Facebook

[markberwyn]

If you're not sure what an article is, just PM me, it's cool.

[markberwyn]

Annnnnnnnd, the senator vanishes. Of course.

[berwyn senator]

One Man Berwyn Talk!  Responding to you'r self? Get a job and a life or is living in you'r parents basement and looking for people on BT to fuck with?

[markberwyn]

All I've done is ask you to provide the title of a book or article you've found edifying, senator. Can you do it?

[markberwyn]

I'm sorry you found the "give the title of something you read" request such a steep mountain to climb. You claim to be such a great reader!

[berwyn senator]

Your mirror must have broke!  Can't insult an idiot!!!

[markberwyn]

Senator, did you ever find yourself in a bookstore, perhaps because you took a wrong turn somewhere? Did you maybe look around and see a book that made you think, "Huh, that might be something I'd like to read"? Do you recall the title of that book?

Not even asking to hear the title of a book you've read anymore. Just the title of a book you thought you might like to read someday.

[watcher]

Hah! Who knew? BTF lives! A bit dusty, but...
Last I checked it seemed this place was toast.  Given today's and recent FB news, places like this
could be looking at a rebirth?

Hi everybody!

[Ted]

Hah! Who knew? BTF lives! A bit dusty, but...
Last I checked it seemed this place was toast.  Given today's and recent FB news, places like this
could be looking at a rebirth?

Hi everybody!

Hey Watcher,

  What's up?  How's life in Forest Park?

Ted

[watcher]

Life in FoPa is still weird.  We get to vote on Video Gambling in November. The Pro side says if it gets prohibited many of our bars will
close. The Anti side says it's a horribly regressive way to raise revenue. The vote is NO to continue, YES to prohibit.
Berwyn is used as the poster-child for both.

[markberwyn]

Life in FoPa is still weird.  We get to vote on Video Gambling in November. The Pro side says if it gets prohibited many of our bars will
close. The Anti side says it's a horribly regressive way to raise revenue. The vote is NO to continue, YES to prohibit.
Berwyn is used as the poster-child for both.

What Berwyn bars closed because they couldn't have video gambling?

[watcher]

The Pro side claims that a ban would cause customers to head to Berwyn, N. Riverside or Brookfield with their dining/entertainment dollars.
The Anti side points at Berwyns "Cafes" and "tacky signage" as the unavoidable future unless video gambling is prohibited here.

The P side says look at the revenue being generated for Berwyn.
The A side says look at how much money has to be lost to generate that revenue. 60% of the profits leave town (25% to the state & 35% to the game supplier.)

FoPa had informally voted against allowing VG. In a non-binding referendum, it was voted down 2-1. In a poll sent out with water bills it was also rejected. In 2016 the council voted to allow VG. This prompted a petition drive to bring a binding referendum to the voters to let voters decide. The first two attempts were stymied when three "nuisance" questions were submitted that filled the limit on ballot questions. FoPa's electoral board ruled against the VG VOTE petitions. That set off a court challenge that ended with the IL supreme court ruling that the question must be placed on the ballot. So that's where things are now.

In 5 weeks the voters will speak.

[Ted]

The Pro side claims that a ban would cause customers to head to Berwyn, N. Riverside or Brookfield with their dining/entertainment dollars.
The Anti side points at Berwyns "Cafes" and "tacky signage" as the unavoidable future unless video gambling is prohibited here.

The P side says look at the revenue being generated for Berwyn.
The A side says look at how much money has to be lost to generate that revenue. 60% of the profits leave town (25% to the state & 35% to the game supplier.)

FoPa had informally voted against allowing VG. In a non-binding referendum, it was voted down 2-1. In a poll sent out with water bills it was also rejected. In 2016 the council voted to allow VG. This prompted a petition drive to bring a binding referendum to the voters to let voters decide. The first two attempts were stymied when three "nuisance" questions were submitted that filled the limit on ballot questions. FoPa's electoral board ruled against the VG VOTE petitions. That set off a court challenge that ended with the IL supreme court ruling that the question must be placed on the ballot. So that's where things are now.

In 5 weeks the voters will speak.

I was surprised that they even got enough signatures to get this on the ballot.  The Forest Park referendum has been talked about on Berwyn Facebook sites with some people wanting to do the same in Berwyn but it sounded like the bar is set very very high to get a referendum on the ballot to overrule a city council or village council vote.

[Ted]

Life in FoPa is still weird.  We get to vote on Video Gambling in November. The Pro side says if it gets prohibited many of our bars will
close. The Anti side says it's a horribly regressive way to raise revenue. The vote is NO to continue, YES to prohibit.
Berwyn is used as the poster-child for both.

  There are a lot of people in Berwyn who want to do the same thing - get rid of video gaming.

  The biggest issue in Berwyn right now is the massive levy and property tax hike in District 100.  Voters voted to increase the tax rate to increase the amount of property taxes collected from $13.3 million to $15.5 million (an increase of $2.2 million).

  But the school board levied $19.6 million expecting the tax cap would bring the amount down.  However, because it was a year with the triennial reassessment and because the tax cap law had the new rate, the $19.6 million stayed as is and people saw an increase that was 3 times what was expected from the referendum literature.

  My own taxes increased from $4900 to $5900, with $600 due to D100.  I was expecting the D100 portion to increase by $180, not $600.

Because of the change in the exemptions law and because of the triennieal reassessment, some people have seen their overall taxes doubled and even tripled and a lot of low income families cannot afford the increase.

The board is looking at a debt abatement for next summer for the surplus and doing an underlevy this December to get the tax rate in line with what was stated in the referendum but it doesn't help people now who do not have the money to pay their property taxes.


  The other big story is that the Committee to Elect Robert Lovero is being investigated for "irregularities and discrepencies" in its financial reporting to the state.  It will be the third investigation in the last 5 years.  In 2013, the Illinois Election Board fined the Loveo PAC over $38,000, which is the second largest campaign finance law fine in the history of the state of Illinois - even more than the $25,000 fine against Calvin Giles.

[watcher]

Two-fer...

The bar to bring a binding referendum is certainly too high. Coupled with the three question limit and the low bar for non-binding questions stack the odds against efforts like "Let Forest Park Vote. They actually had to collect the signatures twice because of the bizarre rules and rulings.  But, there is now IL supreme court precedence that will make things easier for others, going forward. Berwyn's numbers dwarf ours, but you're three times our size too.

The ol' tax fairy triple whammy. Heh-heh. The assessor says it's not his fault, the taxing bodies point at everything but their own levies, the State says it's a local problem and homeowners curse them all. Pols (or wannabe VIPs like Dan Proft) try to monetize and convert the anger into power while Illinois teeters on the brink. Clearly the buck never stops. It's the Willie Sutton phenomena?

"You don't need to have a solution to admire the problem."