It’s time to tell the tale of how McHenry County Establishment got narrowly beaten in that fight.

The vote was close (13-10-1) and my guess is that video poker proponents will try to reverse that vote after new county board members are sworn in, if the people they back defeat anti-gambling incumbents like District 2’s Barbara Wheeler.

Video gambling was the first local issue taken on by Patriots United, the folks who coordinated the Independence Day TEA Party, picketed State Rep. Jack Franks’ office on a cold spring day about his sponsorship of a bill considered pro-abortion and gun control, held a well-attended forum on the Democrats’ health care reform, and co-sponsored with the McHenry County Young Republicans a candidates’ night for 8th congressional district GOP aspirants.

Members attended John Hammerand’s License and Liquor Committee meetings and sponsored a debate between proponents and opponents.

Here are Patriots United video slot machine debate panels, ban proponents on the right, opponents on the left. Opponents, from left to right, are Tom Grey, David Smith and James Blue.

Then, Patriots United had a forum in Woodstock during which video poker machine salesmen debated three social conservatives:

• Tom Grey, the nationally- known Methodist minister who started out in Galena during the time the county board decided to site a riverboat in Jo Davies County and now Field Coordinator and National Spokesman for Stop Predatory Gambling
• Jim Blue, representing Illinois Church Action on Alcoholism and Addiction Problems
• David Smith, Executive Director of the Illinois Family Institute

They urged their members to contact county board members, but that was not what did the trick.

They used this robo call technique I first saw tobacco companies us in lobbying against cigarette tax hikes maybe ten years ago.

Call people, explain the issue and ask if they would like to speak to their county board member.

Since there are four county board members per district, how would that work?

The Illinois Family Institute selected six county board members considered to be approachable on the issue.

They were

• Yvonne Barnes in District 1
• Jim Heisler in District 2
• Ed Dvorak in District 3
• Sue Draffkorn in District 4
• Jim Kennedy in District 5
• Dan Ryan in District 6

From 1,334 to 1,453 calls were made in each district.

From to 649 to 774 of the calls were answered by voters. After the recorded pitch, voters were asked to push a phone button if they wished to be transferred to their county board member.

There were over fifty transfers for all but one district.

From the time my father served on the county board, I can tell you that he never got that many calls on any subject. On some zoning matters, especially the landfill ones, he might have gotten fifty letters. One phone call on a subject was a big number back in the 1980’s.

Getting dozens of calls must have sounded like a tidal wave.

And it was. You can’t find an issue where that many constituents have contacted county board members by phone. Undoubtedly, some of them were friends and supporters of each member.

A little over half of the calls were answered in person; the rest went to answering machines.

Of the six county board members receiving calls, only Huntley’s Ryan, a Sun City resident, voted in favor of allowing video slot machines in establishments serving liquor in unincorporated McHenry County.

Barnes, Kennedy and Ryan are up for election this year. District 6’s Ryan is the only one with GOP primary opposition.

= = = = =
Check out possible targets for the pro-gambling forces in this post.

Having failed to alter the agenda to allow a Tuesday up or down county board vote on video gambling, Nunda Township’s gambling opponent Barb Wheeler next sought to table the referendum resolution.

This motion was seconded by Ersel Schuster.

As it sat on the agenda, the outright ban was to be considered for 30 days and voted upon the first Tuesday in December.

But that rule can be waived.

Tina Hill asked if the committee was “going to ask to waive the 30-day review (for the gambling ban resolution).”

License and Liquor Committee Chairman John Hammerand related the history of the committee discussion. It started with talk of a ban, then “we decided it would be nice to have the people involved in the decision.”

He said he wanted the county board to have the opportunity to be a leader in the communities, so that municipalities could put similar referendums on the ballot on Feb. 2nd.

“I certainly support the referendum,” he said.

“It’s not my goal to waive the rules,” Hammerand continued.

Cary’s Anna May Miller took the delegate approach:

“I would like to move forward to allowing people with the county weigh in.”

Woodstock’s Hill wondered why there was all the fuss. She listed the number of people in each county board district who would be eligible to vote, 47,923 in all, while there are 200,228 registered voters in McHenry County. That’s not quite 25% of the total living outside of municipalities.

• District 1 – 4,034
• District 2 – 2,340
• District 3 – 11,214
• District 4 – 12,448
• District 5 – 3,254
• District 6 – 14,633

Huntley’s Dan Ryan pointed toward the moral aspect of the issue. He said there was no question from the fiscal point of view:

“Yes, we want the money.”

Ryan voted for a referendum, assuming I would guess that people know what their moral stand on the issue is.

The cost of the referendum also came up. Just under $18,000.

Yvonne Barnes of Cary came down on the trustee side of representation:

“I’m opposed to postponing the vote (on the gambling ban).”

Hammerand re-entered the debate:

“All I’m asking is to have status quo until we have a referendum and let them speak.”

Hill attempted to clarify what would be voted upon. Hammerand seemed to say that a vote on both Tuesday would be acceptable.

Pete Merkel, up for re-election in an unopposed McHenry-Richmond-Burton Township primary, took the trustee approach. He told of two advisory referendums on hot issues which a park board and city council decided to put on the ballot in an attempt to reach consensus.

The votes were 54-46 and 49-51.

No consensus resulted, he noted, supporting the “no advisory referendum” side of the issue.

“That’s why we get paid to make the tough decisions,” Merkel added.

“I’ll bet we’re going to be back here at the end of February with a whole roomful again and we’ll be having the same discussion.

“I think it is a cop out.

“Do we want to do that (have a referendum) with the 2030 Plan, with the public safety building?”

Merkel then pointed out that it was a social issue and questioned whether a “low turnout” primary election would yield a valid reading of public opinion.

Hedging his bet a bit, Merkel concluded,

“I don’t want to say, ‘We don’t want to listen to the people.’”

His vote, nevertheless, was against holding the advisory referendum.

“I totally agree with Mr. Merkel’s position,” Seneca Township board member Ersel Schuster added.

She remembered an advisory referendum that received 80% approval, but was ignored. The subject was whether the county board should require a three-quarters vote to approve conditional use permits.

Bull Valley’s Virginia Peschke agreed.

“I think the referendums should be reserved for asking people if (they want higher taxes).

“This is just government cowardice.”

Sandra Salgado, who like Merkel has not primary opponent, also took the “we can make the decision without voter input.”

“I can’t tell you how aggravated I was when legislators stood up here and said, ‘(You’re) going to make the hard decision.’”

“Obviously, I’m ready to make the tough decision,” Wheeler added.

“You don’t want the people to say you don’t want to hear them. (Let’s) not put the burden on our voters. We are elected to make these tough decisions.”

Also speaking in opposition to a referendum was Yvonne Barnes of Cary.

“I believe as elected officials it is our responsibility to make these decisions.

“This issue affects people throughout the area (county). An advisory referendum does not include (those in incorporated areas) in making the decision.”

Merkel then referred to the provision in the legislation that allows 25% of the voters to petition for a binding referendum.

Hammerand pointed out how extraordinary high that 25% signature requirement is.

“If it is (for) the board to wash out this referendum, I have no objection.”

He then attempted to amend the resolution motion to require a county board vote after the February 2nd primary election.

Tina Hill seconded the motion, “even though we’re probably on different sides of the issue.”

The attempt failed on a voice vote.

The McHenry County Board meeting debate Tuesday was extraordinary in its lack of focus on the gambling issue.

Algonquin’s Marc Munaretto put it best, asking why two resolutions, one to hold an advisory referendum on the issue and the other to ban video slot machines in unincorporated areas had gotten out of the License and Liquor Committee.

I wasn’t at the committee meeting when that happened, but someone who was told me that Barb Wheeler had made a motion to recommend a resolution banning video gambling and it almost failed for lack of a second.

The majority of the committee pretty obviously wanted a vote on the referendum resolution first, although Mary McCann may have changed her mind, because she voted against holding an advisory referendum.

The committee being a collegial group, however, both resolutions were forwarded to the county board.

A vote on the referendum question was scheduled for Tuesday; the one on the outright ban at a later meeting.

This did not please Wheeler, who tried to change the agenda so the ban could be voted upon Tuesday.

Clearly Wheeler is against this extension of gambling and was satisfied that her vote would represent her constituency.

It is much less clear how her colleagues would have voted today or will vote in a month.

If any of the opponents have taken the kind of tallies I used to take on the House floor in Springfield before one of my important bills, they have not shared that with me.

With many of the members up for re-election, going to a referendum could be considered a cop-out, that is, a way to avoid making a potentially dangerous political decision before the Feb. 2nd primary election.

Others believe with Mary Donner:

“I truly believe in my heart this belongs on a referendum first.

“I want to know what the voters in McHenry County feel about this.”

More tomorrow.

John Hammerand, Chairman of the McHenry County Board’s Liquor and License Committee has informed McHenry County Blog that the question of whether an advisory referendum will be put on the February 2nd primary election ballot will be voted upon November 3rd.

About a month later, the question of whether to ban video poker, as it is euphemistically called by proponents, will be discussed December 1st.

= = = = =
From left to right are McHenry County Board members Bob Bless, Mary McCann, License and Liquor Committee Chairman John Hammerand, Assistant State’s Attorney’s Sara Jansen and Cynthia Schaupp and County Board member Barb Wheeler.

That was the editorial message from the Chicago Sun-Times to the Cook County Board for a committee’s having recommended that 53 restaurants and taverns in unincorporated Cook County not be allowed to have electronic slot machines.

Of course, most of the media label them “video poker machines,” a description that makes them so much less threatening.

After all, people watch poker games on TV.

Nobody would watch people playing slot machines.

The McHenry County Board’s License and Liquor Committee will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, October 7th, at the Administrative Center, which is on Ware Road north of the McHenry County Jail.

It’s too boring.

So far, I have seen no position from either of the daily Heralds. 

Too potentially addictive.

On October 7th, next Wednesday, the McHenry County License and Liquor Committee will hold a hearing starting at 6 PM.  It will be at the administrative center north of the county jail.

Input will be sought on whether the county should bar video gambling–electronic shot machines, if you want the truth–to be installed in places serving liquor in unincorporated areas.  Bars and restaurants.

No need to be on time. Politicians justifying having voted for this source of revenue to finance a state capital program–roads, schools, a $40 million new campus for the failing Chicago State University–will speak first.

Come late and you’ll still get a chance to speak.

There has been some effort to alert traditional opponents to gambling, as I mentioned yesterday, but not much.

And, if you oppose this matter and don’t attend, don’t be surprised to see something like the front page seen above from the Elgin Courier-News on the front page of one of the daily Heralds. 

McHenry County Libertarians are marshaling people to attend the License and Liquor Committee meeting on whether a ban should be imposed on slot machines and video poker in the unincorporated part of McHenry County.

The meeting will be held starting at 6 PM Wednesday, October 7th.

Besides recommending a full ban by the whole McHenry County Board, the committee could recommend an advisory referendum on the subject at the February primary election.

It would be an advisory referendum, because the legislature only allowed binding referendums that are initiated by 25% of the voters in a county or municipality. 

“Why would we decide what’s best for them?” county board member Bob Bless asked.  “I think we should let them (the voters) decide.”

Committee Chairman John Hammerand agreed:

“If we’re all aflutter and can’t be a representative government, as we’re supposed to be, we could still put an advisory referendum on the ballot.

The minimum that will happen is that the county board’s License and Liquor Committee will hold a hearing on the evening of October 6th [since changed to the 7th; meeting starts at 6] to allow public input.  It may be in conjunction with the Finance and Audit Committee and the Law and Justice Committee, if they wish.  The full county board would consider the issue on October 20th.

County Administrator Pete Austin said chairmen of both committees “just want to see the whole board is considering the issue.  They’re glad the issue is coming up today.”

The committee members also want to give gambling expansion opponent State Rep. Jack Franks (D-Marengo), and gambling expansion proponents

• State Senator Pam Althoff (R-McHenry)
• State Rep. Mark Beaubien (R-Barrington Hills) and
• State Rep. Mike Tryon (R-Crystal Lake)

to give their views on the issue and answer questions.

The name of State Senator Dan Duffy (R-Lake Barrington) was not mentioned.  The newly-elected state senator voted against the slot machine bill.

Then, on October 20th, the county board could vote whether to ban slot machines in the unincorporated part of McHenry County having an effect on 44 bars, taverns and restaurants, plus 7 golf clubs, according to research that McHenry County Board Chairman Ken Koehler passed out.  Koehler wanted the legislators at that meeting.

Under the slot machine legislation, county government would lose the just under $10,000 from licenses for coin operated amusement machines it now gets and pick up 5% of the amount gambled on a maximum of 225 slot machines.  The county’s share is estimated to be about $241,500.

“What we’re talking about on the county side is very small,” Koehler said.  He suggested it could go for gambling addiction treatment.

“If this is such a terrible thing, then maybe we ought to use it (for counseling).”

“It may have very large ramifications beyond revenues,” Wheeler replied.

Koehler pointed out,

“I’m told there is some gambling going on in McHenry County even as we speak.”

He spoke of some of its being stopped for a while only to spring up again.

Later, sardonically, Wheeler suggested legalizing and taxing marijuana.

“Apparently it grows pretty well in the county. (See 2008-1, 2008-2 and 2009 McHenry County Conservation District stories.)  Maybe we should legalize it and regulate it.”

Democrat Jim Kennedy wanted to make sure that the Chicago Crime Commission testified at the meeting, as well as the State Police, who, along with the state Gaming Commission are charged with with policing the slot machines under the legislation.

Committee Chairman Hammerand made an impassioned argument in favor of banning the slots, evoking how New Yorkers turned Coney Island from a sin city to a family-friendly location.

“Vice does not pay as well as decency,” he quoted those who turned its reputation around.

Hammerand pointed out that McHenry County has the highest percentage of families (adults married) in the state.

“If that’s something we want to continue selling, maybe we shouldn’t have video games here.

 ”If we want to be a bedroom community and attract families, I think we should (forego it).

“I feel revenue does not trump principles,” the Wonder Lake resident said.

In expressing her opposition to slot machines before the meeting Republican Precinct Committeeman Joyce Story of McHenry pointed out something I had not realized before.

Every liquor license holder will not be eligible to have five slot machines.

Only those who hold a license to pour liquor can have the gambling machines.

“That concerns me more,” she said.

“They will stay longer and gamble more.”

Also appearing in opposition was Republican Algonquin Township Precinct 51 Committeeman Eileen Marhoefer.

“I think this is a horse you just don’t want to let out of the barn,” she said.

“I think it’s going to be a huge problem for law enforcement.

“It’s hard enough to enforce cigarette sales (to minors),” Marhoefer concluded.

Bill Parrot, whom I first met at the huge Patriots United meeting on health care at the Crystal Lake Holiday Inn, also spoke against the proposal.

He asked if the retail businesses favored the proposal.

“Do we have a consensus among the (merchants) of the county?” the McHenry resident asked.

Leading off the meeting was Libertarian Dave Brady.

He had found a mistake in the resolution, which he pointed out to the committee.

After Brady’s presentation, Hammerand said that he “stole it (the resolution) from DuPage County. Just get rid of that (whereas clause).”

Hammerand asked the State’s Attorneys office to review the resolution.

On a philosophical level, Brady argued that the ban was another  example  of “the nanny state.”

“We’re going to protect you from yourself.”

He wondered how McHenry County could “accept money from gambling, but not allow it in the county.”

Brady asked whether that was being “family friendly” or “being hypocritical.”

McHenry County Board member Mary McCann was worried about the competitive disadvantage taverns near village boundaries might face if slot machines were banned for them but not for bars within a nearby municipality.

= = = = =
McHenry County Board member Bob Bless is in the top photo.

Below is a picture of the whole committee, plus staff from the State’s Attorney and Sheriff’s Office.

The three Republican state legislators representing McHenry County who voted for the gambling expansion bill are next in the article.

County Board member Barb Wheeler listens to County Board Chairman Ken Koehler in the next image.

Committee Chairman John Hammerand is next.

Below are public commenters Joyce Story, Bill Parrot and Dave Brady.

County Board member Mary McCann appears bottom right.