Illinois state lawmakers shorted pensions by $4.1 billion and killed scholarships for low-income students, but gave themselves pay raises and a new office building. Their budget leaves no room for error as revenue projections drop.
Illinois state lawmakers approved a record-high $50.6 billion spending plan for fiscal year 2024 at 2:30 a.m. on March 27, despite no Republican support and three Senate Democratic caucus members voting “no” on the bill.
Lawmakers had originally anticipated passing the state budget and adjourning their spring session by May 19 but were hung up amid reported revenue declines and higher-than-expected costs.
Despite repeated claims by elected leaders that the budget is balanced, that claim ignores a massive unpaid bill: state pensions.
Appropriations to the five statewide pension funds will fall $4.1 billion below what the plans’ own actuaries have determined is required to actually begin paying off the state’s pension debt.
While Gov. J.B. Pritzker has touted his administration’s handling of the state’s pension crisis – including making $200 million in additional pension contributions in the 2024 budget – state budgets continue to shortchange pensions by billions of dollars annually. The effects of year after year of paying in too little has resulted in massive growth in pension debt, which now stands at $140 billion, according to state estimates.
It is likely much worse: independent estimates put the figure at more than $300 billion, using assumptions that are more realistic than the state’s optimistic projections. Refusal among elected leaders to consider constitutional pension reform or make full, actuarially determined contributions leaves the current budget inherently unbalanced and jeopardizes the ability of future budgets to deliver core services to Illinoisans.
The new mayor’s allies lay out their agenda: ‘First We Get the Money.’
Well, that didn’t take long. Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson was inaugurated last week, and two days later his allies released a report with their agenda for the next four years. Title: “First We Get the Money.”
They mean your money. The report offers a flavor of the trend in Chicago politics and why the once-great city is struggling.
The report says a mere $12 billion in new spending will “make Chicago truly safe” by “addressing issues that underlie crime and poverty.” To get the cash, the mayor should collect $6.8 billion by “making the wealthy and corporations pay what they owe” and then cut spending on the Chicago Police Department.
Mr. Johnson has tried to distance himself from the report, but one gets the sense this is part of the choreography. The report’s creators, Action Center on Race & the Economy (Acre) and the People’s Unity Platform, helped Mr. Johnson win. Co-author Saqib Bhatti is on his transition team. Chicago Teachers Union President Stacy Davis Gates is on the Acre board.
The report suggests Mr. Johnson reinstate a “head tax” on business of $33 per employee. Chicago’s previous head tax of $4 per employee was ended in 2014 by the City Council under Mayor Rahm Emanuel, who called it a “job killer” and a deterrent to business hiring.
The mayor is also urged to raise the real-estate transfer tax on sales over $1 million by 1.9 percentage points from the current 0.75%. Progressives say most of the funds would come from “skyscrapers” and commercial properties. The Windy City has plenty of $1 million homeowners and it already has the second highest tax rates in the country on commercial properties worth $1 million, according to the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
Landlords with luxury apartments that are vacant should pay a fee to “encourage” them to “charge more affordable rents.” The authors want to raise the tax on jet fuel to force airlines to pay for “profiting from creating pollution in our city.” Then add a financial transactions tax for a cut of every trade at the Chicago Board of Trade and the Chicago Board Options Exchange.
Read more of the Wall Street Journal Op/Ed piece here.
Thirty-two state lawmakers have stepped up their efforts to save the Invest in Kids Act, Illinois’ tax credit scholarship for more than 9,000 students.
The House members, all Republicans, have signed a letter indicating their support for the program, which, as we’ve reported, is in danger of being killed by anti-school-choice lawmakers. Lawmakers will decide this month whether or not to extend the program as part of the budget negotiation process.
Those who’ve signed the letter support the hopes and dreams of the scholarship students from low-income, working-class families. For details of the program, see Empower Illinois’ 2022 Impact Report.
Those who refuse to show their support are effectively giving in to the teachers unions, which strongly oppose Invest in Kids and are actively pushing to end the program (see IEA’s stop vouchers in Illinois).
That refusal includes House Democrats who were asked to sign the letter but wouldn’t. Given Democrats’ lockstep support of the teachers unions, it’s unlikely any would sign anyway.
The refusal also includes eight Republican House lawmakers who have not signed: House GOP leader Tony McCombie, as well as Jeff Keicher, Dave Severin, Charles Meier, Norine Hammond, Wayne Rosenthal, Michael Marron and Amy Elik. (Wirepoints is unaware of any similar letter making the rounds in the Senate.)
These unsupportive legislators should be called out because school choice should be a slam dunk for both Republicans and Democrats. As the WSJ reported Tuesday, “The program is popular with voters. In May 2021, an ARW Strategies poll showed 61% of Illinois voters approved the tax-credit program, including 67% of state Democrats. 71% of black voters and 81% of Hispanics statewide approved of the plan.”
Not to mention, states around the country like Indiana and Iowa are greatly expanding their school choice programs and making them universal.
With no real understanding what’s in it, so far not having seen even a draft, Illinois lawmakers will soon vote on a budget spending about $50 billion of your money.
This portion of Hanna Meisel’s Friday column from Capitol News Illinois is a must-read:
During House floor debate, Rep. Jeff Keicher, R-Sycamore, renewed his request for an estimate as to when a draft copy of the budget might drop – or at least a revenue estimate for the state’s fiscal year that begins July 1.
“You’re asking me?” replied Rep. Jay Hoffman, a Democrat from Swansea who was presiding over the House chamber at the time. Hoffman’s quip elicited laughs from members, and Keicher broke into a smile.
“Funny story,” Keicher responded. “After I made my inquiry last night, I had eight members of the other side of the aisle suggest to me that they hadn’t seen one either.”
The Republican superminority is routinely cut out from budget formation, but that’s a Democrat acknowledging that most of his party, too, is shut out.
The Daily Herald recently reported, “After 8-year fight, judge says Barrington Hills horse boarding law is constitutional.” We’ve learned before that article was published, another commercial horse boarding related suit was filed in Cook County on April 25th, and it can be found here.
Ordinance 16-22, referred to in the filing, can be found here. Audio recordings of the Trustee’s discussions prior to approving that ordinance can be heard here.
April 2023 Illinois state income tax collections came in $1.8 billion lower than April 2022, leading state forecasters to make massive cuts in expected 2023 revenue.
State revenue projections were cut by more than $800 million in new fiscal year 2023 estimates from the state legislature’s Commission on Government Forecasting and Accountability.
Illinois saw a massive $1.76 billion drop in actual personal income tax collections during April 2023 compared to April 2022. Lower year-over-year revenues were expected as the effects of federal stimulus activity dissipated. State forecasters built that drop into their projections, but they were still way off – by $986 million.
Revenue from corporate income, corporate franchise taxes and fees, sales, liquor, inheritance, and cannabis taxes were also down in April 2023 compared to April 2022.
While the most recent tax collection data has substantially altered projections for FY 2023 revenues, the state projections for fiscal year 2024 remain virtually unchanged because of tax disbursement changes made by the Illinois Department of Revenue for the upcoming fiscal year. Should revenues continue to falter, FY 2024 revenues could come in lower than expected even with these changes.
Just as the projections were off, so is rhetoric from Gov. J.B. Pritzker about the state’s improved financial condition: the state’s fiscal future remains in jeopardy. In March 2023, Pritzker suggested the state’s strong revenue growth was stable, saying “…as we feel comfortable with these new revenues coming in and their stability; and I think we’re seeing a few years in a row now of the stability of that revenue – that we should be talking about whether there are tax cuts that we can implement.”
Just a month later, year over year revenues posted a massive decline. The April 2023 revenues offer a clear warning about the state’s fiscal future. Experts had been warning Illinois could potentially be among the states facing a fiscal cliff once federal pandemic relief funding ran out. Now, it should be clear the state should not simply expect revenues to keep climbing while avoiding any reforms to the budgeting process, pension costs, or the general financial management of the state.
The District 220 Board of Education meets this evening at 7:00 PM at the District Administration Center, 515 W. Main Street. Topics on their agenda include:
Consideration for the Board of Education to authorize the Assistant Superintendent of Business Services/CSBO to approve contracts for the procurement of natural gas and electricity and to elect and designate the price terms of such contracts. The price terms of such contracts shall not exceed the rate of forty-four cents ($0.4400) per therm for natural gas and 6.9 cents ($0.069) per kilowatt hour for electricity, and for periods not to exceed 36 months.
Consideration to Approve BHS Trip to the Stratford Shakespeare Festival in Stratford, Ontario
A copy of the agenda can be viewed here. The meeting will be livestreamed on the district YouTube channel.
The city kept 126 beds but isn’t using them. The state has 1,125 more beds from the makeshift hospital but says the city hasn’t asked for them. And the city is missing out on $30 million from Springfield to support immigrants.
Construction workers put the finishing touches on a 500-bed temporary COVID-19 hospital at McCormick Place on April 3, 2020. It ended up going unused. | Chris Sweda / Chicago Tribune pool photo
Mayor Lori Lightfoot and Gov. J.B. Pritzker stood together in April 2020 at the start of the coronavirus pandemic to showcase the rapid transformation of an empty convention hall at McCormick Place East into a medical facility with 500 beds — and 2,500 more to be installed later.
It turned out the makeshift COVID-19 hospital wasn’t needed because existing hospitals were able, after all, to meet the demand of treating coronavirus patients. So the beds were moved to warehouses, and the facility was dismantled as quickly as it was set up.
Now, with at least 8,500 refugees from Latin America having been transported to Chicago from Texas since last August in a political tug-of-war over national immigration policy, those beds are available for use in temporary shelters.
The city kept 126 full-size beds from the McCormick Place temporary hospital. City officials say it would be difficult to set them up quickly because the beds include a mattress, headboard, footboard, bed frame and no linens.
Mayor Lori Lightfoot, Gov. J.B. Pritzker and U.S. Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., tour the COVID-19 care facility in Hall C at McCormick Place on April 17, 2020. Tyler Pasciak LaRiviere / Sun-Times
Instead, the Lightfoot administration chose to send cots for immigrants to sleep on at temporary shelters because they’re “easy to deploy and set up during an emergency,” according to Mary May, a spokeswoman for the city’s Office of Emergency Management and Communications.
“At this time, it is simply not as practical to use the limited number of beds we have in storage.”
The Barrington Hills Park District Board will hold a, “Park Board & Decennial Committee on Local Government Efficiency,” meeting this evening in person and via Zoom at 7:00 PM. Topics on their agenda include:
On the recommendation of current BOE member, Erin Chan Ding, Rouse reached out via his Barrington220 issued email address to recruit Clopton to run for BOE: “As you are aware we’ve got some political craziness going on and we are anticipating some strong opposition to equity work moving forward in the district without the support of a sound board of education.”
In order to facilitate Clopton’s placement on the BOE, Rouse offered to put Clopton in contact with “people that are very interested in getting behind/supporting good candidates and putting them in contact with the right people.”
It is no secret that Rouse works closely with Jessica Green, founder of Courageous Community, an organization listed as a Community Partner on Rouse’s Equity220 website. Green hosted a “Meet the Candidate” fundraiser, exclusive to candidates Clopton, Altschuler, and Collister-Lazzari, 3 of the 7 running for BOE in the recent election. Green is also a member of the Equity Committee run by Rouse, but closed to the D220 community, as only “those who support the mission” are allowed to participate. So much for Rouse’s DEI initiative “We Belong to Each Other” ~ it clearly should come with a disclaimer: We Belong to Each Other… but only if you’re the ‘right people.’
Rouse took his support of Clopton running for BOE even further by connecting her with Melissa Atteberry. Atteberry is the current President of the Barrington Education Association (BEA), the D220 teacher’s union. Atteberry was very eager to meet with Clopton, “I would love to meet with you and learn more about your motivations, as well as goals for the district.”
Clopton will be called upon to vote on the BEA Union contract. What influence does Atteberry hold over her in that regard. We know that Chan Ding took political donations from, as well as the endorsement of, the BEA two years ago when she ran for BOE. This subjected her to much criticism. It appears from this election cycle that the BEA has found other ways to influence the BOE elections other than by making public endorsements and donations.
Rouse also took time away from his DEI work to meet Clopton for an extended lunch in Deer Park, where they apparently discussed her ability to combat the “political craziness” going on and the “strong opposition” to the equity work no one other than those deemed privileged enough by Rouse to serve on his private DEI Equity Committee Team know anything about.
Each of the meetings Rouse scheduled with Clopton were conducted on D220 time, on D220 email, and many on D220’s Zoom platform. As seen above, Rouse further orchestrated and participated in meetings between Clopton and BOE incumbent candidate Collister-Lazzari.
Collister-Lazarri and Superintendent Hunt made it very clear at the BOE meeting of September 20, 2022, that only people who “support the mission” would be welcome to participate on Rouses’s DEI Equity Team. The first Equity Committee meeting was reported on at this BOE meeting starting at 48:55, wherein Collister-Lazzari advised the meetings are “not open to the public” because, similar to the Safety & Security Committee, “there’s things that maybe the whole public shouldn’t be aware of.” When pushed as to how one might get involved, Chan Ding advised that administrators (i.e. Rouse) ask parents to be involved based on the ‘fit’ for that specific committee, to which Hunt reiterated, “you want people who support the mission of the work, obviously…” Those people are:
It is clear from these communications that we have a D220 Administrator actively seeking candidates for BOE that support his taxpayer paid position. A position that is closed off from public scrutiny and only available for his “District Equity Team” to be part of. He then puts said candidate in contact with the head of the BEA Teacher’s Union, on whose contract said candidate will soon be voting, as the BOE is currently involved in contract negotiations with the BEA. He then takes it one step further by offering to put said candidate in contact with community members that directly support his paid, closed to the public, District position.
Now, this may all be well and fine if Rouse and BEA President Atteberry offered to meet with all candidates running for BOE so they could share their goals for the District and what constitutes a “sound” BOE. However, Rouse was directly contacted by another candidate prior to the recent election, Leonard Munson, who requested a meeting with Rouse to learn more from him about the DEI programs and initiatives. Rouse refused to meet with Munson, stating his “admin team” has been advised to let D220 Superintendent Hunt know if any requests to meet are made from candidates and to refer requests to Hunt’s office as it was Hunt’s job to meet with candidates to discuss the District’s programs, “including our equity work.”
This should come as no surprise as Rouse has already decided that there are parents who are and who are not on the D220 “District Equity Team” and he has said so publicly, in BOE meetings and on his Twitter feed. Rouse clearly does not believe Munson “supports the mission” as he was denied any meeting with Rouse. Yet, the District emails indicate Rouse not only recruited Clopton, but met with her multiple times on the taxpayer’s dime. Is this Rouse’s idea of “equity”? The BOE candidates, parents and taxpayers of D220 deserve better.
