicago getting a casino. But he said there could be unintended consequences associated with a city-owned casino, something he says does not exist elsewhere in the United States. “There can be conflicts that pop up that we will never dream about now,” he said. In addition to his complaints about the Chicago casino, Jaffe said the bill is too large and poorly written. “It contains so much junk in it from top to bottom,” he said. “It’s a Christmas tree bill. It’s something for everyone.” He said the board is not prepared to take on the task of vetting such a large expansion. “If you want that bill, properly enacted and properly regulated, we probably would need 300 more bodies,” he said. Gaming board officials said the board is understaffed by about 100 people and would need those positions filled, plus 300 more employees to administer to proposal.
Supporters argue that the measure will bring economic development to depressed areas, add more than $1 billion in revenue to the state’s struggling budget and help to prop up the state’s struggling horse racing industry. Link said that Jaffe and the board should have been working with him on the bill instead of complaining about it publicly. “If you had a problem with this bill you or your staff should have been in my office...and asking me ‘what can I do to improve the bill.’ And I would have listened to you.”
Jaffe said he would be willing to sit down with lawmakers to talk about the bill. But judging from the exchanges at today’s hearing, that could be a contentious meeting. Jaffe and committee members from both sides of the aisle traded barbs, and at few points things became heated between Jaffe and Link. “I don’t want to be insulting today, but I just think what you’re saying is preposterous,” Jaffe said.
Link responded, “Well, I think what you’re saying is beyond that.”
Part of the tension may stem from a provision in Link’s bill that would remove all the members of the gambling board. Gov. Pat Quinn would be free to reappoint them if they fit the bill’s requirements for board members. But Link said tonight that he does not plan to pass a bill with that component, and he plans to remove it from the bill when it is up for another committee hearing next week. Quinn today reiterated his support for the current board. “I have a lot of respect for the gaming board. I’ve put people on there that are upstanding and will get the job done for the public. Anything that lessens their independence, I think is very dangerous.”
He also rehashed his longstanding worries about the oversight of a Chicago casino, which he says he supports. “I think we have to be exceptionally careful in places like Chicago, where we must have over all the time so that we don’t have wrong people in gambling doing bad things.” But Quinn said he is “not excited” about allowing online gambling, which SB 1739 would also do. “This whole subject of Internet gaming, we’ve got to be careful here. This has to be analyzed very carefully. We just can’t pass things willy-nilly. It doesn’t have the proper review. It just was thrown in there at the last minute, and I don’t think that’s healthy. I think when it comes to gambling, you always have to be careful. I think everybody in Illinois knows that.”
State police say they need more funding for concealed carry
By Meredith Colias
The state police say they will need additional money and staff to oversee a new concealed carry law in Illinois.
In December, the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals invalidated an Illinois law banning residents from carrying concealed guns. The law was the only one in the nation. The court gave the state 180 days to pass new legislation. In addition to their other duties, the state police approve Firearm Owner Identification [FOID] applications for prospective gun owners. Under legislation currently being considered, the state police would also issue concealed carry permits. Under the proposals, applicants would pay fees for their permits, creating a funding source for administering the program.
Hiram Grau, director of the Illinois State Police, estimates his agency will need at least 60 staff members and a minimal $25 million in additional funding to devote to administering a concealed carry system in the state. “While our numbers and personnel are dwindling, our responsibilities are growing,” Grau said during an Illinois House hearing today.
Rep. John Cavaletto, a Salem Republican, said he wanted to help the state police as much as possible, but money is tight under the current budget situation. “When you're dealing with X amount of dollars, X amount of dollars is all you've got,” he said.
The Illinois State Police is asking for nearly $383.6 million for Fiscal Year 2014 operations. The number is down slightly from the $383.8 million the state police estimates it will spend in FY 2013. Grau said he planned on instituting three new cadet classes. He estimates seven to nine cadets from a class of more than 40 would be used to police some high crime areas in cities such as Chicago and East St. Louis.
The state police say they will need additional money and staff to oversee a new concealed carry law in Illinois.
In December, the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals invalidated an Illinois law banning residents from carrying concealed guns. The law was the only one in the nation. The court gave the state 180 days to pass new legislation. In addition to their other duties, the state police approve Firearm Owner Identification [FOID] applications for prospective gun owners. Under legislation currently being considered, the state police would also issue concealed carry permits. Under the proposals, applicants would pay fees for their permits, creating a funding source for administering the program.
Hiram Grau, director of the Illinois State Police, estimates his agency will need at least 60 staff members and a minimal $25 million in additional funding to devote to administering a concealed carry system in the state. “While our numbers and personnel are dwindling, our responsibilities are growing,” Grau said during an Illinois House hearing today.
Rep. John Cavaletto, a Salem Republican, said he wanted to help the state police as much as possible, but money is tight under the current budget situation. “When you're dealing with X amount of dollars, X amount of dollars is all you've got,” he said.
The Illinois State Police is asking for nearly $383.6 million for Fiscal Year 2014 operations. The number is down slightly from the $383.8 million the state police estimates it will spend in FY 2013. Grau said he planned on instituting three new cadet classes. He estimates seven to nine cadets from a class of more than 40 would be used to police some high crime areas in cities such as Chicago and East St. Louis.
2013 Roster of State Government Officials is available
Illinois Issues' 2013 Roster of State Government Officials is now available. Order by visiting our website, http://illinoisissues.uis.edu/, calling us at (217) 206-6084, or emailing at illinoisissues@uis.edu.
And thanks for reading Illinois Issues!
And thanks for reading Illinois Issues!
Tuesday, April 09, 2013
Suburban administrators say transportation cuts hit classrooms
By Meredith Colias
Suburban administrators struggling to cover transportation costs say they cannot bear deeper cuts next year.
Angela Smith, an assistant superintendent in the Plainfield Community Consolidated School District 202, told a House committee that reducing the money the state pays for regular school bus costs to her district will only force it to look for cuts in other parts of her budget, such as staffing and basic programs. She said cuts to the state transportation reimbursement should not give lawmakers a false sense that teachers and students would not be impacted. “It’s going to affect the classroom, there’s no way around it,” she said.
Gov. Pat Quinn proposed a cut to regular transportation funding that is almost as large as his proposed cut to General State Aid. Under his plan, aid would be cut by $150 million, while the money the state gives schools to transport kids would be reduced by about $145 million. Quinn’s cut would take transportation funding from $206 million in the current fiscal year to more than $60 million in Fiscal Year 2014. However, the House education budgeting committee has led the way on the state education budget in recent years, and its proposal could be different from what the governor has pitched. “There are going to be cuts. We are experiencing enormous challenges here,” said Rep. David McSweeney, a Barrington Hills Republican and a member of the committee.
At the same time the transportation budget is expected to decrease, more school districts statewide are struggling to cover costs. The state board of education is estimating two-thirds of school districts will run a deficit in the next fiscal year. Both Smith and Tom Leonard, superintendent of Barrington Community Unit School District 220, said they were concerned with safety issues and were straining to figure out how to transport students over larger areas in their districts as efficiently as possible. Districts are not able to charge parents to make up the difference for busing their children because it would also reduce their share of General State Aid. Districts have taken measures such as spreading bus stops out farther from each other in an attempt to streamline costs as much as possible. “We’re stretched that to the point where there’s not very much [more] that can be done,” Smith said.
“We are trying to be efficient. More cuts will lead to stranger things,” Leonard said. Smith said the “easy” and “hard” options have already been taken in many district’s budget. “All that’s left are the really hard things,” she said.
Rep. William Davis, who chairs the committee, said that he is sympathetic to the cuts. He said that he plans to advocate for new revenues as he has in past budget years. “We do understand what cuts do,” he said. Davis, a Homewood Democrat, suggested that administrators could lobby their own suburban representatives, most of whom are Republican.
Suburban administrators struggling to cover transportation costs say they cannot bear deeper cuts next year.
Angela Smith, an assistant superintendent in the Plainfield Community Consolidated School District 202, told a House committee that reducing the money the state pays for regular school bus costs to her district will only force it to look for cuts in other parts of her budget, such as staffing and basic programs. She said cuts to the state transportation reimbursement should not give lawmakers a false sense that teachers and students would not be impacted. “It’s going to affect the classroom, there’s no way around it,” she said.
Gov. Pat Quinn proposed a cut to regular transportation funding that is almost as large as his proposed cut to General State Aid. Under his plan, aid would be cut by $150 million, while the money the state gives schools to transport kids would be reduced by about $145 million. Quinn’s cut would take transportation funding from $206 million in the current fiscal year to more than $60 million in Fiscal Year 2014. However, the House education budgeting committee has led the way on the state education budget in recent years, and its proposal could be different from what the governor has pitched. “There are going to be cuts. We are experiencing enormous challenges here,” said Rep. David McSweeney, a Barrington Hills Republican and a member of the committee.
At the same time the transportation budget is expected to decrease, more school districts statewide are struggling to cover costs. The state board of education is estimating two-thirds of school districts will run a deficit in the next fiscal year. Both Smith and Tom Leonard, superintendent of Barrington Community Unit School District 220, said they were concerned with safety issues and were straining to figure out how to transport students over larger areas in their districts as efficiently as possible. Districts are not able to charge parents to make up the difference for busing their children because it would also reduce their share of General State Aid. Districts have taken measures such as spreading bus stops out farther from each other in an attempt to streamline costs as much as possible. “We’re stretched that to the point where there’s not very much [more] that can be done,” Smith said.
“We are trying to be efficient. More cuts will lead to stranger things,” Leonard said. Smith said the “easy” and “hard” options have already been taken in many district’s budget. “All that’s left are the really hard things,” she said.
Rep. William Davis, who chairs the committee, said that he is sympathetic to the cuts. He said that he plans to advocate for new revenues as he has in past budget years. “We do understand what cuts do,” he said. Davis, a Homewood Democrat, suggested that administrators could lobby their own suburban representatives, most of whom are Republican.
Friday, April 05, 2013
Return-to-session preview
By Jamey Dunn
Lawmakers return from a two-week break in the legislative session to begin the slog through the final two months before the May 31 adjournment date. They have plenty to consider in the coming weeks:
Pension changes
Before the House went on break, the chamber took an important vote on changes to state employees’ retirement benefits. They approved House Bill 1165 on a vote of 66 to 50. The bill would cap the amount of salary on which retirees could earn the compounded 3 percent cost of living adjustment [COLA] at $25,000. Anyone earning more pension income would receive a flat COLA of $750 annually. Under the proposal, retirees would not be eligible for a COLA until they have been retired for five years or they reach age 67, whichever comes first. The bill also would apply to current retirees who are now receiving COLAs. Supporters of pension changes said this was perhaps the most difficult vote on the issue taken so far. The House has already approved legislation that would cap pensionable salary at the Social Security wage base, which is $113,700 in 2013, or the employee's current salary, whichever is greater, and a bill that would increase the retirement age for employees younger than 46. Employees from 40 to 45 would see a one-year increase, employees 35 to 39 would see a three-year increase and employees 34 and younger would see a five-year increase.
House Speaker Michael Madigan said those components, potentially along with some other provisions that have been up for debate recently, would likely be part of comprehensive legislation yet to come. “I think we’re in a position to finalize the preparation of the bill and then move a bill from the House to the Senate that treats all aspects of the problem,” he said.
Rep. Elaine Nekritz, who has been leading the push for pension changes in the House, said she and Evanston Democratic Sen. Daniel Biss, her counterpart on the issue in the other chamber, have spent the two-week break trying to form a picture of what might be in the final plan. “When we last voted to changes to the COLA, the speaker talked about how the next step would be to put together a comprehensive package,” she said. “So I have put together a list of things that I think we need to be considering.” But Nekritz said it is too soon for her to pin down what may actually end up in that final plan or when it may be up for a committee hearing or floor vote. “At this point, I don’t anticipate that that would happened in the next two weeks, but I've been wrong before.”
Same sex marriage
The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments related to same sex marriage last week, and longtime observers say the court may opt to rule portions of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) unconstitutional. If that happens, couples in states that have same sex marriage could become eligible for the federal benefits currently available only to heterosexual married couples.
Illinois U.S. Sen. Mark Kirk, a Republican, announced his support of same sex marriage this week. Kirk, who suffered from a debilitating stroke last year and has been working hard at recovery, said his personal experience paved the way for his stance. “Same-sex couples should have the right to civil marriage. Our time on this Earth is limited, I know that better than most. Life comes down to who you love and who loves you back — government has no place in the middle,” Kirk said in a prepared statement.
Legislation to legalize same sex marriage in Illinois has passed in the Senate, but Madigan said it is about a dozen votes shy of the support needed for it to clear the House. (Go here to read selected Illinois Issues coverage of the issue on the state and federal level.)
Concealed carry
A federal court ruled the state’s ban on the concealed carrying of firearms unconstitutional and gave Illinois a deadline for approving legislation to regulate it. The House has followed a similar process on this issue as it has on pensions. However, the chamber does not yet seem close to agreement on any final comprehensive plan for concealed carry. Expect to see more debate on the topic, as well as other gun related issues, such as bans on assault weapons and high capacity magazines, in the coming weeks.
Medical marijuana
Skokie Democratic Rep. Lou Lang thinks this might be the session that a bill to legalize the use of marijuana to treat chronic medical conditions might gain the needed backing to pass in the House. A House committee approved House Bill 1 in March, and Lang said the legislation is gaining support. He says the measure is just a couple votes shy of being passed. Lang has said many times that if every lawmaker who told him they supported the idea would cast a vote in favor of the plan, he would have far more support than the majority he needs. He has called medical marijuana bills for three separate floor votes in the House, only to watch them fail. But he is dealing with many new lawmakers this time around, so perhaps it is Lang’s year. The Senate has approved medical marijuana legislation in the past.
Gaming expansion
Expect efforts to pass another gaming expansion plan in the final months of the scheduled spring session. Lang and Waukegan Democratic Sen. Terry Link, who have backed other expansion plans, say they would like to try again. Lawmakers approved two gambling bills in recent years, only to have them vetoed by Gov. Pat Quinn. The newest proposal contains many of the provisions that were in those two bills, but it also has stricter regulations and a ban on campaign contributions from casino owners, which Quinn has called for many times. But the bill has a wild card provision: It would legalize some forms of online gambling, which would fall under the supervision of the Illinois Lottery. The lottery currently sells tickets online, but allowing online gaming such as Internet poker would be a huge gambling expansion. Residents would be able to place bets from their computers or even their smart phones. Two other states, Nevada and New Jersey, have approved such online gambling. The idea is new, and Quinn has been careful not to be too critical of the legislation in public. However, as the negotiations move in, it is possible this component could make him shy away because he has said he opposes “top heavy” bills that would make gambling in the state too readily available. At one point, the governor was even shying away from putting slot machines at horse racing tracks, an idea he seems to have softened to if the state revenues earned are spent on education.
Budget
As lawmakers debate these and other issues, they will also be working to craft a budget for the next fiscal year. That plan will likely contain some controversial cuts. Spending pressures such as pension costs and health care expenses are growing, and competing interests will be vigorously battling over resources for Fiscal Year 2014.
Lawmakers return from a two-week break in the legislative session to begin the slog through the final two months before the May 31 adjournment date. They have plenty to consider in the coming weeks:
Pension changes
Before the House went on break, the chamber took an important vote on changes to state employees’ retirement benefits. They approved House Bill 1165 on a vote of 66 to 50. The bill would cap the amount of salary on which retirees could earn the compounded 3 percent cost of living adjustment [COLA] at $25,000. Anyone earning more pension income would receive a flat COLA of $750 annually. Under the proposal, retirees would not be eligible for a COLA until they have been retired for five years or they reach age 67, whichever comes first. The bill also would apply to current retirees who are now receiving COLAs. Supporters of pension changes said this was perhaps the most difficult vote on the issue taken so far. The House has already approved legislation that would cap pensionable salary at the Social Security wage base, which is $113,700 in 2013, or the employee's current salary, whichever is greater, and a bill that would increase the retirement age for employees younger than 46. Employees from 40 to 45 would see a one-year increase, employees 35 to 39 would see a three-year increase and employees 34 and younger would see a five-year increase.
House Speaker Michael Madigan said those components, potentially along with some other provisions that have been up for debate recently, would likely be part of comprehensive legislation yet to come. “I think we’re in a position to finalize the preparation of the bill and then move a bill from the House to the Senate that treats all aspects of the problem,” he said.
Rep. Elaine Nekritz, who has been leading the push for pension changes in the House, said she and Evanston Democratic Sen. Daniel Biss, her counterpart on the issue in the other chamber, have spent the two-week break trying to form a picture of what might be in the final plan. “When we last voted to changes to the COLA, the speaker talked about how the next step would be to put together a comprehensive package,” she said. “So I have put together a list of things that I think we need to be considering.” But Nekritz said it is too soon for her to pin down what may actually end up in that final plan or when it may be up for a committee hearing or floor vote. “At this point, I don’t anticipate that that would happened in the next two weeks, but I've been wrong before.”
Same sex marriage
The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments related to same sex marriage last week, and longtime observers say the court may opt to rule portions of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) unconstitutional. If that happens, couples in states that have same sex marriage could become eligible for the federal benefits currently available only to heterosexual married couples.
Illinois U.S. Sen. Mark Kirk, a Republican, announced his support of same sex marriage this week. Kirk, who suffered from a debilitating stroke last year and has been working hard at recovery, said his personal experience paved the way for his stance. “Same-sex couples should have the right to civil marriage. Our time on this Earth is limited, I know that better than most. Life comes down to who you love and who loves you back — government has no place in the middle,” Kirk said in a prepared statement.
Legislation to legalize same sex marriage in Illinois has passed in the Senate, but Madigan said it is about a dozen votes shy of the support needed for it to clear the House. (Go here to read selected Illinois Issues coverage of the issue on the state and federal level.)
Concealed carry
A federal court ruled the state’s ban on the concealed carrying of firearms unconstitutional and gave Illinois a deadline for approving legislation to regulate it. The House has followed a similar process on this issue as it has on pensions. However, the chamber does not yet seem close to agreement on any final comprehensive plan for concealed carry. Expect to see more debate on the topic, as well as other gun related issues, such as bans on assault weapons and high capacity magazines, in the coming weeks.
Medical marijuana
Skokie Democratic Rep. Lou Lang thinks this might be the session that a bill to legalize the use of marijuana to treat chronic medical conditions might gain the needed backing to pass in the House. A House committee approved House Bill 1 in March, and Lang said the legislation is gaining support. He says the measure is just a couple votes shy of being passed. Lang has said many times that if every lawmaker who told him they supported the idea would cast a vote in favor of the plan, he would have far more support than the majority he needs. He has called medical marijuana bills for three separate floor votes in the House, only to watch them fail. But he is dealing with many new lawmakers this time around, so perhaps it is Lang’s year. The Senate has approved medical marijuana legislation in the past.
Gaming expansion
Expect efforts to pass another gaming expansion plan in the final months of the scheduled spring session. Lang and Waukegan Democratic Sen. Terry Link, who have backed other expansion plans, say they would like to try again. Lawmakers approved two gambling bills in recent years, only to have them vetoed by Gov. Pat Quinn. The newest proposal contains many of the provisions that were in those two bills, but it also has stricter regulations and a ban on campaign contributions from casino owners, which Quinn has called for many times. But the bill has a wild card provision: It would legalize some forms of online gambling, which would fall under the supervision of the Illinois Lottery. The lottery currently sells tickets online, but allowing online gaming such as Internet poker would be a huge gambling expansion. Residents would be able to place bets from their computers or even their smart phones. Two other states, Nevada and New Jersey, have approved such online gambling. The idea is new, and Quinn has been careful not to be too critical of the legislation in public. However, as the negotiations move in, it is possible this component could make him shy away because he has said he opposes “top heavy” bills that would make gambling in the state too readily available. At one point, the governor was even shying away from putting slot machines at horse racing tracks, an idea he seems to have softened to if the state revenues earned are spent on education.
Budget
As lawmakers debate these and other issues, they will also be working to craft a budget for the next fiscal year. That plan will likely contain some controversial cuts. Spending pressures such as pension costs and health care expenses are growing, and competing interests will be vigorously battling over resources for Fiscal Year 2014.
Monday, April 01, 2013
DoC still working out policy for former Tamms prisoners
 |
| North segregation wing at Pontiac Correctional Center |
Inmates who were transferred from a now-shuttered super-maximum security prison in Tamms remain in relative isolation at the Pontiac Correctional Center with no immediate possibility of rejoining the general prison population.
The Tamms Correctional Center closed in January, and most inmates were transferred to the maximum-security facility in Pontiac. Pontiac Warden Randy Pfister said that for many of the prisoners, this was not their first time at Pontiac. “Many of the ex-Tamms offenders had already spent time at Pontiac Correctional [Center]. They’re very familiar with Pontiac Correctional Center,” he told reporters after leading them on a tour of Pontiac last Friday.
On the day of the visit, Pontiac held 1,948 inmates. According to the John Howard Association, a prison watchdog group, Pontiac is designed to hold 1,800 inmates. The Department of Corrections lists the prison’s capacity 2,152. It costs almost $32,000 to house a prisoner at Pontiac for a year. Pfister estimated that about half of the men serving time at Pontiac will be behind bars for the rest of their lives.
Former Tamms prisoners fall under two general categories. About 50 of them are in disciplinary segregation at Pontiac. Pfister said that serious infractions of the rules in the prison system, such as assaults or possession of contraband, land inmates in long term segregation. Inmates who rack up more than a year of segregation are typically transferred to Pontiac to serve their disciplinary time. “Violate the rules or the policies or procedures of the Department of Corrections; basically it’s the same as if you break a law on the streets.”
The former Tamms prisoners in segregation live under the strictest conditions at the facility. They spend the vast majority of their time and take all of their meals in small cells by themselves. The cell doors are covered in Plexiglas and metal grating. The addition of Plexiglas is one of the infrastructure changes made specifically for the former Tamm’s prisoners. Reporters were not allowed on the wings where the “worst of the worst” of former Tamms inmates are housed at Pontiac. “The North segregation [where former Tamms prisoners are held], it’s a different atmosphere,” said Frank Turner, president of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Local 494. Turner, who is a corrections officer at Pontiac, said prisoners in other cell blocks have more incentive to exhibit good behavior because they have more opportunities to earn rewards.
The inmates in North segregation are allowed five hours of recreation time a week. They take that in large rust-colored metal cages in the prison yard. Segregation prisoners are not allowed to bring anything into the cages, dubbed recreation pods by DoC. There is a pull-up bar, and Pontiac staff said prisoners often exercise or yell back in forth to prisoners in other pods when they are in the yard. There is a system at Pontiac for stepping down segregation prisoners to less restrictive conditions, but Stacey Solano, a spokeswoman for DoC, said that no former Tamms inmates have been placed under a different security classification than their status was at the super-max prison. Pfister said some inmates in segregation at Pontiac should never be returned to a general prison population because of the dangers that they present and their inability to follow the rules.
 |
| Cell in North cell house where Tamms prisoners reside |
 |
| Recreation pods where segregation inmates get yard time. |
Inmates in administrative detention typically get more time in the yard than those in segregation Pfister said they can spend up to nine hours a week outside. Administrative detention inmates are reevaluated every 90 days to determine if they still need to be separated from the general population. However, DoC has no plan in place for integrating any of the former Tamms inmates. Solano said that DoC is developing a policy to transition Tamms inmates back into the general population, but has no timeline for when that might happen. She said former Tamms inmates could earn additional privileges at Pontiac if their 90-day evaluations are positive.
 |
| Basketball courts where some former Tamms inmates play. |
Former Tamms prisoners in both categories are restricted on how they can move around the prison when they are out of their cells. The warden said the prison is using a combination of security protocols pulled from rules applied at Tamms, under Pontiac's current segregation policy and on the former death row at Pontiac, which now houses Tamms inmates that are in administrative detention. He said former Tamms prisoners are always accompanied by a guard when they are moved, and a prison sergeant is always nearby.
 |
| Cell doors for segregation inmates from Tamms. |
Among their demands, they asked that private property that they had in Tamms be returned to them. “Many of the issues were property issues,” said Pfister. “Because we got over 100 of them in a two-day period, it took us a little while to get their personal property.” Segregation inmates from Tamms also asked that the Plexiglas be removed from their cells, a request that has not been accommodated. “We totally opposed that because those men were in Tamms, and they were not behind Plexiglas, and they were fine,” said Reynolds. Tamms Year Ten was not associated with the hunger strike, but the group is working to ensure that former Tamms prisoners do not encounter discrimination in their new placements at other prisons. She said that she thinks that Pfister is doing his best to treat former Tamms prisoners like the other inmates at Pontiac. However, she said there is also the possibility that inmates might have an issue with individual guards. “I really did fully believe that he was treating everyone the same. I really think that is his whole mantra in life.”
Pfister said of the inmates in his prison: “We just deal with them professionally and respectfully and treat them like a man. They’ve already been judged; that’s not our job.”
The warden said that the hunger strike has ended, but he said some prisoners held out for a long time. “I think the longest one was just under 50 days,” he said. Despite the hunger strike, Reynolds said that much of the feedback from inmates and their families after the move to Pontiac has been positive. “This is [a] very good experience that you’re seeing our guys having and that the family members are happy about.” She said that there was concern that DoC employees might take out their frustration over the recent prison closing on Tamms inmates. “We were so terrified that these guys were going to go there and be really treated badly, and they would act out, and there would be a lot of tension.” But Reynolds said the reality at Pontiac is very different. “The staff and everybody was so nice to the parents, they were just in shock.” She said the visitation process at Pontiac is much easier for families to negotiate. For Tamms visits, they have to mail in paperwork and undergo a screening each time. Often, they would make the trip to the prison in the state’s southern tip only to be turned away. “The Tamms visitation policy was such a circus of nonsense that they put family members through.”
Reynolds said she has major concerns about the isolation polices at Pontiac, but she said for former Tamms inmates, just getting to eat an orange, smell the grass and see the sky on a regular basis is an improvement from their lives at the super-max facility. “They’re having sensory experiences at Pontiac. They weren’t having them at Tamms.”
 |
| Pontiac's visiting room. Inmates are not allowed contact with visitors. |
He said that the crowding at other prisons also makes it difficult to execute inmate management policies. “We’ve got 33,000 beds, and we’ve got 49,000 inmates. You know, the math doesn’t add up. And they’ve announced that they’ve got six institutions that we’re putting cots in the gymnasiums. The writing’s on the wall. If you’ve got more inmates than you’ve got beds, there’s going to be a problem.” He said the conflicts that result from overcrowding at lower security levels mean that more inmates will likely rack up segregation time and potentially be sent to Pontiac. At some point, he said, there just wouldn’t be any more room at the higher security level prisons for more dangerous inmates. “You’re going to have to take inmates that don’t fit the criteria at a lower institution because you don’t have enough beds at the higher security level.” Turner said the additional staff from the Dwight closure will help to take some pressure off guards at Pontiac, who he says have been working a high level of overtime. “Unfortunately they’re closing a facility. That’s taking beds away. That doesn’t make any sense.”
For more on the debate surrounding the closure of Tamms super-max prison, see Illinois Issues June 2102.
Illinois Issues also toured a minimum security prison in Vienna. You can read about that facility at the Illinois Issues blog.
Wednesday, March 27, 2013
Deadline nears for discriminatory lending settlement
By Jamey Dunn
Minority borrowers in Illinois may be eligible for compensation under a settlement with now-defunct Countrywide Financial over its discriminatory lending practices. But they have only a few days left to submit paperwork to get a piece of the settlement.
Bank of America, which bought Countrywide in 2008, has agreed to pay $335 million to customers affected by the racial discrimination committed by the former lender when making home loans. The U.S. Department of Justice sent letters and claim forms to the more than 200,000 people nationwide who are eligible for compensation. To receive a check, those eligible must submit their forms by March 29, this Friday.
“The relief obtained in this settlement is crucial for borrowers who’ve paid far too high a price for the risky, discriminatory lending practices Countrywide employed in the buildup to the housing collapse,” said Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan, who filed a discrimination suit against Countrywide in 2011. “I encourage anyone who has received information from the settlement administrator to act quickly to submit their claim before the deadline.” Madigan’s suit was ended by the federal settlement, which calls for at least $20 million to go to Illinois.
The DoJ says during that between 2004 and 2008, Countrywide lenders charged minority borrowers more in fees and other costs. According to the settlement, black and Hispanic borrowers were also more than twice as likely to end up with expensive subprime loans with ballooning interest rates than white borrowers with similar credit scores. “The steered Hispanic and African-American borrowers [who got subprime loans] paid, on average, thousands of dollars more for their loans and were subject to possible prepayment penalties, increased risk of credit problems, default, and foreclosure,” said the federal complaint.
The settlement applies to 41 states and the District of Columbia. But the DoJ focused in on Chicago as one of the examples used in its complaint against Countrywide. “In 2007, Countrywide charged a retail customer in Chicago borrowing $200,000 on average about $795 more in non-risk-based pricing adjustments if he were Hispanic, and an average of about $460 more if he were African-American, than the average amount charged to a non-Hispanic white borrower,” the compliant said. The DoJ said that at the same time, African-American and Hispanic borrowers in Chicago were also paying about $1,000 more in fees than white borrowers on the same kind of loan. The letters sent to those eligible for the settlement included a minimum amount that borrowers can expect to receive. The payouts range from $200 to $15,000. The higher amounts will go to the more than 12,000 people who were given sub-prime loans despite their solid credit histories. The final amount each borrower would receive will be determined by how many people respond by the deadline, after which the settlement will be sliced up among those that submitted to proper paperwork.
Borrowers who have questions, need help with their submission or need a new claim form should contact Independent Settlement Administrator Rust Consulting Inc, a contractor hired by DoJ to oversee the settlement. The administrator can be reached at (800) 842-5148 or by email at countrywide.settlement@usdoj.gov.
Illinois residents can also call Madigan’s Homeowner Helpline at (866) 544-7151. For more on the settlement, see Illinois Issues February 2012.
The Countrywide discriminatory lending settlement is not to be confused with the $26 billion foreclosure settlement approved in 2012. That agreement came in response to the nation’s largest lenders engaging in sloppy and sometimes fraudulent foreclosure practices, such as signing off on documents without verifying information, a practice known as robo-signing. Illinois is expected to receive $1 billion in that settlement, and most of the money is supposed to go toward keeping struggling borrowers in their homes.
Minority borrowers in Illinois may be eligible for compensation under a settlement with now-defunct Countrywide Financial over its discriminatory lending practices. But they have only a few days left to submit paperwork to get a piece of the settlement.
Bank of America, which bought Countrywide in 2008, has agreed to pay $335 million to customers affected by the racial discrimination committed by the former lender when making home loans. The U.S. Department of Justice sent letters and claim forms to the more than 200,000 people nationwide who are eligible for compensation. To receive a check, those eligible must submit their forms by March 29, this Friday.
“The relief obtained in this settlement is crucial for borrowers who’ve paid far too high a price for the risky, discriminatory lending practices Countrywide employed in the buildup to the housing collapse,” said Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan, who filed a discrimination suit against Countrywide in 2011. “I encourage anyone who has received information from the settlement administrator to act quickly to submit their claim before the deadline.” Madigan’s suit was ended by the federal settlement, which calls for at least $20 million to go to Illinois.
The DoJ says during that between 2004 and 2008, Countrywide lenders charged minority borrowers more in fees and other costs. According to the settlement, black and Hispanic borrowers were also more than twice as likely to end up with expensive subprime loans with ballooning interest rates than white borrowers with similar credit scores. “The steered Hispanic and African-American borrowers [who got subprime loans] paid, on average, thousands of dollars more for their loans and were subject to possible prepayment penalties, increased risk of credit problems, default, and foreclosure,” said the federal complaint.
The settlement applies to 41 states and the District of Columbia. But the DoJ focused in on Chicago as one of the examples used in its complaint against Countrywide. “In 2007, Countrywide charged a retail customer in Chicago borrowing $200,000 on average about $795 more in non-risk-based pricing adjustments if he were Hispanic, and an average of about $460 more if he were African-American, than the average amount charged to a non-Hispanic white borrower,” the compliant said. The DoJ said that at the same time, African-American and Hispanic borrowers in Chicago were also paying about $1,000 more in fees than white borrowers on the same kind of loan. The letters sent to those eligible for the settlement included a minimum amount that borrowers can expect to receive. The payouts range from $200 to $15,000. The higher amounts will go to the more than 12,000 people who were given sub-prime loans despite their solid credit histories. The final amount each borrower would receive will be determined by how many people respond by the deadline, after which the settlement will be sliced up among those that submitted to proper paperwork.
Borrowers who have questions, need help with their submission or need a new claim form should contact Independent Settlement Administrator Rust Consulting Inc, a contractor hired by DoJ to oversee the settlement. The administrator can be reached at (800) 842-5148 or by email at countrywide.settlement@usdoj.gov.
Illinois residents can also call Madigan’s Homeowner Helpline at (866) 544-7151. For more on the settlement, see Illinois Issues February 2012.
The Countrywide discriminatory lending settlement is not to be confused with the $26 billion foreclosure settlement approved in 2012. That agreement came in response to the nation’s largest lenders engaging in sloppy and sometimes fraudulent foreclosure practices, such as signing off on documents without verifying information, a practice known as robo-signing. Illinois is expected to receive $1 billion in that settlement, and most of the money is supposed to go toward keeping struggling borrowers in their homes.
Friday, March 22, 2013
ISBE: More than half of Illinois school districts face budget deficits this year
By Jamey Dunn
More than half of Illinois school districts will spend more money than they have this fiscal year ,according to analysis from the Illinois State Board of Education.
According ISBE report, more than 570, or about 67 percent, of schools will deficit spend this fiscal year, which ends in June. That number has increased from 425 districts, or about 48 percent last fiscal year. The analysis ranks schools on their fiscal stability based on factors such as how much cash a district has on hand and its debt load. More than 100 school districts have dropped out of its highest ranking category since last year and the number of districts in the lowest category, called financial watch, has doubled, going from 17 districts to 45. But 13 percent of Illinois districts fell in the bottom two rankings, up from about 6 percent last year. The number of districts on the financial watch list decreased each year from 2004 to 2009. The number went up in 2010, declined in 2011 and 2012 and spiked under the current analysis. (Financial rankings for all of the state’s school districts can be found at ISBE’s website.) This is the 11th year that ISBE has done such an analysis.
The rankings have been changed to account for slow payments from the state to schools districts. The state currently owes schools more than $630 million. According to ISBE, no schools are put on financial watch based solely on late payments.
ISBE officials attribute the decline in districts’ financial stability to cuts in state funding. They say that K-12 education has been cut by almost $900 million since 2009. “It is no surprise that our analysis shows the harmful effects of multiple cuts to education funding by the legislature. School districts have already eliminated thousands of teaching positions, increased class sizes, delayed facility repairs and so on, all in an effort to reduce expenses,” ISBE Chairman Gery Chico said in a prepared statement. “We cannot expect Illinois to remain competitive in a global economy if we continue to shirk our responsibility to children as our schools struggle to make ends meet.”
The board has requested $875 million in additional funding for Fiscal Year 2014. “The Illinois State Board of Education is simply asking for what is required by law in fully funding General State Aid,” Superintendent of Education Christopher Koch said in a prepared statement. “While we understand that difficult decisions must be made and that there is a great deal of pressure on the state budget, we are asking the legislature to meet its constitutional commitment. This recommendation is aggressive but desperately needed to provide much-needed financial relief to districts.”
Gov. Pat Quinn’s budget proposal would cut K-12 education by $275 million from current fiscal year levels. Quinn said growing pensions costs necessitate cuts in education. “Skyrocketing pension obligations leave our state with no choice but to continue reductions to our core priorities,” Quinn said when he presented his budget plan. He is calling for early childhood education to be spared further cuts.
Thursday, March 21, 2013
House passes bill to cut COLAs on public pensions
By Jamey Dunn
Supporters of efforts to cut spending on public-employee pensions say they reached a turning point today, as the House approved reductions to cost-of-living increases for current and future retirees.
“The meat and potatoes of pension reform happened today,” House Minority Leader Tom Cross said after today’s vote. “And I think this was the toughest vote people are going to face.” Lawmakers approved House Bill 1165 on a vote of 66 to 50. The measure would cap the amount of salary on which retirees could earn the compounded 3 percent cost of living adjustment [COLA] at $25,000. Anyone earning more pension income would receive a flat COLA of $750 annually. Under the bill, retirees would not be eligible for a COLA until they have been retired for five years or they reach age 67, whichever comes first. The bill also would apply to current retirees who are now receiving COLAs.
“I know that this is a very difficult thing to do to retirees ... but unfortunately, we have let the problem get so big that that has to be the nature of the solution that we’re looking to,” said sponsor Rep. Elaine Nekritz, a Northbrook Democrat. The current COLAs are by far the costliest component of the pension plans. Nekrtiz and Cross said that they must be targeted to make a real dent in the $96 billion unfunded liability.
House Speaker Michael Madigan said today’s vote signals that the House is very close to a vote on a final comprehensive pension reform bill. “I think we’re in a position to finalize the preparation of the bill and then move a bill from the House to the Senate that treats all aspects of the problem.”
Opponents to HB 1165 say it is an unconstitutional reduction in employee benefits and unfair to retirees who planned their finances around the benefits they were promised when they left their jobs. “What’s not fair to do is to go to them and say, 'You have to make up the entire liability,' when over half the liability is because the state of Illinois never made its payments,” said Rep. David Reis, a Willow Hill Republican. He said lawmakers should instead accept a union coalition offer for employees to pay a larger percentage of their wages toward their pensions. “There are other avenues out there that have been negotiated with the various unions that may prevent a lawsuit, that I think would help us accomplish what we’re trying to do.”
Earlier this month, the House approved House Bill 1154, which would cap pensionable salary at the Social Security wage base, which is $113,700 in 2013, or the employee's current salary, whichever is greater. The same day, the chamber voted in favor of HB 1166, which would increase the retirement age for employees younger than 46. Employees from 40 to 45 would see a one-year increase, employees 35 to 39 would see a three-year increase and employees 34 and younger would see a five-year increase. All three bills are key pieces of HB 3411, the “comprehensive plan” pushed by Cross and Nekrtiz, and are now in the Senate. “We all recognize the enormity of this problem. The significance of the problem is not the issue. The issue is, how do we react to the problem? How do we move legislation that will solve the problem and do it in such a way that we have a reasonable chance of approval from the Illinois court system?” Madigan said on the House floor today. “We’ve taken three significant steps in a process to solve the problem.”
Cross and Nekritz both agree that a final package could contain tweaks and additional provisions. Their bill has a provision meant to ensure that the state would make its annual required payment and calls for money now going to pay off pension bonds to be used to pay down the unfunded liability after the bonds have matured. It would also require employees to pay 2 percent more of their salaries toward their retirement benefits. Both lawmakers agree that any of those proposals may end up in a final bill. “We’ve now passed the most challenging parts of the bill, in many ways, so putting together a comprehensive package from here, when you are talking about the funding guarantee and additional money going into the pension systems, those are things that are hardly controversial.” Cross said he is still not thrilled with the approach that the House took, voting on each part separately. And he said he does not know how he stands on any potential final bill until he sees what is in it. He said he would like it to be as close to complete as possible. “I’m not happy with the process. I’d like to see something in a more comprehensive package.”
While leaders of both parties in the House say the chamber made significant progress today, the Senate rejected a comprehensive proposal on Wednesday. Senate Bill 34, which is similar to HB 3411, fell seven votes shy of the majority needed to pass. The chamber instead approved a much narrower bill that would only apply to teachers. Senate President John Cullerton said that the measure was just part of an overall reform package he plans to present in the Senate. “The work of building a coalition of 30 votes is going to require more heavy lifting. I'm committed to this goal and look forward to passing a full reform plan this session,” he said in a prepared statement.
Cross said the House vote today may shake things up in the other chamber. “I think any time that one chamber passes something of this significance, it changes the dynamic,” he said. “I would like to think that the Senate would take another shot. They can certainly do just this bill.”
Gov. Pat Quinn said he plans to work with both chambers to try to get a bill to his desk. “I’m encouraged by the positive steps recently taken by the Illinois General Assembly toward comprehensive pension reform. In the past few weeks, the Illinois House has passed three pension reform bills, culminating with today’s major cost-saving measure, which reforms the cost-of-living-adjustment factor,” Quinn said in a prepared statement. “In addition, yesterday’s votes in the Illinois Senate indicate that there is support for pension reform. There's much more work to do, but I’m pleased to see progress being made. I will continue working with the leaders and members of both houses and both parties to get comprehensive pension reform legislation on my desk so that I can sign it into law.”
Union leaders said they would continue to fight against the changes, which they say violate the state's Constitution.“We remain opposed to measures passed by the House and Senate this week. We will continue to advocate for coalition-supported solutions that have been negotiated with the unions who represent those affected by pension changes," said a statement from the We Are One Coalition.
Supporters of efforts to cut spending on public-employee pensions say they reached a turning point today, as the House approved reductions to cost-of-living increases for current and future retirees.
“The meat and potatoes of pension reform happened today,” House Minority Leader Tom Cross said after today’s vote. “And I think this was the toughest vote people are going to face.” Lawmakers approved House Bill 1165 on a vote of 66 to 50. The measure would cap the amount of salary on which retirees could earn the compounded 3 percent cost of living adjustment [COLA] at $25,000. Anyone earning more pension income would receive a flat COLA of $750 annually. Under the bill, retirees would not be eligible for a COLA until they have been retired for five years or they reach age 67, whichever comes first. The bill also would apply to current retirees who are now receiving COLAs.
“I know that this is a very difficult thing to do to retirees ... but unfortunately, we have let the problem get so big that that has to be the nature of the solution that we’re looking to,” said sponsor Rep. Elaine Nekritz, a Northbrook Democrat. The current COLAs are by far the costliest component of the pension plans. Nekrtiz and Cross said that they must be targeted to make a real dent in the $96 billion unfunded liability.
House Speaker Michael Madigan said today’s vote signals that the House is very close to a vote on a final comprehensive pension reform bill. “I think we’re in a position to finalize the preparation of the bill and then move a bill from the House to the Senate that treats all aspects of the problem.”
Opponents to HB 1165 say it is an unconstitutional reduction in employee benefits and unfair to retirees who planned their finances around the benefits they were promised when they left their jobs. “What’s not fair to do is to go to them and say, 'You have to make up the entire liability,' when over half the liability is because the state of Illinois never made its payments,” said Rep. David Reis, a Willow Hill Republican. He said lawmakers should instead accept a union coalition offer for employees to pay a larger percentage of their wages toward their pensions. “There are other avenues out there that have been negotiated with the various unions that may prevent a lawsuit, that I think would help us accomplish what we’re trying to do.”
Earlier this month, the House approved House Bill 1154, which would cap pensionable salary at the Social Security wage base, which is $113,700 in 2013, or the employee's current salary, whichever is greater. The same day, the chamber voted in favor of HB 1166, which would increase the retirement age for employees younger than 46. Employees from 40 to 45 would see a one-year increase, employees 35 to 39 would see a three-year increase and employees 34 and younger would see a five-year increase. All three bills are key pieces of HB 3411, the “comprehensive plan” pushed by Cross and Nekrtiz, and are now in the Senate. “We all recognize the enormity of this problem. The significance of the problem is not the issue. The issue is, how do we react to the problem? How do we move legislation that will solve the problem and do it in such a way that we have a reasonable chance of approval from the Illinois court system?” Madigan said on the House floor today. “We’ve taken three significant steps in a process to solve the problem.”
Cross and Nekritz both agree that a final package could contain tweaks and additional provisions. Their bill has a provision meant to ensure that the state would make its annual required payment and calls for money now going to pay off pension bonds to be used to pay down the unfunded liability after the bonds have matured. It would also require employees to pay 2 percent more of their salaries toward their retirement benefits. Both lawmakers agree that any of those proposals may end up in a final bill. “We’ve now passed the most challenging parts of the bill, in many ways, so putting together a comprehensive package from here, when you are talking about the funding guarantee and additional money going into the pension systems, those are things that are hardly controversial.” Cross said he is still not thrilled with the approach that the House took, voting on each part separately. And he said he does not know how he stands on any potential final bill until he sees what is in it. He said he would like it to be as close to complete as possible. “I’m not happy with the process. I’d like to see something in a more comprehensive package.”
While leaders of both parties in the House say the chamber made significant progress today, the Senate rejected a comprehensive proposal on Wednesday. Senate Bill 34, which is similar to HB 3411, fell seven votes shy of the majority needed to pass. The chamber instead approved a much narrower bill that would only apply to teachers. Senate President John Cullerton said that the measure was just part of an overall reform package he plans to present in the Senate. “The work of building a coalition of 30 votes is going to require more heavy lifting. I'm committed to this goal and look forward to passing a full reform plan this session,” he said in a prepared statement.
Cross said the House vote today may shake things up in the other chamber. “I think any time that one chamber passes something of this significance, it changes the dynamic,” he said. “I would like to think that the Senate would take another shot. They can certainly do just this bill.”
Gov. Pat Quinn said he plans to work with both chambers to try to get a bill to his desk. “I’m encouraged by the positive steps recently taken by the Illinois General Assembly toward comprehensive pension reform. In the past few weeks, the Illinois House has passed three pension reform bills, culminating with today’s major cost-saving measure, which reforms the cost-of-living-adjustment factor,” Quinn said in a prepared statement. “In addition, yesterday’s votes in the Illinois Senate indicate that there is support for pension reform. There's much more work to do, but I’m pleased to see progress being made. I will continue working with the leaders and members of both houses and both parties to get comprehensive pension reform legislation on my desk so that I can sign it into law.”
Union leaders said they would continue to fight against the changes, which they say violate the state's Constitution.“We remain opposed to measures passed by the House and Senate this week. We will continue to advocate for coalition-supported solutions that have been negotiated with the unions who represent those affected by pension changes," said a statement from the We Are One Coalition.
Universities ask legislators to restore Quinn's proposed cuts
By Meredith Colias
The presidents of four of Illinois' public universities testified today before the Senate Appropriations Committee, hoping to avoid Gov. Pat Quinn's proposed budget cuts for higher education.
The universities said they were operating with growths in enrollment over the past decade, growing costs for employee health care and millions in deferred maintenance, all while facing cuts and delayed payments from the state. In his budget proposal for Fiscal Year 2014, Quinn proposed to further cut 4.9% in state funding for higher education. Al Bowman, president of Illinois State University, said reduced state funding had a direct impact on ISU and the ability of many students seeking a college education. “The impact on affordability is certainly something that we can’t ignore,” he said. He said more money is needed to provide some salary increases and maintenance updates.
The state has only paid about 20 percent of what it owes to public universities at this point, three months from the end of the current fiscal year. Even though the payments are slow coming, Bowman said the payment schedule is predictable and “something we’re able to deal with.”
Recently, Moody’s bond rating agency revised credit ratings for some state universities, including the University of Illinois, the state's largest university system, citing debt concerns and reliance on state funds for their operating budgets.
The U of I, with campuses in Chicago, Urbana-Champaign and Springfield, estimated it would lose $32 million in the next fiscal year under Quinn’s budget. University President Robert Easter said the U of I is still waiting on $480 million in late payments. He said the university hopes to receive flat funding this year instead of the cut in Quinn’s proposed budget.
Several committee members pushed back against some salaries at U of I, noting the university budgeted for a $1.1 million total salary increase for its top 10 officials. “The increase in that could probably pay for three additional faculty members,” said Sen. Michael Hastings, an Orland Hills Democrat. Easter said some of the increased salaries were for medical faculty who are also being compensated for their work in medical facilities. Some of the employees who received raises, including Easter, had moved from temporary status to permanent employment.
Easter said after the committee meeting that the U of I is left to figure out how to continue research and provide quality faculty with a reduction in state funds. The university has had to raise tuition, delay building maintenance and increase class sizes, he said. “Every one of these requires us to recalibrate.”
Governors State University asked lawmakers for additional funding beyond the $24.6 million it received this fiscal year. The university wants $2.5 million for a new building that would house classrooms. However, President Elaine Maimon said administrators would be glad just to avoid Quinn’s proposed reduction. “We requested a modest increase in the budget because we need it. However, we would be really pleased with a flat budget,” she told committee members. She said the school limited the freshman class that they plan to admit in 2014 and would like to be able to expand admission in the future. “Even with all we are doing to increase enrollment ... we really believe that if you could give us a flat budget, we could manage all of this and make the state proud of us."
The president of Southern Illinois University, Glenn Poshard, said his university needed to continue to be able to provide a college education to students from more impoverished areas of the state. He spoke of the growing difficulty for families in southern Illinois to send their kids to college, due in part to the historic rise in tuition rates.
Poshard said regional disparities in income and K-12 education leave many students not as academically prepared to attend college or as financially stable as students from more affluent areas. “The other Illinois struggles to make ends meet,” Poshard said. “Illinois’ prosperity here is uneven and declining.”
He said for an average family in southern Illinois, the cost of in-state tuition for a single student was about half of the family’s annual income. The affordability gap “risks pricing students out of post-secondary education,” he said. SIU expects to see a $10 million decline in funds from the state in the next fiscal year. Poshard said the state has paid about 21 percent, or $42.8 million, of the $204 million it owes the university the current fiscal year.
The presidents of four of Illinois' public universities testified today before the Senate Appropriations Committee, hoping to avoid Gov. Pat Quinn's proposed budget cuts for higher education.
The universities said they were operating with growths in enrollment over the past decade, growing costs for employee health care and millions in deferred maintenance, all while facing cuts and delayed payments from the state. In his budget proposal for Fiscal Year 2014, Quinn proposed to further cut 4.9% in state funding for higher education. Al Bowman, president of Illinois State University, said reduced state funding had a direct impact on ISU and the ability of many students seeking a college education. “The impact on affordability is certainly something that we can’t ignore,” he said. He said more money is needed to provide some salary increases and maintenance updates.
The state has only paid about 20 percent of what it owes to public universities at this point, three months from the end of the current fiscal year. Even though the payments are slow coming, Bowman said the payment schedule is predictable and “something we’re able to deal with.”
Recently, Moody’s bond rating agency revised credit ratings for some state universities, including the University of Illinois, the state's largest university system, citing debt concerns and reliance on state funds for their operating budgets.
The U of I, with campuses in Chicago, Urbana-Champaign and Springfield, estimated it would lose $32 million in the next fiscal year under Quinn’s budget. University President Robert Easter said the U of I is still waiting on $480 million in late payments. He said the university hopes to receive flat funding this year instead of the cut in Quinn’s proposed budget.
Several committee members pushed back against some salaries at U of I, noting the university budgeted for a $1.1 million total salary increase for its top 10 officials. “The increase in that could probably pay for three additional faculty members,” said Sen. Michael Hastings, an Orland Hills Democrat. Easter said some of the increased salaries were for medical faculty who are also being compensated for their work in medical facilities. Some of the employees who received raises, including Easter, had moved from temporary status to permanent employment.
Easter said after the committee meeting that the U of I is left to figure out how to continue research and provide quality faculty with a reduction in state funds. The university has had to raise tuition, delay building maintenance and increase class sizes, he said. “Every one of these requires us to recalibrate.”
Governors State University asked lawmakers for additional funding beyond the $24.6 million it received this fiscal year. The university wants $2.5 million for a new building that would house classrooms. However, President Elaine Maimon said administrators would be glad just to avoid Quinn’s proposed reduction. “We requested a modest increase in the budget because we need it. However, we would be really pleased with a flat budget,” she told committee members. She said the school limited the freshman class that they plan to admit in 2014 and would like to be able to expand admission in the future. “Even with all we are doing to increase enrollment ... we really believe that if you could give us a flat budget, we could manage all of this and make the state proud of us."
The president of Southern Illinois University, Glenn Poshard, said his university needed to continue to be able to provide a college education to students from more impoverished areas of the state. He spoke of the growing difficulty for families in southern Illinois to send their kids to college, due in part to the historic rise in tuition rates.
Poshard said regional disparities in income and K-12 education leave many students not as academically prepared to attend college or as financially stable as students from more affluent areas. “The other Illinois struggles to make ends meet,” Poshard said. “Illinois’ prosperity here is uneven and declining.”
He said for an average family in southern Illinois, the cost of in-state tuition for a single student was about half of the family’s annual income. The affordability gap “risks pricing students out of post-secondary education,” he said. SIU expects to see a $10 million decline in funds from the state in the next fiscal year. Poshard said the state has paid about 21 percent, or $42.8 million, of the $204 million it owes the university the current fiscal year.
Utility rate increases headed to Quinn
By Jamey Dunn
The Illinois House sent a bill to Gov. Pat Quinn today that could mean rate hikes for customers of the state’s two largest utility companies.
Senate Bill 9 would essentially overrule a decision from the Illinois Commerce Commission, a regulatory body that approves rate increases and is overseeing the implementation of the smart grid plan, which became law in 2011. Lawmakers say the ICC misinterpreted the law. They say the resulting ruling could cost Commonwealth Edison an estimated $100 million annually and forced Ameren to reduce its rates by just under $50 million. The utilities want the money back, plus interest.
Under the smart grid legislation, which became law after legislators voted to override a veto from Gov. Pat Quinn, Ameren and Commonwealth Edison committed to investing more than $3 billion in the state’s electrical grid over 10 years. Under the law, ComEd is required to create 2,000 new jobs, and Ameren is required to create 450 jobs over the same period. ComEd has already created 700 new jobs under the plan. The utility has also installed 500 “smart switches” that help to prevent power outages and completed 500 projects to strengthen the grid against storm damage. But the utility companies claim that they cannot move ahead with the investments and further job growth unless the ICC ruling is reversed. “ComEd is proceeding with a portion of the core grid modernization programs, while postponing the deployment of the remainder and all smart meters until 2015. SB 9 would allow us to get the Smart Grid program — and the related job creation — back on track,” said Anne Pramaggiore, ComEd president and CEO.
Unions are supporting the bill, hoping to see the job growth continue. “On behalf of the 6,300 hard-working men and women of northern Illinois who make up IBEW Local 15, we enthusiastically support this legislation because it allows utilities to invest in their systems, grow the local economy and create thousands of new jobs — something our state needs badly,” said Dean Apple, president and business manager of IBEW Local 15. “If we don’t find a solution to deploy ComEd’s Smart Grid program as planned, our state will face a great setback. We believe SB 9 is that solution.”
The rate increases are expected to be small, likely less than $1 for most customers. However, opponents say it is unfair to charge customers more for power that they have already paid for. “They’re getting the retroactive rate hikes with interest,” said Scott Musser, associate state director for AARP. “People are going to be paying for service that they have already used.” He said that the move is part of a disturbing trend of utility companies coming to the legislature for relief when the ICC issues an unfavorable ruling. ComEd appealed the ICC ruling, and the ICC issued another ruling after that appeal. The utility is also in court with a lawsuit over the ruling. “They didn’t like what the commission did. The commission’s decision was based on the law.” Musser said, adding that the court case should be allowed to play out. “The issue hasn’t been resolved through the appropriate legal channels. If they don’t like in the end what the court decided and they want to come back to and tweak the law, fine.”
The House approved the measure with little floor debate today, and no lawmakers spoke out against the bill. Musser said that illustrates how much sway the utility companies, which spend millions each year to lobby lawmakers, hold in the state. “In the House and the Senate, a lot of it’s the clout the utility companies have. I think it’s unfortunate nobody’s getting up on the floor and speaking about it. You’re seeing people voting against it, but you’re not getting an actual dialogue.”
A spokesperson for Gov. Pat Quinn said he plans to “thoroughly review the bill.” A representative of the governor filed as an opponent to the bill at a House committee hearing Wednesday.
For more on Smart grid see Illinois Issues July/August 2011.
The Illinois House sent a bill to Gov. Pat Quinn today that could mean rate hikes for customers of the state’s two largest utility companies.
Senate Bill 9 would essentially overrule a decision from the Illinois Commerce Commission, a regulatory body that approves rate increases and is overseeing the implementation of the smart grid plan, which became law in 2011. Lawmakers say the ICC misinterpreted the law. They say the resulting ruling could cost Commonwealth Edison an estimated $100 million annually and forced Ameren to reduce its rates by just under $50 million. The utilities want the money back, plus interest.
Under the smart grid legislation, which became law after legislators voted to override a veto from Gov. Pat Quinn, Ameren and Commonwealth Edison committed to investing more than $3 billion in the state’s electrical grid over 10 years. Under the law, ComEd is required to create 2,000 new jobs, and Ameren is required to create 450 jobs over the same period. ComEd has already created 700 new jobs under the plan. The utility has also installed 500 “smart switches” that help to prevent power outages and completed 500 projects to strengthen the grid against storm damage. But the utility companies claim that they cannot move ahead with the investments and further job growth unless the ICC ruling is reversed. “ComEd is proceeding with a portion of the core grid modernization programs, while postponing the deployment of the remainder and all smart meters until 2015. SB 9 would allow us to get the Smart Grid program — and the related job creation — back on track,” said Anne Pramaggiore, ComEd president and CEO.
Unions are supporting the bill, hoping to see the job growth continue. “On behalf of the 6,300 hard-working men and women of northern Illinois who make up IBEW Local 15, we enthusiastically support this legislation because it allows utilities to invest in their systems, grow the local economy and create thousands of new jobs — something our state needs badly,” said Dean Apple, president and business manager of IBEW Local 15. “If we don’t find a solution to deploy ComEd’s Smart Grid program as planned, our state will face a great setback. We believe SB 9 is that solution.”
The rate increases are expected to be small, likely less than $1 for most customers. However, opponents say it is unfair to charge customers more for power that they have already paid for. “They’re getting the retroactive rate hikes with interest,” said Scott Musser, associate state director for AARP. “People are going to be paying for service that they have already used.” He said that the move is part of a disturbing trend of utility companies coming to the legislature for relief when the ICC issues an unfavorable ruling. ComEd appealed the ICC ruling, and the ICC issued another ruling after that appeal. The utility is also in court with a lawsuit over the ruling. “They didn’t like what the commission did. The commission’s decision was based on the law.” Musser said, adding that the court case should be allowed to play out. “The issue hasn’t been resolved through the appropriate legal channels. If they don’t like in the end what the court decided and they want to come back to and tweak the law, fine.”
The House approved the measure with little floor debate today, and no lawmakers spoke out against the bill. Musser said that illustrates how much sway the utility companies, which spend millions each year to lobby lawmakers, hold in the state. “In the House and the Senate, a lot of it’s the clout the utility companies have. I think it’s unfortunate nobody’s getting up on the floor and speaking about it. You’re seeing people voting against it, but you’re not getting an actual dialogue.”
A spokesperson for Gov. Pat Quinn said he plans to “thoroughly review the bill.” A representative of the governor filed as an opponent to the bill at a House committee hearing Wednesday.
For more on Smart grid see Illinois Issues July/August 2011.
Wednesday, March 20, 2013
Senate approves pension changes for teachers
By Jamey Dunn
The Illinois Senate rejected a comprehensive pension proposal today, opting instead to approve benefit changes that would apply only to teachers.
Senate Bill 35, which is similar to legislation being considered in the House, received bipartisan support but fell seven votes shy of the majority needed to pass. The bill would:
Opponents argued that the bill clearly violates the pension protection in the state’s Constitution but that for the state to uphold other constitutional obligations, such as funding education and ensuring public safety, the state must be allowed to reduce retiree benefits.
But Biss said: “Article XIII Section 5 [the pension protection] is not the only part of the Illinois Constitution. The preamble of the Constitution says explicitly the whole point of the document is to provide for the health, safety and welfare of the people; to eliminate poverty and inequality; to ensure legal, social and economic justice.”
Chicago Democratic Sen. Kwame Raoul said the language in the Constitution regarding pensions is clear. “You really don’t have to be a lawyer to read the plain language of Article XIII [which describes membership in a public retirement system as] a ‘contractual relationship, the benefits of which shall not be diminished or impaired.’ It’s plain English. Read Article XIII, please read it.” He said that if Biss’ plan were approved, it would be tossed out by the courts, and lawmakers would be forced to revisit the issue. “We can’t ignore it. We can’t just say we ... think that the court is going to look at this unambiguous language and say, ‘Oh well, um, we think the exigency of the circumstance gives us the opportunity to say, 'Oh, the heck with Article XII.’ The court is not going to do that,” he said. “In order to kind of do that, they would have to kind of conclude that this is our only option. They would have to conclude that this is an emergency, and this is the only thing we can do. ... and that’s not our only option. There’s several bills that have been introduced. They will be of record. The court will not ignore that.”
Biss said he does not think that cutting benefits is fair, but he said it is necessary to get the system and the state on stable footing. “The argument that we’ve all heard may many times is that the employees, of whom we are asking a very real sacrifice in this bill, have done nothing wrong. And they haven’t. That they have made every payment. And they have. That they were made a promise. And they were. ... I have never used the word fair when talking about this because they were made a promise and it isn’t fair.” But Biss said his proposal would “enable us out of the ashes of that failure, to build a system going forward that we can truly afford and to build a state going forward that we can all be proud of.”
Republicans who spoke in favor of the plan agreed with Biss. “We all know what a vexing problem this is. And no matter what we do, it’s going to be painful to someone,” said Minority Leader Christine Radogno. “We have a lot of great ideas here, but I think at this moment, this is the best, most comprehensive plan that we’ve seen to date, that tries to treat everyone fairly.” A dozen Republicans and 11 Democrats voted in favor of the bill. Radogno said she was disappointed with the outcome.
However, Rep. Elaine Nekritz, who is sponsoring similar legislation in the House, said that she was not discouraged because the vote was somewhat close. “For a bill that is as challenging as that bill, I was not that upset about the roll call.”
The Senate did approve SB 1, which would only to apply teachers who are currently working. But Senate President John Cullerton, who sponsors the bill, said that bill is only the first part of a package of reforms he plans to propose. “The pension clause states that membership in the state pension system is an enforceable and contractual right. I believe that means that benefits cannot be changed unless the legislature offers public employees and retirees a choice and the opportunity to consider and accept that offer,” Cullerton said in a prepared statement after the proposal passed. No Republicans voted in favor of the bill. “I also acknowledge that there are other interpretations of the pension clause and various ways to structure a reform bill. While it’s our job to pass a bill that addresses this crisis, it will be up to the courts to rule on the constitutionality of the legislation. In an effort to capture the maximum amount of savings for the state, I have agreed to sponsor a package of reforms. We addressed part of that package today.”
Under SB1, current teachers would be offered a choice. They could opt to give up their compounded-interest cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) for access to the state’s health plan and access to a cash balance retirement plan in addition to their current benefits. Employees who opted to keep their COLAs would have their pensionable salaries frozen, so no future raises could be considered for benefits. Cullerton said he removed retired teachers and those who have already given notice that they plan to retire, because most would not opt to reduce their COLAs. So, he said, including them would not produce substantial savings. “We’ve reached a crossroads. We’ve had enough debate on these issues. Now it’s time to pass a bill,” Cullerton said on the Senate floor.
Republicans said Cullerton’s bill is not comprehensive and would not save enough money. “If we’re going to do it, let’s do it. Sen. Biss’ bill saves us seven times more money than this,” said Palatine Republican Sen. Matt Murphy.
While he said leaving retirees out of any pensions deal would be a positive step, Dan Montgomery, president of the Illinois Federation of Teachers, said SB1 is unconstitutional. “It’s a positive that they took retired teachers out. That’s true. They should take retirees out of every system [changes]; we’ve said that for a long time. Not only [because] of the constitutional reasons but out of fairness. ... That’s a good thing that they did that. But the bill still is unconstitutional, and the impact on active teachers we still believe should fail in the courts.”
Nekritz said that the Senate passing SB 1 would likely not have any immediate effect on the House, which has been considering several pension provisions individually on floor votes. “I can’t imagine that this will change the program that we’re on in the short run,” she said. “The Senate is going down its path and the House is going down its path, and at some point, we will need to reconcile them. But I don’t think it is that time yet.”
The Illinois Senate rejected a comprehensive pension proposal today, opting instead to approve benefit changes that would apply only to teachers.
Senate Bill 35, which is similar to legislation being considered in the House, received bipartisan support but fell seven votes shy of the majority needed to pass. The bill would:
- Allow cost of living adjustments [COLAs] on only the first $25,000 of a retiree’s pension, or on only $20,000 for those who receive Social Security benefits. COLAs would not kick in until a retiree turns 67 or five years after retirement, whichever comes first.
- Increase the retirement age for employees younger than age 46. Employees from age 40 to 45 would see a one-year increase, employees 35 to 39 would see a three-year increase and employees 34 and younger would see a five-year increase.
- Limit the amount of pensionable income to the Social Security wage base, which will be $113,700 in 2013, or the employee's current salary, whichever is greater.
- Guarantee that the state make required annual payments to the pension systems.
Opponents argued that the bill clearly violates the pension protection in the state’s Constitution but that for the state to uphold other constitutional obligations, such as funding education and ensuring public safety, the state must be allowed to reduce retiree benefits.
But Biss said: “Article XIII Section 5 [the pension protection] is not the only part of the Illinois Constitution. The preamble of the Constitution says explicitly the whole point of the document is to provide for the health, safety and welfare of the people; to eliminate poverty and inequality; to ensure legal, social and economic justice.”
Chicago Democratic Sen. Kwame Raoul said the language in the Constitution regarding pensions is clear. “You really don’t have to be a lawyer to read the plain language of Article XIII [which describes membership in a public retirement system as] a ‘contractual relationship, the benefits of which shall not be diminished or impaired.’ It’s plain English. Read Article XIII, please read it.” He said that if Biss’ plan were approved, it would be tossed out by the courts, and lawmakers would be forced to revisit the issue. “We can’t ignore it. We can’t just say we ... think that the court is going to look at this unambiguous language and say, ‘Oh well, um, we think the exigency of the circumstance gives us the opportunity to say, 'Oh, the heck with Article XII.’ The court is not going to do that,” he said. “In order to kind of do that, they would have to kind of conclude that this is our only option. They would have to conclude that this is an emergency, and this is the only thing we can do. ... and that’s not our only option. There’s several bills that have been introduced. They will be of record. The court will not ignore that.”
Biss said he does not think that cutting benefits is fair, but he said it is necessary to get the system and the state on stable footing. “The argument that we’ve all heard may many times is that the employees, of whom we are asking a very real sacrifice in this bill, have done nothing wrong. And they haven’t. That they have made every payment. And they have. That they were made a promise. And they were. ... I have never used the word fair when talking about this because they were made a promise and it isn’t fair.” But Biss said his proposal would “enable us out of the ashes of that failure, to build a system going forward that we can truly afford and to build a state going forward that we can all be proud of.”
Republicans who spoke in favor of the plan agreed with Biss. “We all know what a vexing problem this is. And no matter what we do, it’s going to be painful to someone,” said Minority Leader Christine Radogno. “We have a lot of great ideas here, but I think at this moment, this is the best, most comprehensive plan that we’ve seen to date, that tries to treat everyone fairly.” A dozen Republicans and 11 Democrats voted in favor of the bill. Radogno said she was disappointed with the outcome.
However, Rep. Elaine Nekritz, who is sponsoring similar legislation in the House, said that she was not discouraged because the vote was somewhat close. “For a bill that is as challenging as that bill, I was not that upset about the roll call.”
The Senate did approve SB 1, which would only to apply teachers who are currently working. But Senate President John Cullerton, who sponsors the bill, said that bill is only the first part of a package of reforms he plans to propose. “The pension clause states that membership in the state pension system is an enforceable and contractual right. I believe that means that benefits cannot be changed unless the legislature offers public employees and retirees a choice and the opportunity to consider and accept that offer,” Cullerton said in a prepared statement after the proposal passed. No Republicans voted in favor of the bill. “I also acknowledge that there are other interpretations of the pension clause and various ways to structure a reform bill. While it’s our job to pass a bill that addresses this crisis, it will be up to the courts to rule on the constitutionality of the legislation. In an effort to capture the maximum amount of savings for the state, I have agreed to sponsor a package of reforms. We addressed part of that package today.”
Under SB1, current teachers would be offered a choice. They could opt to give up their compounded-interest cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) for access to the state’s health plan and access to a cash balance retirement plan in addition to their current benefits. Employees who opted to keep their COLAs would have their pensionable salaries frozen, so no future raises could be considered for benefits. Cullerton said he removed retired teachers and those who have already given notice that they plan to retire, because most would not opt to reduce their COLAs. So, he said, including them would not produce substantial savings. “We’ve reached a crossroads. We’ve had enough debate on these issues. Now it’s time to pass a bill,” Cullerton said on the Senate floor.
Republicans said Cullerton’s bill is not comprehensive and would not save enough money. “If we’re going to do it, let’s do it. Sen. Biss’ bill saves us seven times more money than this,” said Palatine Republican Sen. Matt Murphy.
While he said leaving retirees out of any pensions deal would be a positive step, Dan Montgomery, president of the Illinois Federation of Teachers, said SB1 is unconstitutional. “It’s a positive that they took retired teachers out. That’s true. They should take retirees out of every system [changes]; we’ve said that for a long time. Not only [because] of the constitutional reasons but out of fairness. ... That’s a good thing that they did that. But the bill still is unconstitutional, and the impact on active teachers we still believe should fail in the courts.”
Nekritz said that the Senate passing SB 1 would likely not have any immediate effect on the House, which has been considering several pension provisions individually on floor votes. “I can’t imagine that this will change the program that we’re on in the short run,” she said. “The Senate is going down its path and the House is going down its path, and at some point, we will need to reconcile them. But I don’t think it is that time yet.”
Tuesday, March 19, 2013
Advocates for children ask for budget cuts to be restored
By Meredith Colias
Advocates for early childhood education, bilingual education and homeless student assistance programs appealed to Illinois lawmakers today to restore some funding cut in previous years.
Early childhood education advocates asked for the biggest restoration of funds, $25 million to an early childhood block grant. Under Gov. Pat Quinn’s proposed budget for Fiscal Year 2014, early childhood education would be spared further cuts like those enacted in prior years, and current funding levels would be continued.
Citing the importance of early childhood education, Morgan County Sheriff Randy Duvendack said the state was not providing adequate funding. Duvendack said early childhood education in schools was necessary for the development of “critical, early social skills” for young, disadvantaged children to discourage criminal activity later in life. He said cuts to state funding meant that about 22,000 children were dropped from state-supported preschool programs since 2009.
Marvin Torres of the Latino Policy Forum said as the state’s childhood poverty rate increases, funding for early childhood education is needed to bridge gaps for disadvantaged children in kindergarten who start school as much as six months academically behind their peers. Nancy Radner, director of policy for the nonprofit Ounce of Prevention program, told lawmakers that early childhood education was “an investment that pays off.” Radner said preparing students to do better in school sooner prevents unnecessary placements later in special education. It also reduces the number of students who have to repeat grades, and it lessens teacher turnover. Citing reduced funding in recent years, she said, “We would like to see some of the ground regained.”
Torres also testified in support of funding for bilingual education programs. He estimated 304 schools in 88 counties across the state had children who do not speak English as their primary language. In 2012, Torres estimated that the number of students in the state for whom English is a second language grew from 146,000 in 2004 to about 200,000 in 2012, while funding from state state government has remained flat since 2011.
Patricia Nix-Hodes of the Chicago Coalition for the Homeless asked for $3 million that is not included in Gov. Pat Quinn’s budget to provide support for homeless students to remain in school. She said the homeless student population is also growing, and that money to fund staff is needed to provide services to ensure that students are able to attend school on a regular basis.
Advocates for early childhood education, bilingual education and homeless student assistance programs appealed to Illinois lawmakers today to restore some funding cut in previous years.
Early childhood education advocates asked for the biggest restoration of funds, $25 million to an early childhood block grant. Under Gov. Pat Quinn’s proposed budget for Fiscal Year 2014, early childhood education would be spared further cuts like those enacted in prior years, and current funding levels would be continued.
Citing the importance of early childhood education, Morgan County Sheriff Randy Duvendack said the state was not providing adequate funding. Duvendack said early childhood education in schools was necessary for the development of “critical, early social skills” for young, disadvantaged children to discourage criminal activity later in life. He said cuts to state funding meant that about 22,000 children were dropped from state-supported preschool programs since 2009.
Marvin Torres of the Latino Policy Forum said as the state’s childhood poverty rate increases, funding for early childhood education is needed to bridge gaps for disadvantaged children in kindergarten who start school as much as six months academically behind their peers. Nancy Radner, director of policy for the nonprofit Ounce of Prevention program, told lawmakers that early childhood education was “an investment that pays off.” Radner said preparing students to do better in school sooner prevents unnecessary placements later in special education. It also reduces the number of students who have to repeat grades, and it lessens teacher turnover. Citing reduced funding in recent years, she said, “We would like to see some of the ground regained.”
Torres also testified in support of funding for bilingual education programs. He estimated 304 schools in 88 counties across the state had children who do not speak English as their primary language. In 2012, Torres estimated that the number of students in the state for whom English is a second language grew from 146,000 in 2004 to about 200,000 in 2012, while funding from state state government has remained flat since 2011.
Patricia Nix-Hodes of the Chicago Coalition for the Homeless asked for $3 million that is not included in Gov. Pat Quinn’s budget to provide support for homeless students to remain in school. She said the homeless student population is also growing, and that money to fund staff is needed to provide services to ensure that students are able to attend school on a regular basis.
Court tosses out lawsuit over public retirees' health care
Jamey Dunn
A judge today sided with the state in a disputed over the cost of public retiree health insurance.
Last year, lawmakers approved and Gov. Pat Quinn signed a measure to allow the state to begin charging retired workers premiums for their health care. Many retired state workers and university employees do not pay premiums if they worked for more than 20 years. Those retirees are required to pay for coverage for family members, along with co-pays and other out-of-pocket costs.
State workers sued, arguing that their retiree health benefits were protected, much like pension benefits, by the Illinois Constitution. But Sangamon County Circuit Court Associate Judge Steven Nardulli dismissed their complaints today. “The Pension Code and the [The State Employee Group Insurance Act] are structurally separate and substantially different. They are separately administered and separately funded. They provide benefits that are fundamentally different,” said the ruling. (link via Capitol Fax) “The cost of health insurance premiums are not fixed at the time of retirement and are paid from the General Revenue Fund, as opposed to fixed benefits paid from a protected fund. The fact that there is an indirect or incidental impact on pensions because of the enactment and amendment of the SEIGA does not make the benefits under the SEIGA pensions in nature.”
Gov. Pat Quinn’s administration said retirees should expect to start paying premiums after July 1. “I am pleased with the court’s action today to uphold this important law. This is good news for the taxpayers and another step forward in our effort to restore fiscal stability to Illinois,” Quinn said in a prepared statement.
Senate President John Cullerton said the ruling makes his proposal to change the state’s pension systems seem like a legal possibility. Cullerton supports a proposal that would force employees to choose between their compounded-interest cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) or access to a retiree health care plan. Employees who opted to keep their COLAs would have their pensionable salaries frozen, so no future raises could be considered for benefits. He argues that employees must be given something in exchange for a reduction in pension benefits, and access to the health care plan would be the trade. “The real impact of this ruling is that it reinforces my position that a guarantee of health care access can be negotiated as part of a contractual change to protected pension benefits. Only the benefits found in the Illinois Pension Code are protected by the Pension Clause,” Cullerton said in a prepared statement. “Pension reform is my top priority. While I acknowledge that there are a number of ways to structure a bill, I believe that a reform based on contractual principles of offer, consideration and acceptance is the best way to ensure that the legislation is upheld in court. I will continue to advocate that giving state employees and retirees a choice between cost-of-living allowances and access to health care is the best way forward.”
Union officials say Cullerton’s plan presents a coercive choice and does not offer employees something of value in exchange for benefit cuts.
The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Council 31 backed a class action suit in Randolph County that was rolled into today's ruling. “We are greatly disappointed by today’s decision,” AFSCME Executive Director Henry Bayer said in a prepared statement. “We continue to believe this law impairs the rights of men and women who retired after careers with state government or state universities to obtain health insurance coverage according to the terms in place when they retired. It also violates the constitutional clause that prevents the diminishment of retirement benefits earned by public employees. We intend to consult with the plaintiffs and our union partners about our options going forward.”
AFSCME also announced today that its members ratified a new three-year contract with the state. A tentative agreement was reached last month, after more than a year of negotiations. Under the deal, employees will receive back pay from raises that Quinn previously froze. They will take a pay freeze for the current fiscal year but would see 2 percent increases in the last two years of the contract. Workers also agreed to pay higher premiums, co-pays and deductibles for their health care. Quinn estimates that the move will save the state about $900 million in employee health care costs over the life of the contract. “This new contract takes into account the state’s fiscal challenges, while also recognizing the vitally important work state employees do,” Bayer said.
A judge today sided with the state in a disputed over the cost of public retiree health insurance.
Last year, lawmakers approved and Gov. Pat Quinn signed a measure to allow the state to begin charging retired workers premiums for their health care. Many retired state workers and university employees do not pay premiums if they worked for more than 20 years. Those retirees are required to pay for coverage for family members, along with co-pays and other out-of-pocket costs.
State workers sued, arguing that their retiree health benefits were protected, much like pension benefits, by the Illinois Constitution. But Sangamon County Circuit Court Associate Judge Steven Nardulli dismissed their complaints today. “The Pension Code and the [The State Employee Group Insurance Act] are structurally separate and substantially different. They are separately administered and separately funded. They provide benefits that are fundamentally different,” said the ruling. (link via Capitol Fax) “The cost of health insurance premiums are not fixed at the time of retirement and are paid from the General Revenue Fund, as opposed to fixed benefits paid from a protected fund. The fact that there is an indirect or incidental impact on pensions because of the enactment and amendment of the SEIGA does not make the benefits under the SEIGA pensions in nature.”
Gov. Pat Quinn’s administration said retirees should expect to start paying premiums after July 1. “I am pleased with the court’s action today to uphold this important law. This is good news for the taxpayers and another step forward in our effort to restore fiscal stability to Illinois,” Quinn said in a prepared statement.
Senate President John Cullerton said the ruling makes his proposal to change the state’s pension systems seem like a legal possibility. Cullerton supports a proposal that would force employees to choose between their compounded-interest cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) or access to a retiree health care plan. Employees who opted to keep their COLAs would have their pensionable salaries frozen, so no future raises could be considered for benefits. He argues that employees must be given something in exchange for a reduction in pension benefits, and access to the health care plan would be the trade. “The real impact of this ruling is that it reinforces my position that a guarantee of health care access can be negotiated as part of a contractual change to protected pension benefits. Only the benefits found in the Illinois Pension Code are protected by the Pension Clause,” Cullerton said in a prepared statement. “Pension reform is my top priority. While I acknowledge that there are a number of ways to structure a bill, I believe that a reform based on contractual principles of offer, consideration and acceptance is the best way to ensure that the legislation is upheld in court. I will continue to advocate that giving state employees and retirees a choice between cost-of-living allowances and access to health care is the best way forward.”
Union officials say Cullerton’s plan presents a coercive choice and does not offer employees something of value in exchange for benefit cuts.
The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Council 31 backed a class action suit in Randolph County that was rolled into today's ruling. “We are greatly disappointed by today’s decision,” AFSCME Executive Director Henry Bayer said in a prepared statement. “We continue to believe this law impairs the rights of men and women who retired after careers with state government or state universities to obtain health insurance coverage according to the terms in place when they retired. It also violates the constitutional clause that prevents the diminishment of retirement benefits earned by public employees. We intend to consult with the plaintiffs and our union partners about our options going forward.”
AFSCME also announced today that its members ratified a new three-year contract with the state. A tentative agreement was reached last month, after more than a year of negotiations. Under the deal, employees will receive back pay from raises that Quinn previously froze. They will take a pay freeze for the current fiscal year but would see 2 percent increases in the last two years of the contract. Workers also agreed to pay higher premiums, co-pays and deductibles for their health care. Quinn estimates that the move will save the state about $900 million in employee health care costs over the life of the contract. “This new contract takes into account the state’s fiscal challenges, while also recognizing the vitally important work state employees do,” Bayer said.
House and Senate take different approaches on concealed carry
By Jamey Dunn
While the Illinois House debates gun control issues each week on the chamber’s floor, the Senate is trying to tackle the issue in a more low-key fashion.
The House today rejected several amendments that would apply to the concealed carry of weapons in public. A federal court has given the state until June to approve concealed carry legislation. Today, House members voted down provisions that would require those with concealed carry licenses also to hold $1 million in liability insurance, limit licensees to carrying a single gun and require concealed carry applicants to complete training with the gun they plan to carry. The chamber approved a couple of amendments, including one that would ban guns in bars.
Republicans continue to voice frustration at the process, which has been dubbed a Weekly Order of Business. Under the process, amendments go directly to the floor for debate instead of being approved by a committee. The House is using a similar method to consider potential changes to public employee pensions. The House has voted over the last few weeks to adopt several amendments relating to concealed carry or gun control to House Bill 1155 but has not passed a bill to the Senate dealing with either issue. Republicans have bemoaned the process, calling it a political game. “What’s the end game? What are we doing here? Politics?” asked House Minority Leader Tom Cross when he stood up on the floor to rail against the process last week. “This is a joke. We’re all sick of it.”
But some House members say the approach is helping to sort through a large number of proposals on a politically difficult topic. “If the goal for the gun debates is to see what there’s support for in the chamber, then we’re accomplishing that goal. Obviously there’s things that pass and things that don’t, and that’s I think informing the ultimate goal,” said Rep. Elaine Nekritz, a Northbrook Democrat.
The Senate is working to address concealed carry, too — just a little more quietly. Chicago Democratic Sen. Kwame Raoul, who is working in his chamber to negotiate a concealed carry bill, says he is paying attention to the process in the House. However, he says votes such as those today do not mean any of the provisions that are up for consideration are off the table. “I don’t know how real those roll calls are. You don’t construct a bill by issues in isolation. And any bill that deals with an issue like this, if you vote in favor of it, there’s probably going to be some stuff in the bill that you don’t like,” he said. “Certainly, there could be an element that may be a deal breaker, and we’ll certainly look at what the House has done with some of these roll calls, but I don’t think they’re determinate by any means.”
Raoul said he and Dixon Sen. Tim Bivins, who was tapped by Republican legislative leadership to take up concealed carry, are working to try to find a bill “that can pass and can deliver to the citizens of the state of Illinois, with varying views, a gun public policy that’s acceptable.” According to his staff, Bivins is ill today and not available for comment. He was excused from legislative session today.
Raoul said he and Bivins are meeting with members of the Senate and looking to find common ground. “This debate in the past has been a very polarized debate, with the gun control groups on one side and the [National Rifle Association] on the other, and I think the vast majority of citizens in the state of Illinois are caught somewhere in the middle. And that group in the middle is the one that we’re trying to satisfy with the proposal coming out of the Senate,” Raoul said. He said he hopes to have a resulting piece of legislation long before the spring legislative session is scheduled to adjourn on May 31. “I don’t anticipate taking a vote anywhere near the last week of session. I’m working to get a bill as soon as possible.”
While the Illinois House debates gun control issues each week on the chamber’s floor, the Senate is trying to tackle the issue in a more low-key fashion.
The House today rejected several amendments that would apply to the concealed carry of weapons in public. A federal court has given the state until June to approve concealed carry legislation. Today, House members voted down provisions that would require those with concealed carry licenses also to hold $1 million in liability insurance, limit licensees to carrying a single gun and require concealed carry applicants to complete training with the gun they plan to carry. The chamber approved a couple of amendments, including one that would ban guns in bars.
Republicans continue to voice frustration at the process, which has been dubbed a Weekly Order of Business. Under the process, amendments go directly to the floor for debate instead of being approved by a committee. The House is using a similar method to consider potential changes to public employee pensions. The House has voted over the last few weeks to adopt several amendments relating to concealed carry or gun control to House Bill 1155 but has not passed a bill to the Senate dealing with either issue. Republicans have bemoaned the process, calling it a political game. “What’s the end game? What are we doing here? Politics?” asked House Minority Leader Tom Cross when he stood up on the floor to rail against the process last week. “This is a joke. We’re all sick of it.”
But some House members say the approach is helping to sort through a large number of proposals on a politically difficult topic. “If the goal for the gun debates is to see what there’s support for in the chamber, then we’re accomplishing that goal. Obviously there’s things that pass and things that don’t, and that’s I think informing the ultimate goal,” said Rep. Elaine Nekritz, a Northbrook Democrat.
The Senate is working to address concealed carry, too — just a little more quietly. Chicago Democratic Sen. Kwame Raoul, who is working in his chamber to negotiate a concealed carry bill, says he is paying attention to the process in the House. However, he says votes such as those today do not mean any of the provisions that are up for consideration are off the table. “I don’t know how real those roll calls are. You don’t construct a bill by issues in isolation. And any bill that deals with an issue like this, if you vote in favor of it, there’s probably going to be some stuff in the bill that you don’t like,” he said. “Certainly, there could be an element that may be a deal breaker, and we’ll certainly look at what the House has done with some of these roll calls, but I don’t think they’re determinate by any means.”
Raoul said he and Dixon Sen. Tim Bivins, who was tapped by Republican legislative leadership to take up concealed carry, are working to try to find a bill “that can pass and can deliver to the citizens of the state of Illinois, with varying views, a gun public policy that’s acceptable.” According to his staff, Bivins is ill today and not available for comment. He was excused from legislative session today.
Raoul said he and Bivins are meeting with members of the Senate and looking to find common ground. “This debate in the past has been a very polarized debate, with the gun control groups on one side and the [National Rifle Association] on the other, and I think the vast majority of citizens in the state of Illinois are caught somewhere in the middle. And that group in the middle is the one that we’re trying to satisfy with the proposal coming out of the Senate,” Raoul said. He said he hopes to have a resulting piece of legislation long before the spring legislative session is scheduled to adjourn on May 31. “I don’t anticipate taking a vote anywhere near the last week of session. I’m working to get a bill as soon as possible.”
Thursday, March 14, 2013
Eastern Illinois University looking for flat funding
By Meredith Colias
After Gov. Pat Quinn asked for a 5 percent reduction in higher education spending, the first university to appeal to lawmakers during the budgeting process asked to avoid cuts.
For the past several years, funding for higher education has remained both static and slow in coming. The state delayed higher education payments owed to universities because it did not have the money to immediately pay them. Universities have been waiting in line for payments, as have K-12 schools, Medicaid providers and vendors that provided services to Illinois. With this in mind, Eastern Illinois University’s president, William Perry, said he came to the Capitol attempting to show good faith by asking to keep the university’s general state funding at the same level as last year, about $44 million.
Eastern is also asking for $80 million in capital funding to build a science center on campus. Perry said the university increased student fees to cover some of the construction costs. This request was not included in Gov. Quinn’s proposed budget, according to his office.
Perry said the university is trying to control its own costs by reducing some administrative positions. He also noted that students voluntarily increased some campus fees to raise money for a portion of the proposed building’s estimated cost. He said EIU has simply worked around the state’s delayed payments and that its first priority was continuing to offer its degree opportunities to students in a tightening fiscal climate. “The quality of our programs has not been diminished, so we’re managing it,” he said. Perry said the university had to pre-plan for some uncertainty with various sources of funding. “As with any state agency, you do what you can with where you are, and if state funding goes down, we’ll figure out a way to work with it and manage it,” he said.
The committee’s chairman, Sen. Dan Kotowski, a Park Ridge Democrat, said he was grateful the university “did their homework” and did not ask for extra appropriations from the state budget. “Unfortunately, we're in a really difficult position financially,” he said. "We are going to do our best to make sure that [avoiding cuts] happens. Education can't keep taking these hits that it has,” he said. “What is realistic is the level of support for funding, a stable level of funding for education."
Sen. Chapin Rose, a Mahomet Republican, said the pension issue was a "missing" piece to the discussion that would crowd out funding for items such as higher education if not properly addressed. “To be brutally honest, if the pension payment keeps going up … each year, it’s not just higher education, it’s everything [facing cuts],” he said.
After Gov. Pat Quinn asked for a 5 percent reduction in higher education spending, the first university to appeal to lawmakers during the budgeting process asked to avoid cuts.
For the past several years, funding for higher education has remained both static and slow in coming. The state delayed higher education payments owed to universities because it did not have the money to immediately pay them. Universities have been waiting in line for payments, as have K-12 schools, Medicaid providers and vendors that provided services to Illinois. With this in mind, Eastern Illinois University’s president, William Perry, said he came to the Capitol attempting to show good faith by asking to keep the university’s general state funding at the same level as last year, about $44 million.
Eastern is also asking for $80 million in capital funding to build a science center on campus. Perry said the university increased student fees to cover some of the construction costs. This request was not included in Gov. Quinn’s proposed budget, according to his office.
Perry said the university is trying to control its own costs by reducing some administrative positions. He also noted that students voluntarily increased some campus fees to raise money for a portion of the proposed building’s estimated cost. He said EIU has simply worked around the state’s delayed payments and that its first priority was continuing to offer its degree opportunities to students in a tightening fiscal climate. “The quality of our programs has not been diminished, so we’re managing it,” he said. Perry said the university had to pre-plan for some uncertainty with various sources of funding. “As with any state agency, you do what you can with where you are, and if state funding goes down, we’ll figure out a way to work with it and manage it,” he said.
The committee’s chairman, Sen. Dan Kotowski, a Park Ridge Democrat, said he was grateful the university “did their homework” and did not ask for extra appropriations from the state budget. “Unfortunately, we're in a really difficult position financially,” he said. "We are going to do our best to make sure that [avoiding cuts] happens. Education can't keep taking these hits that it has,” he said. “What is realistic is the level of support for funding, a stable level of funding for education."
Sen. Chapin Rose, a Mahomet Republican, said the pension issue was a "missing" piece to the discussion that would crowd out funding for items such as higher education if not properly addressed. “To be brutally honest, if the pension payment keeps going up … each year, it’s not just higher education, it’s everything [facing cuts],” he said.
House approves pension changes
By Jamey Dunn and Meredith Colias
The Illinois House approved two changes to the public employee pension system, but supporters of pension reform say there is still work to be done to reach a comprehensive solution.
Over the past few weeks, the House took several test votes on various amendments that contained pension changes. Today, the chamber passed two bills and sent them over to the Senate, which is having its own debate over the constitutionality of proposals to cut benefits for state workers and retirees. A Senate committee approved two other pension bills yesterday.
The House passed House Bill 1154, which caps the amount of salary that will be considered for pension benefits. The bill would limit the amount of pensionable income to the Social Security wage base, which is $113,700 in 2013, or the employee's current salary, whichever is greater. HB 1166 also passed. The proposal would increase the retirement age for employees younger than 46. Employees from 40 to 45 would see a one-year increase, employees 35 to 39 would see a three-year increase and employees 34 and younger would see a five-year increase.
Republicans supported both measures, but House Minority Leader Tom Cross said he was concerned about the process of passing proposals individually instead of approving a comprehensive plan. “This is for all practical purposes, legislating by multiple choice. What I find troublesome about this process is that this is perhaps the biggest issue that has ever faced the ILGA from a financial perspective, and there’s no road map that’s been laid out for where we’re going,” Cross said on the House floor. “I hope that we’re not setting the stage where we’re sending a series of different bills to the Supreme Court, and not in one big package, which I think could cause a lot of mischief for this issue and this problem.” Cross voted in favor of both bills.
But Northbrook Democratic Rep. Elaine Nekritz said that the standard ways of getting legislation passed just aren’t working for pension changes. “Working this bill in a traditional way, we really have not been able to come up with a solution. I’ve served on pension task forces, and I was a member of the governor’s pensions working group last year, [I] sat through meetings with the leaders and stakeholder on this,” she said. “And all those very traditional kind of processes and the kinds of things that we actually kind of complain about here, where the leaders come together and [make] a solution and then put it on the members’ desks, those traditional processes have not worked. And so I think it really is important that we try to do something different and find out what members will support.”
Union leaders maintain that all the proposals the House is considering, and the two approved by the Senate committee yesterday, are unconstitutional. “We believe that the best approach to constitutionality is by negotiating with the stakeholders,” said John Cameron, political director for the American Federation of State Local and Municipal Employees Council 31.
Nekrtiz and Cross are co-sponsoring a comprehensive bill, HB 3441. Both of the bill’s the House passed today are components of the plan, and a House committee approved HB 3441 after today’s floor votes on the other two bills.
Nekritz played down the importance of committee votes on pension proposals before the hearing. “While the Senate has gotten those bills out of committee, I don’t know where that’s going to end up on the floor. We’ve done that numerous times in the House here, to the point where I think the pensions committee is a little tired of taking testimony on the same thing.” Nekritz said that today’s floor votes were not the hardest part of the plan to get passed. Proposed reductions to the cost of living adjustments given annually to retirees are another piece of her and Cross' plan. Such changes are controversial but would also produce the most overall savings. “I still think we have to put the whole package together in a way that hands the Supreme Court one piece of legislation to consider and hands the Senate one piece of legislation to consider.”
Nekritz said of today’s votes, “These are important milestones along the way, but they’re not the final package.”
The Illinois House approved two changes to the public employee pension system, but supporters of pension reform say there is still work to be done to reach a comprehensive solution.
Over the past few weeks, the House took several test votes on various amendments that contained pension changes. Today, the chamber passed two bills and sent them over to the Senate, which is having its own debate over the constitutionality of proposals to cut benefits for state workers and retirees. A Senate committee approved two other pension bills yesterday.
The House passed House Bill 1154, which caps the amount of salary that will be considered for pension benefits. The bill would limit the amount of pensionable income to the Social Security wage base, which is $113,700 in 2013, or the employee's current salary, whichever is greater. HB 1166 also passed. The proposal would increase the retirement age for employees younger than 46. Employees from 40 to 45 would see a one-year increase, employees 35 to 39 would see a three-year increase and employees 34 and younger would see a five-year increase.
Republicans supported both measures, but House Minority Leader Tom Cross said he was concerned about the process of passing proposals individually instead of approving a comprehensive plan. “This is for all practical purposes, legislating by multiple choice. What I find troublesome about this process is that this is perhaps the biggest issue that has ever faced the ILGA from a financial perspective, and there’s no road map that’s been laid out for where we’re going,” Cross said on the House floor. “I hope that we’re not setting the stage where we’re sending a series of different bills to the Supreme Court, and not in one big package, which I think could cause a lot of mischief for this issue and this problem.” Cross voted in favor of both bills.
But Northbrook Democratic Rep. Elaine Nekritz said that the standard ways of getting legislation passed just aren’t working for pension changes. “Working this bill in a traditional way, we really have not been able to come up with a solution. I’ve served on pension task forces, and I was a member of the governor’s pensions working group last year, [I] sat through meetings with the leaders and stakeholder on this,” she said. “And all those very traditional kind of processes and the kinds of things that we actually kind of complain about here, where the leaders come together and [make] a solution and then put it on the members’ desks, those traditional processes have not worked. And so I think it really is important that we try to do something different and find out what members will support.”
Union leaders maintain that all the proposals the House is considering, and the two approved by the Senate committee yesterday, are unconstitutional. “We believe that the best approach to constitutionality is by negotiating with the stakeholders,” said John Cameron, political director for the American Federation of State Local and Municipal Employees Council 31.
Nekrtiz and Cross are co-sponsoring a comprehensive bill, HB 3441. Both of the bill’s the House passed today are components of the plan, and a House committee approved HB 3441 after today’s floor votes on the other two bills.
Nekritz played down the importance of committee votes on pension proposals before the hearing. “While the Senate has gotten those bills out of committee, I don’t know where that’s going to end up on the floor. We’ve done that numerous times in the House here, to the point where I think the pensions committee is a little tired of taking testimony on the same thing.” Nekritz said that today’s floor votes were not the hardest part of the plan to get passed. Proposed reductions to the cost of living adjustments given annually to retirees are another piece of her and Cross' plan. Such changes are controversial but would also produce the most overall savings. “I still think we have to put the whole package together in a way that hands the Supreme Court one piece of legislation to consider and hands the Senate one piece of legislation to consider.”
Nekritz said of today’s votes, “These are important milestones along the way, but they’re not the final package.”
Deal reached on fracking fees
By Jamey Dunn
A day after House Speaker Michael Madigan said he supports a ban on hydraulic fracturing in Illinois, supporters of a bill to regulate it say they have reached a deal with the industry.
Rep. John Bradley, a Marion Democrat, said he expects a House committee to approve House Bill 2615 on Friday. (UPDATED: The Friday hearing on the bill was cancelled, and Bradley was excused from legislative session. The bill remains in committee.) “We’ve got a historic compromise here on the issue of horizontal high volume hydraulic fracturing, and we intend to move forward with that.”
Madigan told reporters yesterday that he supports a moratorium on the practice, commonly referred to as fracking. It is achieved by pumping water mixed with sand and chemicals through a well into rock that holds a carbon fuel, such as oil or natural gas. The sand holds the cracks open so the gas and/or oil can be extracted. Horizontal drilling allows gas and oil companies to drill down into the Earth and then permeate rock along a horizontal line, which is sometimes miles long. Industry experts say that it is likely both oil and gas will be extruded from fracking wells in southern Illinois, where drilling companies have spent about $150 million to lease mineral rights. “Until you really get down there and drill, you don’t know what’s going to come up,” said Mark Denzler, representing the Growing Resources and Opportunity for the Workforce in Illinois coalition, a business group supporting fracking in the state.
Madigan referred to the fallout that fracking has caused in other states, particularly Pennsylvania, where methane leaked into drinking water wells. “Read about what happened in Pennsylvania,” he said. Methane is not toxic but is dangerous at certain levels because it is flammable.
Negotiations over fracking regulations in Illinois have been going on for years. A regulatory framework in the Senate passed last year with no opposition. However, the plan fell apart in the closing days of the legislative session because a deal could not be reached over the fees and taxes that well operators would pay and last minute consideration of proposals to temporarily ban the process while a task force conducted research.
After Madigan’s talk to the press yesterday, industry representative met with Bradley and came to a deal on the taxes and fees. Denzler, who is also vice president and chief operating officer of the Illinois Manufacturers’ Association, said the state stands to gain an estimated $200,000 in revenue per well. He denies that industry concerns over Madigan’s statement pushed the negotiations. “I don’t think so. We’ve been negotiating on this for three years and focused on the revenue for about three weeks. So we were actually very close. We were close to an agreement before the comments yesterday, and we were hoping to get an agreement reached so the bill could move this week,” Denzler said. “I think we would have gotten the agreement yesterday regardless of comments that might have been made.” Operators would pay $13,500 in fees for each well. $11,000 would go to the Department of Natural Resources, which would oversee licensing, and $2,500 would to the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency.
Supporters say they do not expect the speaker’s stance to stop the bill from being approved in the House. “We feel really good about the package, and we’re moving it forward,” Bradley said.
“We feel pretty good about it,” Denzler said. “We think it’s a strong regulatory framework. It’s endorsed by the business community, the Farm Bureau, the major environmental interests in the state of Illinois. So we think it’s a good comprise. We have nearly 60 legislators who have signed on as [co-sponsors], so we feel pretty good about its chances.”
Environmental groups were encouraged by Madigan’s words. “We absolutely support the speaker’s call for a moratorium. ... That remains our first choice. That remains the safest thing for the state of Illinois to do, but if that doesn’t pass, we have to do whatever we can to protect ourselves,” said Jack Darin, director of the Illinois chapter of the Sierra Club. Darin and representatives of other environmental organizations have been criticized by some southern Illinois community groups for coming to the table over regulation instead of taking a hard line stance on a moratorium.
Darin said he takes Madigan’s statement at face value and does not see it as a strategic effort to push an agreement from the industry on takes and fees. “I do think that the speaker has been focused on this issue for over a year, and I do think the speaker understands the problems that have been created in other states. And we see that he’s been trying to get the strongest possible protections that we can. We worked with the speaker for the better part of 2012 to try to pass the moratorium. And if he supports the moratorium now, then we stand with him in trying to get that to happen.”
But Bradley said he does not expect that the bills calling for a two-year ban on fracking and a task force to study the issue will progress. They are currently assigned to the House Revenue and Finance Committee, where he serves as chairman. “If bill sponsors want to come to committees and call their bills [for hearings], they’re welcome to do that. It’s a democratic process. But I’m not expecting that to go anywhere.” Bradley was coy about his thoughts on the speaker’s intent or the possible effect the highly publicized statement had on negotiations yesterday. “Well, I’m just happy that we got something done and that we were able to resolve all the unfinished issues.”
A day after House Speaker Michael Madigan said he supports a ban on hydraulic fracturing in Illinois, supporters of a bill to regulate it say they have reached a deal with the industry.
Rep. John Bradley, a Marion Democrat, said he expects a House committee to approve House Bill 2615 on Friday. (UPDATED: The Friday hearing on the bill was cancelled, and Bradley was excused from legislative session. The bill remains in committee.) “We’ve got a historic compromise here on the issue of horizontal high volume hydraulic fracturing, and we intend to move forward with that.”
Madigan told reporters yesterday that he supports a moratorium on the practice, commonly referred to as fracking. It is achieved by pumping water mixed with sand and chemicals through a well into rock that holds a carbon fuel, such as oil or natural gas. The sand holds the cracks open so the gas and/or oil can be extracted. Horizontal drilling allows gas and oil companies to drill down into the Earth and then permeate rock along a horizontal line, which is sometimes miles long. Industry experts say that it is likely both oil and gas will be extruded from fracking wells in southern Illinois, where drilling companies have spent about $150 million to lease mineral rights. “Until you really get down there and drill, you don’t know what’s going to come up,” said Mark Denzler, representing the Growing Resources and Opportunity for the Workforce in Illinois coalition, a business group supporting fracking in the state.
 |
| Each blue dot represents an oil and gas test drill. Data, which was obtained from the Prairie Research Center at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, was current as of Dec. 2012. Graphic by Andrew Thomason |
After Madigan’s talk to the press yesterday, industry representative met with Bradley and came to a deal on the taxes and fees. Denzler, who is also vice president and chief operating officer of the Illinois Manufacturers’ Association, said the state stands to gain an estimated $200,000 in revenue per well. He denies that industry concerns over Madigan’s statement pushed the negotiations. “I don’t think so. We’ve been negotiating on this for three years and focused on the revenue for about three weeks. So we were actually very close. We were close to an agreement before the comments yesterday, and we were hoping to get an agreement reached so the bill could move this week,” Denzler said. “I think we would have gotten the agreement yesterday regardless of comments that might have been made.” Operators would pay $13,500 in fees for each well. $11,000 would go to the Department of Natural Resources, which would oversee licensing, and $2,500 would to the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency.
Supporters say they do not expect the speaker’s stance to stop the bill from being approved in the House. “We feel really good about the package, and we’re moving it forward,” Bradley said.
“We feel pretty good about it,” Denzler said. “We think it’s a strong regulatory framework. It’s endorsed by the business community, the Farm Bureau, the major environmental interests in the state of Illinois. So we think it’s a good comprise. We have nearly 60 legislators who have signed on as [co-sponsors], so we feel pretty good about its chances.”
Environmental groups were encouraged by Madigan’s words. “We absolutely support the speaker’s call for a moratorium. ... That remains our first choice. That remains the safest thing for the state of Illinois to do, but if that doesn’t pass, we have to do whatever we can to protect ourselves,” said Jack Darin, director of the Illinois chapter of the Sierra Club. Darin and representatives of other environmental organizations have been criticized by some southern Illinois community groups for coming to the table over regulation instead of taking a hard line stance on a moratorium.
Darin said he takes Madigan’s statement at face value and does not see it as a strategic effort to push an agreement from the industry on takes and fees. “I do think that the speaker has been focused on this issue for over a year, and I do think the speaker understands the problems that have been created in other states. And we see that he’s been trying to get the strongest possible protections that we can. We worked with the speaker for the better part of 2012 to try to pass the moratorium. And if he supports the moratorium now, then we stand with him in trying to get that to happen.”
But Bradley said he does not expect that the bills calling for a two-year ban on fracking and a task force to study the issue will progress. They are currently assigned to the House Revenue and Finance Committee, where he serves as chairman. “If bill sponsors want to come to committees and call their bills [for hearings], they’re welcome to do that. It’s a democratic process. But I’m not expecting that to go anywhere.” Bradley was coy about his thoughts on the speaker’s intent or the possible effect the highly publicized statement had on negotiations yesterday. “Well, I’m just happy that we got something done and that we were able to resolve all the unfinished issues.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
