Gary repayment bill for East Chicago, Michigan City passes House without discussion
The Indiana House passed a bill requiring the city of Gary to pay more than $12 million to East Chicago and Michigan City, which means the bill needs Senate approval before reaching Gov. Mike Braun's desk.
House Bill 1448 – authored by Rep. Hal Slager, R-Schererville – addresses a state comptroller's mistake with supplemental payments that were added into state law during the 2019 session.
Ahead of Thursday's vote, Slager said the bill works to fix 'a misalignment of gaming revenue that was altered for four years through the movement of a gaming license and a hold harmless agreement.'
'We've got to get this straightened out and give the comptroller the authority to get that taken care of. This is a compromise solution,' Slager said.
The bill passed 89-2, with Rep. Ragen Hatcher, D-Gary, and Rep. Ryan Dvorak, D-South Bend, voting against it.
Hatcher was unable to immediately respond to a request for comment Thursday.
Funds were sent to Gary that should have been distributed to East Chicago and Michigan City to ease the financial burden following the move of the Majestic Star casinos to Hard Rock Casino Northern Indiana, located along Interstate 80/94, according to Post-Tribune archives.
Gary owes East Chicago more than $6.4 million and Michigan City more than $5.7 million, according to bill documents.
Slager, on Wednesday, proposed an amendment to House Bill 1448, which passed the House in the bill's second reading.
Both cities might receive compensation for any missing funds during the 2025 fiscal year, according to the amendment.
Hammond was also included in the amendment, saying the city could receive payments if it is also missing funds during the 2025 fiscal year.
Hammond Mayor Tom McDermott previously told the Post-Tribune that since Hard Rock Casino opened, Horseshoe in Hammond has lost about $15-20 million each year. The city's yearly revenue is about $130 million, he added.
Hammond was included in the 2019 bill that awarded supplemental payments.
'We've had to adjust on the fly, but life would be a lot easier if we had the revenue that we had originally,' McDermott said. 'No doubt about it, there was a transfer of wealth from those cities to Gary.'
Slager's amendment also says that the state comptroller can deduct $166,666.67 from Gary to make the supplemental payments. The comptroller cannot deduct more than $2 million in a fiscal year.
Money for supplemental payments will come from the deducted amount and money appropriated by the Indiana General Assembly for making the payments, according to the amendment.
Before the amendment, House Bill 1448 included a three-year plan for Gary's payments.
For the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2025, approximately $1.4 million should be paid to Michigan City for the funds not paid in fiscal year 2021, according to the bill.
Starting in fiscal year 2026, approximately $2.9 million should be paid to East Chicago and approximately $2.2 million should be paid to Michigan City for funds not paid in fiscal year 2022, according to the bill.
For fiscal year 2027, approximately $3.6 million should be paid to East Chicago and approximately $2.2 million to Michigan City for funds not paid in fiscal year 2023, according to the bill.
Gary officials have repeatedly expressed concerns about House Bill 1448 and how it will impact the city's finances. When the bill was announced, Gary Mayor Eddie Melton released a statement saying he was shocked at the dramatic impact it would have on the city.
Melton believes Gary shouldn't have to pay anything in 2025, his statement said.
'I worked closely with my administration and the Gary Common Council to pass a 2025 budget crafted to the needs of Gary citizens,' Melton's statement said. 'For this bill to be brought up at the last minute to address this egregious oversight is unjust.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
44 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Florian Wirtz: An Era-Defining Deal for Liverpool
Florian Wirtz to Liverpool: A Move of Purpose, Not Panic This is an abridged version; the full article is available on our 'It Was Always… Liverpool' Substack page: Smart Recruitment in a Noisy Market In an era when transfer windows are often defined by noise and spectacle, Liverpool have opted for precision. Their move for Florian Wirtz, reportedly worth up to €136.3 million, is not a gamble dressed up as ambition. It is a carefully calculated investment in a player who fits their evolving identity. At 22, Wirtz is already one of Europe's most complete attacking midfielders. He chose Liverpool over Bayern Munich and Manchester City not because they paid more, but because they offered something rare: clarity. Why Wirtz Said Yes to Anfield Bayern promised comfort. City offered glamour and a post-De Bruyne spotlight. But both came with uncertainty. Wirtz wanted more than prestige. He wanted a defined role, a club with a plan and a manager who spoke plainly. Arne Slot did not sell dreams. He outlined responsibilities. Wirtz was told he would be central, not just creatively but structurally. In return, the German turned down easier paths for the chance to shape something new. Built for Purpose, Not Headlines Wirtz is not a flair-first luxury signing. He ranks in the 99th percentile for expected assists, through balls and successful dribbles. His pass completion under pressure is 88.8 percent, second only to Phil Foden. He also recovered the ball 35 times in the final third last season, a sign of work rate to match his talent. This is a player who plays through pressure rather than around it. He wants the ball when the game is tight and does something with it when others hesitate. What This Means for Slot's Liverpool Wirtz fits into Liverpool's reshaped left-sided attack, likely linking with new left-back Milos Kerkez and old Leverkusen teammate Jeremie Frimpong. He drifts into tight half-spaces, connects midfield to final third and offers balance to a right side still anchored by Salah. Slot will use him as a pivot point, a pressure breaker, and a system driver. This move is less about replacing anyone and more about defining a new era. Liverpool did not just buy talent. They secured intent.
Miami Herald
3 hours ago
- Miami Herald
Popular brewery and distillery files Chapter 11 bankruptcy
A local taproom or brewery becomes a beloved part of the community. That's actually somewhat rare in the United States where we don't have a tradition of village pubs. There are some bars that fill that role becoming someplace where friends and neighbors come together. Related: New class action suit claims Costco is tricking you on prices A really good neighborhood bar becomes a place where people bring their families, fall in love, and celebrate life's big moments. When a community loses that, it can be devastating. It's very hard to replace a bar, or pub that has become a de facto community center. Real life may not have bars like "Cheers," but a good neighborhood tavern becomes a place where everybody knows your name. Losing that means more than when another Hooters or TGI Fridays closes. Don't miss the move: Subscribe to TheStreet's free daily newsletter Sure, everyone has their favorite place and the loss of any popular business can be a blow, but local pubs build connections with and between passengers unlike any other kind of business. It's just different to be a regular at one of these local businesses than to be known by the bartender at Chilis. The post-Covid period has been dark for local breweries, taprooms, and pubs, and that devastation has continued. When many businesses close or file for bankruptcy, it's solely on the merits of the business. That's not the case for Big Storm Brewing, which has been pulled down due to the financial woes of Boston Finance Group, which is owned by Big Storm partner Leo Govoni. A 2024 lawsuit alleged from 2009 to 2020, Govoni misappropriated over $100 million from special needs trusts, which are specialized irrevocable trusts established for the elderly and people with disabilities. That does not directly speak to the operations of the brewery and distillery which have a long history (at least by the standards of local breweries). More retail: Walmart CEO sounds alarm on a big problem for customersTarget makes a change that might scare Walmart, CostcoTop investor takes firm stance on troubled retail brandWalmart and Costco making major change affecting all customers "Founded in 2012, Big Storm Brewing Co. has embraced our tagline of 'Florida Craft Beer Forecast' by developing a dynamic lineup of Florida favorites like Tropic Pressure Golden Ale, steeped with hibiscus flowers, and Bromosa Tangerine IPA, brewed with all-natural tangerine puree," the company shared on its website. Big Storm also added a distillery to complement its regionally-sold beers, and to sell in its multiple taprooms. "In 2020, Big Storm Distillery was born with a mission to create world-class spirits with a local flair. Our Big Storm team are innovators at heart, always pushing boundaries, and not afraid to take risks. With a commitment to exceptional customer service, dedication to quality products, and the ambition to explore opportunities left unexplored, Big Storm has become a leader in the craft beer industry and beyond," the company added. While the fate of Big Storm had been unclear, its assets were transferred to a bankruptcy trustee by a federal bankruptcy court on June 5. That took control away from Govoni and put it in the hands of the trustee. Judge Roberta Colton found Govoni and Boston Financial Group liable for the missing $100 million as well as $20 million in interest. Big Storm has not closed its Clearwater, Fla taproom and its fate remains unclear. The court's actions put Big Storm Brewing under Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, but under control of a trustee and not Govoni. The court could decide that the company has more value as a going concern than it does being sold off for parts. If that proves true, then it's more likely to be sold to an operator that wants to keep producing its beers and spirits. Related: Huge music retail chain closes all stores after 'bankruptcy' Big Storm has been very clear in its mission. "We're here to offer more than just a drink; we're sharing a slice of the Florida lifestyle with you, wherever you might be. Our mission? To transform each sip into a sun-drenched experience, a celebration of Floridian culture and zest. Our creations aren't just products; they're invitations to embrace the laid-back, sunny essence of Florida," it posted on its website. Big Storm's operations have continued and it still sells beer and spirits regionally and locally. It's likely to continue operating as long as it's seen as a positive to the estate. The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
What's left for the Supreme Court to decide? 21 cases, including state bans on transgender care
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court is in the homestretch of a term that has lately been dominated by the Trump administration's emergency appeals of lower court orders seeking to slow President Donald Trump's efforts to remake the federal government. But the justices also have 21 cases to resolve that were argued between December and mid-May, including a push by Republican-led states to ban gender-affirming care for transgender minors. One of the argued cases was an emergency appeal, the administration's bid to be allowed to enforce Trump's executive order denying birthright citizenship to U.S.-born children of parents who are in the country illegally. The court typically aims to finish its work by the end of June. Here are some of the biggest remaining cases: Tennessee and 26 other states have enacted bans on certain treatment for transgender youth The oldest unresolved case, and arguably the term's biggest, stems from a challenge to Tennessee's law from transgender minors and their parents who argue that it is unconstitutional sex discrimination aimed at a vulnerable population. At arguments in December, the court's conservative majority seemed inclined to uphold the law, voicing skepticism of claims that it violates the 14th amendment's equal protection clause. The post-Civil War provision requires the government to treat similarly situated people the same. The court is weighing the case amid a range of other federal and state efforts to regulate the lives of transgender people, including which sports competitions they can join and which bathrooms they can use. In April, Trump's administration sued Maine for not complying with the government's push to ban transgender athletes in girls sports. Trump also has sought to block federal spending on gender-affirming care for those under 19 and a conservative majority of justices allowed him to move forward with plans to oust transgender people from the U.S. military. Trump's birthright citizenship order has been blocked by lower courts The court rarely hears arguments over emergency appeals, but it took up the administration's plea to narrow orders that have prevented the citizenship changes from taking effect anywhere in the U.S. The issue before the justices is whether to limit the authority of judges to issue nationwide injunctions, which have plagued both Republican and Democratic administrations in the past 10 years. These nationwide court orders have emerged as an important check on Trump's efforts and a source of mounting frustration to the Republican president and his allies. At arguments last month, the court seemed intent on keeping a block on the citizenship restrictions while still looking for a way to scale back nationwide court orders. It was not clear what such a decision might look like, but a majority of the court expressed concerns about what would happen if the administration were allowed, even temporarily, to deny citizenship to children born to parents who are in the country illegally. Democratic-led states, immigrants and rights groups who sued over Trump's executive order argued that it would upset the settled understanding of birthright citizenship that has existed for more than 125 years. The court seems likely to side with Maryland parents in a religious rights case over LGBTQ storybooks in public schools Parents in the Montgomery County school system, in suburban Washington, want to be able to pull their children out of lessons that use the storybooks, which the county added to the curriculum to better reflect the district's diversity. The school system at one point allowed parents to remove their children from those lessons, but then reversed course because it found the opt-out policy to be disruptive. Sex education is the only area of instruction with an opt-out provision in the county's schools. The school district introduced the storybooks in 2022, with such titles as 'Prince and Knight' and 'Uncle Bobby's Wedding.' The case is one of several religious rights cases at the court this term. The justices have repeatedly endorsed claims of religious discrimination in recent years. The decision also comes amid increases in recent years in books being banned from public school and public libraries. A three-year battle over congressional districts in Louisiana is making its second trip to the Supreme Court Lower courts have struck down two Louisiana congressional maps since 2022 and the justices are weighing whether to send state lawmakers back to the map-drawing board for a third time. The case involves the interplay between race and politics in drawing political boundaries in front of a conservative-led court that has been skeptical of considerations of race in public life. At arguments in March, several of the court's conservative justices suggested they could vote to throw out the map and make it harder, if not impossible, to bring redistricting lawsuits under the Voting Rights Act. Before the court now is a map that created a second Black majority congressional district among Louisiana's six seats in the House of Representatives. The district elected a Black Democrat in 2024. A three-judge court found that the state relied too heavily on race in drawing the district, rejecting Louisiana's arguments that politics predominated, specifically the preservation of the seats of influential members of Congress, including Speaker Mike Johnson. The Supreme Court ordered the challenged map to be used last year while the case went on. Lawmakers only drew that map after civil rights advocates won a court ruling that a map with one Black majority district likely violated the landmark voting rights law. The justices are weighing a Texas law aimed at blocking kids from seeing online pornography Texas is among more than a dozen states with age verification laws. The states argue the laws are necessary as smartphones have made access to online porn, including hardcore obscene material, almost instantaneous. The question for the court is whether the measure infringes on the constitutional rights of adults as well. The Free Speech Coalition, an adult-entertainment industry trade group, agrees that children shouldn't be seeing pornography. But it says the Texas law is written too broadly and wrongly affects adults by requiring them to submit personal identifying information online that is vulnerable to hacking or tracking. The justices appeared open to upholding the law, though they also could return it to a lower court for additional work. Some justices worried the lower court hadn't applied a strict enough legal standard in determining whether the Texas law and others like that could run afoul of the First Amendment.
