|
(Crain’s) — Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan has been asked to rule on whether House Speaker Michael Madigan, her father, has a legal conflict of interest in dealing with a key property-tax cap bill that’s now pending before the General Assembly. In an official — and politically explosive — letter, the Illinois Property Tax Appeals Board requested that Ms. Madigan issue a formal opinion on whether her father’s second job as a property-tax appeals lawyer disqualifies him from taking a leadership role in a huge ongoing debate over whether to extend or cut an existing 7% annual limit on tax hikes on residential property in Cook County. Ms. Madigan so far has not responded to the July 3 letter, which comes as the Illinois Senate is preparing to vote on a proposal by Mr. Madigan to effectively phase out the 7% cap for hundreds for thousands of Cook County residents. A spokesman for Mr. Madigan said his legal clients actually oppose the proposed bill. Illinois media outlets for years have reported on Mr. Madigan’s role as a named partner in Madigan & Getzendanner, a high-end law firm that specializes in challenging tax assessments on commercial property. But the letter potentially places Ms. Madigan in an awkward position. If she rules he’s in a conflict, she would be publicly chastising her father. If she rules he’s not, she would open herself up to criticism of pulling a punch to benefit her father. In the letter and in a phone interview on Tuesday, Tax Appeals Board Executive Director Ronald Messina asserts that Mr. Madigan’s bill could increase the number of property-tax appeals, and thereby the amount of work for both the board and Madigan & Getzendanner. “The board seeks your opinion as to whether or not there exists a conflict of interest requiring Speaker Madigan’s recusal from the legislative process” on the pending bill, says Ms. Messina’s letter. Mr. Messina was appointed to his job by Gov. Rod Blagojevich, a frequent critic of Mr. Madigan’s, and once was a top aide to Cook County Assessor James Houlihan, who has been feuding with the speaker over how much tax relief to offer. But Mr. Messina said he did not share or discuss the letter with Mr. Houlihan until “after the fact,” and one outside civic watchdog, Better Government Assn. Executive Director Jay Stewart, said the request for a legal opinion “is nothing out of left field. . . . It’s fair for (Ms. Madigan) to look at it.” Speaker Madigan’s bill quite likely would result in a tax hike for many homeowners, and that likely would spark an increase in work for property-tax lawyers, Mr. Stewart said. “I don’t think it takes a brain surgeon to figure out there’s probably going to be a lot more appeals” if the pending bill passes. The current proposal, which Mayor Richard M. Daley’s office says he is reluctantly supporting, would continue the tax cap for three years only for those who have lived in their home for at least a decade and have a total household income of less than $75,000 a year. Others would lose their tax break over the next three years. Mr. Madigan’s spokesman said Tuesday that his clients are against the bill because it would continue tax relief for low-income homeowners and continue shifting some of the tax burden to businesses. Mr. Madigan’s bill is awaiting a final vote in the Senate, where sponsoring Sen. Terry Link, D-Vernon Hills, Tuesday predicted that it will pass but may be amended to allow for the General Assembly to revamp it after next year. “I’m not happy with what the House has passed to us,” Mr. Link said. “But, if we do nothing, the people of Cook County will suffer greatly.” Monday, members of the Chicago Council released a letter signed by 49 of their 50 members predicting that many Chicagoans could see their property taxes rise 40% if the speaker’s bill is passed. Mr. Daley’s office says he’s supporting the bill only because it appears to be the best deal he can get at the moment, but political insiders have rumored that the mayor also is concerned about winning House approval for other measures he wants this year. Ms. Madigan's office released a statement late Tuesday saying the request is under review. "We have large numbers of opinion requests and we review them as quickly as possible," a spokeswoman said, adding the review is to "determine whether or not we will issue an opinion." |