Questions on gambling expansion plan
The latest gambling expansion plan comes from Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan, a man who at least understands the General Assembly has some responsibility to address the issues that have paralyzed the Capitol for months.
Unfortunately, though, and not unlike proposals that have come before, the Chicago Democrat's plan raises at least as many questions as it answers.
It proposes a Chicago casino and one additional license beyond the state's current 10.
It would add slots at racetracks and allow expansion of the number of gambling positions at operating casinos. Arlington Heights, home to Arlington Park racetrack, is on record as opposing slots at the track, via a 1987 nonbinding resolution. Some village leaders have recently reiterated that opposition, but not vehemently. Still, we would like Arlington Heights to at least be heard on the question of racetrack slots.
Neither does Madigan's plan assure that any of the new gambling revenue goes to help solve immediate public transit problems. The assumption is that this proposal might pry loose support for some other revenue generator to address that problem: a regional sales tax, a user fee we have supported, or diversion of gas tax revenues, which we have opposed. Thus, this is half a solution at best, and it's doubtful Illinois taxpayers will find much enthusiasm for a serious expansion of gambling AND major new tax proposals that might follow on its heels.
Beyond that, this proposal creates new gambling oversight groups. This isn't a bad idea, particularly with any expanded gambling. And we like Madigan's idea of creating a new, independent gaming enforcement investigator. But in a state rife with patronage and corruption, it has to be clear that such reforms will work in removing politics and improving oversight.
This proposal also would demand a $200 million upfront fee from any Chicago gambling authority, something the city has said it wouldn't support, and would leave 30 percent of Chicago revenues to discretionary spending, which could be just more pork, topped with a new flavor of sauce.
The majority of the revenue statewide, 70 percent, would go to fund a new capital improvement plan for roads, bridges, schools and other infrastructure, a priority we support, but for which there has been no real project detail provided. The balance of 30 percent would go to what Madigan labels "needy" school districts, and likely would provide little property tax relief for suburban residents except those in fast-growth areas.
Madigan's plan to assure minority and female casino ownership by letting them buy into a $5,000 ownership lottery is odd on its face. It could make it difficult for women and minorities with substantial financial backing to get an ownership share. This plan raises questions, too, about who would manage such a casino and therefore be held culpable for its actions.
Still, at least Madigan's plan is a jumping-off point for a new round of discussions. We hope local representatives ask hard questions and look at the plan in terms of the problems it may solve, those it won't and others it could create.