Governor Takes Bill Action

SPRINGFIELD - Governor Bruce Rauner took action today on the following bills:

Bill No.: HB 581
An Act Concerning State Government
Action: Amendatory Vetoed
Note: Amendatory Veto Message Below

Bill No.: HB 4633
An Act Concerning Business
Action: Signed
Effective: January 1, 2017

Bill No.: HB 5104
An Act Concerning State Government
Action: Amendatory Vetoed
Note: Amendatory Veto Message Below

Bill No.: HB 5931
An Act Concerning Care for Persons with Developmental Disabilities
Action: Vetoed
Note: Veto Message Below

Bill No.: SB 320
An Act Concerning Government
Action: Signed
Effective: January 1, 2017

Bill No.: SB 420
An Act Concerning Public Aid
Action: Signed
Effective: January 1, 2017

Bill No.: SB 440
An Act Concerning Public Employee Benefits
Action: Amendatory Vetoed
Note: Amendatory Veto Message Below

Bill No.: SB 730
An Act Concerning Public Aid
Action: Vetoed
Note: Veto Message Below

Bill No.: SB 805
An Act Concerning Transportation
Action: Signed
Effective: January 1, 2017

Bill No.: SB 2156
An Act Concerning Public Employee Benefits
Action: Signed
Effective: January 1, 2017

Bill No.: SB 2306
An Act Concerning Public Aid
Action: Signed
Effective: January 1, 2017

Bill No.: SB 2340
An Act Concerning Public Aid
Action: Signed
Effective: January 1, 2017

Bill No.: SB 2600
An Act Concerning Local Government
Action: Vetoed
Note: Veto Message Below

Bill No.: SB 2604
An Act Concerning Business
Action: Vetoed
Note: Veto Message Below

Bill No.: SB 2701
An Act Concerning Public Employee Benefits
Action: Signed
Effective: Immediate

Bill No.: SB 2734
An Act Concerning Health
Action: Signed
Effective: Immediate

Bill No.: SB 2797
An Act Concerning Liquor
Action: Signed
Effective: Immediate

Bill No.: SB 2804
An Act Concerning Civil Law
Action: Signed
Effective: January 1, 2017

Bill No.: SB 2989
An Act Concerning Liquor
Action: Signed
Effective: January 1, 2017/Immediate

Amendatory Veto Message for HB 581
To the Honorable Members of
The Illinois House of Representatives,
99th General Assembly:

Today I return House Bill 581, which would create the Social Services Contract Notice Act, with specific recommendations for change.

House Bill 581 would require a State agency to provide at least 30 days' prior written notice before suspending or reducing the estimated amount of a grant agreement, service agreement, or contract, regardless of the reason. If a State agency intends to suspend, reduce, or terminate an agreement or contract because of a lack of appropriations or a reduction on the amount of available funds, the bill would require the agency to provide at least 120 days' prior written notice to the Governor and each of the four legislative leaders.

Social service providers should receive as much notice as possible regarding potential changes in State funding, particularly given the State's current fiscal climate. But although this bill's intent is laudable, its requirements would place significant restrictions on agencies' ability to practically and realistically manage State programs. For example, many State contracts pay a fee-for-service determined by reconciling the contract amount against actual service after each contract period; this bill's requirement to give 30 days' prior notice of any reduction in the contract amount would leave some agencies unable to undertake that reconciliation, resulting in under- or over-payment.

I support reasonable measures that give greater certainty to social service providers. In particular, agencies should provide at least 30 days' prior notice before suspending or reducing the amount of a contract or agreement due to a lack of appropriation. This requirement would give sufficient notice to the provider, but also permit agencies to reconcile accounts at the end of a fiscal year and effectively manage taxpayer dollars.

The 120-day notice requirement is also unworkable and should be changed to 30 days. Agencies may not be able to anticipate gaps in funding that far in advance, particularly given the circumstances caused by the recent budget impasse.

Finally, to ensure that this bill applies only to social service providers and not any vendor that contracts with the State—as is the intent of the bill—I suggest clarifying the definition of State agency to include those agencies that actually contract with social service providers.

Therefore, pursuant to Section 9(e) of Article IV of the Illinois Constitution of 1970, I hereby return House Bill 581, entitled "AN ACT concerning State government", with the following specific recommendations for change:

On page 1, by replacing line 20 with "provider, subject to the Grant Accountability and Transparency Act, and that are and that are designed to ensure the health, safety"; and
On page 1, by replacing lines 22 and 23 with the following:
""State agency" means the Department of Aging, the Department of Children and Family Services, the Department of Healthcare and Family Services, the Department of Human Services, and the Department of Public Health, and any commission, board, or other authority within these agencies."; and
On page 2, by replacing line 9 with the following, "agreement, service agreement, or contract, due to the failure of an appropriation or a reduction in the amount of available funds to support the program, shall be subject to"; and
On page 2, by replacing line 20 with the following, "under the designated agreement or contract or as provided under the Grant Accountability and Transparency Act."; and
On page 3, line 15, by replacing "120" with "30"; and
On page 3, by replacing line 20 with the following, "entered on or after the effective date of this Act."

With these changes, House Bill 581 will have my approval. I respectfully request your concurrence.

Sincerely,

Bruce Rauner
GOVERNOR

Amendatory Veto Message for HB 5104
To the Honorable Members of
The Illinois House of Representatives,
99th General Assembly:

Today I return House Bill 5104 with specific recommendations for change. The bill would prohibit the Department of Corrections from considering outside vendors to provide medical care to inmates unless the Department retains every single medical personnel employed by the Department as of January 1, 2016. This mandate would hamstring the Department's ability to determine how best to care for persons in its custody and waste taxpayer dollars.

The Department of Corrections, like every state agency, must be thoughtful when it considers using outside vendors. In deciding whether contracting with an outside vendor would more efficiently use scarce taxpayer dollars, the Department should analyze its operational needs, the needs of its inmates, and any impact on current state employees.

But House Bill 5104 does not afford the Department the opportunity to undertake this type of analysis. Instead, the bill would categorically prohibit the Department from contracting out medical services unless the Department continued to employ all medical personnel on its staff as of January 1, 2016. That date is arbitrary; no one testifying in support of the bill could explain why that date was selected. As we work together on a bipartisan basis to reform our criminal justice system and reduce our prison population, that date would become more and more artificial, potentially leading to a waste of taxpayer dollars.

The bill would also interfere with the Department's ability to implement the court-approved settlement agreement reached between the Department and plaintiffs in Rasho v. Baldwin, which concerns mental health services for persons in the Department's custody. The Department is undertaking a holistic look at how best to provide all medical services at Department facilities. Statutory restrictions, like the one proposed in House Bill 5104, could hamper the Department's ability to successfully implement the settlement agreement.

Nor is the bill necessary for the Department to consider the impact of any contracting on its employees. The most recent collective bargaining agreement with the Illinois Nurses Association (INA) provided that it is State policy "to make every reasonable effort to utilize its employees to perform work they are qualified to do, and to that end, the [State] will avoid, insofar as is practicable, the sub-contracting of work performed by employees in the bargaining unit." The agreement also required the State to provide the union with a cost comparison between performing the work with employees and with a third-party contractor before undertaking any subcontracting. If the State did move forward with any subcontracting, the State was required to provide advance notice to the union and to meet with the union to discuss the decision. The State proposed to retain these employee protections by agreement with the union and agreed to additional procedures in the form of a labor-management committee and a commitment to discussing alternatives to subcontracting.

The provisions described above—which were negotiated with INA—offer a more reasonable and flexible alternative to House Bill 5104. These provisions afford employees reasonable protections against the potential impacts of subcontracting and allow the union to submit alternative proposals, which is the type of labor-management cooperation that we should welcome. These provisions also enable the Department to respond to its operational needs and ever-changing custodial population in a cost-effective manner. By contrast, requiring the Department to maintain a minimum level of staffing and restricting contracting rights will continue to drive up the cost of government at taxpayers' expense. House Bill 5104 is another special interest giveaway.

We should all acknowledge the circumstances under which INA pushed for this bill. During recent collective bargaining, representatives of INA and the State reached a tentative agreement, which included the provisions described above. Almost immediately after signing the tentative agreement, INA reneged on the deal and proceeded instead to lobby the General Assembly to take away the Department's ability to consider outside vendors. Like AFSCME's compulsory arbitration bill that I vetoed, House Bill 5104 is an unaffordable and dangerous end run around the collective bargaining process. Neither INA, AFSCME, nor any other union should be permitted to circumvent good faith collective bargaining negotiations.

My Administration stands by the subcontracting provisions negotiated with INA. The changes recommended below would codify the basic provisions, while more detailed provisions would be included in the collective bargaining agreement. Because subcontracting is one of the subjects of collective bargaining, the union retains its ability to advocate for further protections through the collective bargaining process.

Therefore, pursuant to Section 9(e) of Article IV of the Illinois Constitution of 1970, I hereby return House Bill 5104, entitled "AN ACT concerning State government", with the following specific recommendation for change:

On page 13, by replacing lines 8 through 14 with "Act of the 99th General Assembly, before letting bids for contracts that would have the effect of reducing the number of Department employees whose employment is related to the provision of medical or mental health services, the Department shall prepare a cost comparison between the projected expenses if the work continued to be performed by Department employees and the projected expenses if a third party provided such services and shall allow for a reasonable time to meet with the affected employees or their labor organization representatives and discuss alternatives.".

With this change, House Bill 5104 will have my approval. I respectfully request your concurrence.

Sincerely,

Bruce Rauner
GOVERNOR

Veto Message for HB 5931
To the Honorable Members of
The Illinois House of Representatives,
99th General Assembly:

Today I return House Bill 5931, which would require an immediate 40% increase in taxpayer-funded wages for certain professionals, but without providing any funding.

We should first acknowledge the difficult and important work of these professionals, who assist persons with intellectual and development disabilities in residential and day programs. Many of these professionals have not had a wage increase in years. I am open to finding a responsible way to increase wages for these professionals, but unfortunately this bill is not the answer.

The national average hourly wage for these workers is $10.71, in line with current Illinois wages. House Bill 5931 would immediately increase the Illinois wage to $15.00 per hour, significantly above the national average. The bill would increase the cost of caring for people with development disabilities by $330 million per year, of which Illinois taxpayers would be required to pay at least half. The bill does not provide any mechanism for funding this additional cost.

We should work together to pass a balanced budget. In that context, we can examine savings, program changes, or funding sources that could enable us to better use taxpayer dollars for this and other priorities. Through such a process, we can find the appropriate and affordable way to fund an increase in wages. But until then, it would be fiscally irresponsible to commit the State to significant payments for which it has no available funding.

Therefore, pursuant to Section 9(b) of Article IV of the Illinois Constitution of 1970, I hereby return House Bill 5931, entitled "AN ACT concerning State government", with the foregoing objections, vetoed in its entirety.

Sincerely,

Bruce Rauner
GOVERNOR

Amendatory Veto Message for SB 440
To the Honorable Members of
The Illinois Senate,
99th General Assembly:

Today I return Senate Bill 440, an amendment to the Illinois Pension Code, with specific recommendations for change.

The bill would make several changes to pension benefits for Chicago police officers and firefighters. The bill would expand eligibility for death benefits for Tier 2 retirees. The bill would ensure that widows or surviving spouses are paid a minimum annuity. The bill would also increase the annual cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) from 1.5% to 3.0% for retirees born between 1955 and 1965. Our heroic first responders and their families sacrifice a lot to serve their communities, and they deserve retirement benefits commensurate with that service. I thank the sponsors of this bill, who have been forceful advocates for our police officers and firefighters and their families.

The COLA rate is frequently increased, one cohort of retirees at a time. First responders anticipate this increase. Unfortunately, the City pension systems calculate their financial obligations based on current law; so even though the increase is anticipated, it is not accounted for. For this reason, the City of Chicago and its pension systems opposed the bill.

I support many of the changes in Senate Bill 440, despite that opposition. I am returning the bill, however, to enable further consideration of the COLA rate, which should be considered in the context of broader pension reform. If we expect retirees to benefit from a COLA rate greater than 1.5%, then the City's financial disclosures should transparently reflect that expectation, and the City should identify resources to account for that additional liability. Otherwise the City is short-changing its contributions to the police and fire pension funds. Meaningful pension reform will enable us to provide good retirement benefits to our first responders, while giving certainty to the City, taxpayers, and retirees alike.

Therefore, pursuant to Section 9(e) of Article IV of the Illinois Constitution of 1970, I hereby return Senate Bill 440, entitled "AN ACT concerning public employee benefits", with the following specific recommendations for change:

On page 8, by replacing line 12 with "January 1, 1955) or over on that anniversary date, or upon"; and
On page 8, by replacing line 14 with "55 if born before January 1, 1955) if it occurs after the"; and
On page 9, by replacing lines 2 through 4 with "but before January 1, 1955, such increases shall be 3% and such policemen shall"; and
On page 10, by deleting lines 10 through 21; and
On page 25, by replacing lines 14 and 15 with "to Sections 5-153, 5-155, 5-167.1, 5-169, and 5-170"; and
On page 25, by replacing lines 21 and 22 with "(e) The changes to Sections 5-153, 5-155, 5-163, 5-167.1,"; and
On page 31, by replacing line 12 with "1955) or over on that anniversary date, or upon the first"; and
On page 31, by replacing line 14 with "before January 1, 1955) if that occurs after the first"; and
On page 31, by replacing line 25 with "before January 1, 1955,"; and
On page 32, by replacing lines 1 and 2 with "such increases shall be 3% and such firemen shall not be"; and
On page 32, by deleting lines 25 and 26; and
On page 33, by deleting lines 1 through 10; and
On page 44, by replacing lines 18 and 19 with "to Sections 6-150, 6-158, 6-164, 6-166, and 6-167 made by this"; and
On page 44, by replacing lines 25 and 26 with "(e) The changes to Sections 6-150, 6-158, 6-164, 6-166, and".

With these changes, Senate Bill 440 will have my approval. I respectfully request your concurrence.

Sincerely,

Bruce Rauner
GOVERNOR

Veto Message for SB 730
To the Honorable Members of
The Illinois Senate,
99th General Assembly:

Today I veto Senate Bill 730, which amends the Illinois Public Aid Code to expand the eligibility requirements for the Child Care Assistance Program.

This bill requires that the threshold for the Child Care Assistance Program (CCAP) be raised from 185% of the federal poverty level (FPL) to no less than 200% of FPL in Fiscal Year 2017 and 250% in Fiscal Year 2018 and beyond. The bill further expands the category of eligible participants in the program.

The costly increase proposed by this legislation would place Illinois far above the income thresholds of not only our neighboring states, but nearly every other state in the country at a time when Illinois is already struggling to meet its current financial obligations. In total, Senate Bill 730 would increase the costs of CCAP by over $200 million in Fiscal year 2017 and over $500 million every year thereafter.

The State of Illinois can no longer make spending promises that exceed available revenues. This bill irresponsibly imposes an approximately 40% increase in the overall size of the program without any provision to fund such a broad enlargement. The consequences of such an unaffordable expansion will inevitably result in reduced quality of care, the establishment of waiting lists for CCAP program entry, increased parental co-pays, or the reduction or elimination of other important State programs—none of which would best serve the interests of the children that this legislation is intended to support.

I applaud and share the General Assembly's desire to provide child care assistance to vulnerable Illinois residents. But such efforts must be wisely undertaken and cannot be done without regard to cost and feasibility. Otherwise, such legislation threatens the long-term sustainability of the Child Care Assistance Program itself.

Therefore, pursuant to Section 9(b) of Article IV of the Illinois Constitution of 1970, I hereby return Senate Bill 730, entitled "AN ACT concerning public aid", with the foregoing objections, vetoed in its entirety.

Sincerely,

Bruce Rauner
GOVERNOR

Veto Message for SB 2600
To the Honorable Members of
The Illinois Senate,
99th General Assembly:

Today I veto Senate Bill 2600 from the 99th General Assembly, which would impose a mandate on municipalities that establish commissions to advise on tax increment financing (TIF) under the Tax Increment Allocation Act.

The bill requires that any TIF commission that receives public monies must include representatives of labor and persons from minority groups. The mandates in this legislation are similar to those in Senate Bill 2531 and Senate Bill 2604, which I also vetoed. While I am a proponent of diverse representation, these mandates ignore the need for local decision making. The purpose of a TIF commission is to advise a municipality on economic development opportunities and projects, which are inherently specific to each local area. As such, each municipality is in the best position to determine the commission's composition. Again, I urge the General Assembly to pass legislation to encourage economic growth in Illinois, not mandates which inhibit local municipalities' ability to make decisions for their communities.

Therefore, pursuant to Section 9(b) of Article IV of the Illinois Constitution of 1970, I hereby return Senate Bill 2600, entitled "AN ACT concerning local government", with the foregoing objections, vetoed in its entirety.

Sincerely,

Bruce Rauner
GOVERNOR

Veto Message for SB 2604
To the Honorable Members of
The Illinois Senate,
99th General Assembly:

Today I veto Senate Bill 2604 from the 99th General Assembly. Senate Bill 2604 is the trailer bill to Senate Bill 2531, which I also vetoed. Because Senate Bill 2604 takes effect if and only if Senate Bill 2531 takes effect, Senate Bill 2604 is moot.

Therefore, pursuant to Section 9(b) of Article IV of the Illinois Constitution of 1970, I hereby return Senate Bill 2604, entitled "AN ACT concerning business", with the foregoing objections, vetoed in its entirety.

Sincerely,

Bruce Rauner
GOVERNOR