Why Meigs Field makes sense to school reformers

The date March 30, 2003, probably doesn't ring a bell.

That was the day - night, rather - Mayor Richard Daley ordered the destruction of Meigs Field. Without Chicago City Council approval or Federal Aviation Administration permission, he sent construction crews to the airfield where they promptly clawed through the asphalt. By dawn, two large X's formed from overturned pavement stared up at a bleak, gray sky.

Just like that, Meigs Field was out of business. In its place, Daley built the lakefront park he always wanted.

Was Daley's decision arrogant? Yes.

Risky? Yes.

Undemocratic? Yes.

Necessary to achieve his goal? Yes.

Historic, structural change in government moves like a feather in molasses. In other words, it doesn't move at all. It just gets goopy.

Take education funding reform. The Senate Education Committee on Wednesday approved Senate Bill 2288, the latest version of a property tax-income tax swap sponsored by state Sen. James Meeks. Supporters of the bill described it as House Bill 750 "light."

The legislation would increase the individual income tax from 3 percent to 5 percent and the corporate income tax from 4.8 percent to 8 percent. The bill does not touch the state sales tax, unlike the previous version, but it includes property tax relief and a special venture capital fund for low-income school districts.

More importantly, the bill includes $10 billion to $11 billion for a capital program, which Republicans desperately want; money for higher education, which everyone wants; and a greater state reimbursement rate for special-education instructors, which schools want.

It is the year for school funding reform, just like last year and every year before it - which is why I have absolutely no hope the bill will pass with veto-proof majorities in the House and Senate, let alone get called for a vote in either chamber. Lawmakers are quick to say they favor education funding reform, but they've got more excuses for not voting on it than a 12-year-old who won't do his homework.

We have come to accept these excuses without question. If it's an election year, it's assumed - and worse, accepted - the Legislature will do no work of consequence, especially vote on an income tax increase. Well, folks, every other year is an election year. That excuse must be challenged by the media, education advocates and lawmakers unless they agree to cut their salaries by half because they won't tackle tough issues in 2008, 2010, 2012 and so on.

Furthermore, the "election year" excuse is an admission that policy in Springfield is inextricably linked with politics. That's wrong. Period.

State Rep. David Miller, of Lynwood, chief sponsor of House Bill 750, and Meeks, chief sponsor of Senate Bill 2288, in the past declined to call their bills for votes before the full House and Senate because they didn't have enough support.

I'm tired of that answer, too. Work the bill, call the bill, and then put it on postponed consideration if you fall short. At least you will force lawmakers to take a stand on the most pressing issue facing this state. After all, Meeks' bill does not address education funding solely. His bill raises critical revenue for the state, launches a bricks-and-mortar program certain to create jobs and targets money to school districts that need it most while requiring them to be transparent in how they spend it.

These issues are not Democratic or Republican. They are nonpartisan, yet Meeks' bill moved out of the Senate Education Committee Wednesday along mostly party lines. One Democrat, state Sen. Susan Garrett, of Lake Forest, wimped out and voted "present." The other Democrats voted for it, including Meeks, Jacqueline Collins (D-Chicago) and A.J. Wilhelmi (D-Joliet). Senate President Emil Jones also signed on as a co-sponsor.

Republicans on the committee voted against it: Dan Cronin, of Elmhurst; David Luechtefeld, who represents southern Illinois; and John Millner, of Carol Stream. Remember, the bill included property tax relief, which would have helped their constituents.

Before the committee convened, I talked to Ralph Martire, executive director of the Center for Tax and Budget Accountability and an expert on the state's tax structure. He was in Springfield to testify in favor of the bill, marking at least the 10th time he has done so in the past six years.

"It takes a long time to achieve major revenue reform," he said cheerily.

Right. Like a feather in molasses.

If lawmakers adjourn in May without major education funding reform, Martire owes me lunch.

He thinks I'm being pessimistic.

"You've been spending too much time around the water cooler with your colleague Phil Kadner," he said.

I think Kadner and I have spent too much time watching politicians come and go, come and go and talk, talk, talk, without taking the tough votes and without holding their leaders accountable on this issue.

So my lunch, Mr. Martire, will be at an expensive Chi-cago steakhouse, medium-rare, please, with a tall, cold beer and a side of aspirin.

Kristen McQueary can be reached at kmcqueary@southtownstar.com or (708) 633-5972.