A Conversation with our Readers

A Conversation with Our Readers

People keep asking, so here goes...

Ed Wojcicki

Signature

Readers:

People keep asking me about it, so I know I ought to write about it. What will happen to Illinois Issues when, in the near future, Sangamon State University officially changes to the University of Illinois at Springfield?

This change in name and governance is one among many that will take place at Illinois universities on January 1, 1996 — and maybe as early as July 1, 1995 — as a result of legislation Gov. Jim Edgar signed last month. Two governing bodies, the Board of Regents and Board of Governors, will go out of existence, and seven universities under their control will get their own governing boards. These include Chicago State, Eastern Illinois, Governors State, Illinois State, Northeastern Illinois, Northern Illinois and Western Illinois universities. The U of I - Springfield will not get its own board but will become part of the U of I system, which will have appointed rather than elected trustees. Got all that?

Well, as top state university officials statewide grapple with thousands of details in implementing these changes (or should I say millions?), the rest of us have been advised to carry on as we have been and see where the chips fall. The official answer to what will happen to Illinois Issues is that we cannot know for sure. But university officials here and at the U of I have been so supportive of us in our 20-year history that I have every reason to believe Illinois Issues will enjoy a long and prosperous future. We'll keep you posted.

In this issue, we pay close attention to Gov. Edgar's proposed budget for fiscal year 1996. Our editor, Peggy Boyer Long, attended the budget briefings and provides an overview in the State of the State column (page 8), while Charles Wheeler provides additional analysis on page 6. Furthermore, Michael Hawthorne puts into perspective where the real problem lies in the massive Medicaid portion of the state budget. Hint: It's not with welfare moms, who increasingly are getting a lot of bad ink. See page 12 for details that may surprise you.

Also in this issue, we take a look at what is happening in the horse racing industry in Illinois. It has been regulated much more than other forms of gambling and is struggling to compete with the increasing alternatives for the consumers' gambling dollars. What do the horse racing leaders really want and what do they say they really need? Dave Urbanek, a long-time reporter for the Arlington Heights Daily Herald, filed an in-depth article with us before leaving last month for a new position in the secretary of state's office. See page 22.

Readers want local say in gambling

In February our Question of the Month dealt with the subject of gambling. We asked:

Should local communities have an opportunity to decide whether a gambling casino or gambling riverboat will be located in their community? And you responded:

Yes 73 No 15 Other 4

Running through many of the "yes" votes was an attitude that local communities deserve to have input because the gambling operations will have a major impact on them. Many readers expressed concern about some of the side effects of gambling, such as a need for more police protection.

"The environmental, social and other related problems could have a negative impact upon the community in the long term," wrote one Monticello man. "Short-term gain (i.e., the financial benefits) sometimes results in long-term losses."

"Local citizens suffer the consequences of gambling in the community," another reader wrote. "The positives — increased revenue — can outweigh the negatives — increased activity and potential crime. Or the opposite can occur — negatives would outweigh the positives. Visitors come into the community, then leave. Locals endure the long-term effects of gambling, positive and negative."

Several readers believe a statewide referendum on gambling is needed. Why? A Rockford man said: "The presence of a gambling casino on land or water can dramatically affect the character of a community. A number of people gamble, but want a voice in where a casino is located. In Winnebago County a non-binding referendum was passed (75 percent) but government leaders refused to act on it."

A few of those who said "no" to our question said allowing too much local control could cause too many communities to get casinos, thereby diluting their overall effectiveness. "Gambling only transfers cash from one group to another, like many taxes," a Chicago man said. "As with taxes, gambling cash flow should be controlled on the broadest level possible."

While a couple of readers didn't want gambling to tempt local officials into corruption, one from Champaign said, "They didn't have a referendum on the church just up the highway, even though it is damaging the drainage pattern and will be a traffic hazard. Why should a casino be treated differently from other businesses?"

Ed Wojcicki

April 1995/Illinois Issues/3