Legislative Action                                                       

One pretty much had to be living in a cave during the election season to miss the hailing of the Suburban Power Age in the Illinois legislature.

Senate President James "Pate" Philip (R-23, Wood Dale) was among the first to say that the time had arrived for suburban interests to receive top priority. After years waiting in the wings while Chicago got what it wanted, he said, suburbs had moved into the limelight.

Now, with just a few weeks left before the scheduled May 28 adjournment date (are those snickers in the background?), the truth behind predictions that suburban power now reigns supreme is assessed as "a big, fat question mark."

"At this time I think what we have arrived at is a strongly conservative Senate," said Sen. Grace Mary Stem (D-29, Highland Park). "I assume the speaker of the House will work against that" Republican conservatism, she said, keeping Democratic interests in the forefront until trading time during final bargaining with Philip and the Republican governor, Jim Edgar.

"I obviously have no crystal ball, but I am very interested in the bills Pate Philip has put in, especially regarding the surcharge and the tax caps for Cook County," said Stem, who points out that she alone makes up the entire Democratic suburban caucus in the upper legislative chamber. "What will probably happen is they'll fly out of the Senate and get bogged down in the House." Rep. Louis I. Lang (D-16, Skokie) agreed. "What winds up happening with a lot of these things will be the source of end-of-session negotiating between the legislative leaders," he said."It will be interesting to see how the new players work at that."

Falling by the wayside is reforming the school aid formula, which was previously seen as top priority of those in suburbia. Why the change? "Maybe because of a realization that it just wasn't realistic," said Sen. Peter G. Fitzgerald (R-27, Inverness). "There hasn't been movement in that area for two reasons. A) It had no chance of passing, and B) I think there was general realization on the part of suburban legislators that suburban constituents are generally more affluent and there was just no way around them paying more taxes."

(The education task force's final report probably had something to do with that realization. Task force members said $1.5 billion over five years would be needed to level up school funding and provide tax relief. Financing that high price tag is unlikely, considering Edgar's opposition to an income tax increase.)

In mid-April, Philip retreated from the other major issue many saw as the determining factor of true suburban power in the legislature: Senate Bill 1. It called for implementation of caps on property tax increases statewide, which now are in place in the five suburban "collar" counties: DuPage, Kane, Lake, McHenry and Will. Republicans hoped to use SB 1 to earn support from suburban Cook County residents; property tax bills there have been pushed up just as they have in the collar counties. But Philip lacked the votes to pass the measure. Instead, he proposed placing an advisory referendum on the 1994 general election ballot, asking voters if property tax caps are a good idea. Chicago and other home-rule government units would be exempt.

House Speaker Michael J. Madigan (D-22, Chicago) has made clear his feelings on tax caps, calling them "tax relief for the rich." But how Cook County suburban constituents feel about the caps depends upon whom you talk to and their party affiliation.

Sen. Marty Butler (R-28, Park Ridge), who represents northwest Cook County suburbs, said, "The overwhelming sentiment is for tax caps." He sent surveys on the issue last year to his constituents, and of the 5,000 returned, 85 percent were in favor of tax caps, 8 percent opposed them and the remainder were undecided, he said. "Teachers want school boards to have no restraints put on them," he said, "and yet at the same time I'm getting phone calls from people outraged about their property taxes."

Stern, meanwhile, said she hears a different message: "Out here in the suburbs, many plain folks serve on boards — school boards, park boards — and they feel like tax caps are a bad idea."

Other suburban-oriented issues are harder to nail down. "I think when you get beyond school funding, the suburban issues are not that — let's say 'selfish,' " said Butler. "I think in the next two or three years there's going to be much more pressure coming out of the suburbs for spending for traffic relief."

Rep. John A. Ostenburg (D-80, Park Forest) said that "the sheer number of suburban lawmakers is influencing the process." The freshman representative, whose district covers Cook County's south suburbs, said, "I can't speak to how suburban issues were addressed in the past, but I sit on three education committees, and suburban interests are presented boldly, clearly, and many times they're in the majority."

Fitzgerald said that about the most he and other suburban legislators can do for now is protect against future "tax gouging" of their constituents. "Let's face it, the suburbs are the financial powerhouse of the state," he said. "It's a fact of life that affluent areas are going to carry more of the burden. But I think we can prevent any further soaking of the suburbs."

To that end, Fitzgerald joined other Republican senators in introducing a "truth in budgeting" package. He contends that if the package is passed, the state would save money — which would benefit all Illinoisans but particularly suburbanites because "we end up paying for the lion's share."

Promising to be a divisive issue among

Continued on page 31

May 1993/Illinois Issues/29

Legislative Action                                                       

Continued from page 29

suburbanites is transportation. Two camps will be pushing their interests: those who support vastly improved mass public transportation and those who desire expanded highway systems. There's also the airport issue. Last session Chicago couldn't get approval for a site in the city for a third airport. Back under study is a rural site in southern Will County.

"The major transportation issue has been the third airport and its impact on other transportation elements," said Ostenburg. "A lot of people have been supportive of high-speed rail instead of a third airport, both for environmental reasons and simply because of the impact of growth on rural areas. They're a minority overall; 80 percent favor the airport. But even the proponents want to see highspeed rail into the city."

Of course, airport noise at O'Hare lingers on as an issue, dividing Chicago and suburban leaders. Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley has tried to win support for another runway at O'Hare by tying airport expansion to jobs in DuPage and Cook suburbs. But aggravated leaders in O'Hare's neighboring communities have indicated they would only support a new runway if a cap were placed on flight volume.

The real test for power, as Lang said, will come in the final days of the session. Despite predictions that suburban Republican interests would steamroll over those of Chicago Democrats or downstate communities, House Speaker Madigan still holds the negotiating power to prevent drastic changes.

But demographics are changing. The 1990 census showed Chicago wasn't growing, while its suburbs were. Chicago residents number about 3 million. The rest of Cook County and the five surrounding counties together have about 4.1 million people, and each of the five collar counties showed more than 10 percent growth since 1980. Before too long, power plays may shift from suburbs vs. Chicago to suburban factions squaring off against each other.

"There definitely will be more attention paid to suburban interests," said Lang, "but suburban Cook County is very different from suburban DuPage County. Whether there's going to be the same interest in helping all suburban constituencies remains to be seen." *

May 1993 /Illinois Issues/31