Why change the rules?

There's a solution to falling short of performance goals — just reduce the goals.

In 2010, the state of Illinois contracted with a private company to manage its lottery, and the company recently generated a record $726 million in net revenues.

But there's a problem. When Northstar Lottery Group submitted its bid for the lottery contract, it promised to produce $825 million in profits, nearly $100 million more than it delivered.

Now the company is not only seeking to avoid the financial penalties it would owe the state for failing to meet its pledge, but also is seeking bonus payments for the revenues it did generate.

State officials say an arbitrator will decide the issue. But what's to decide? Isn't a contract a contract?

Well, maybe not if the contract is with the state of Illinois.

Illinois officials decided a few years ago that the state's lottery could do better in producing revenue. That's a pernicious goal because the revenue the lottery generates mostly comes from people who can't afford to lose money but can't resist the lure of something for nothing.

Northstar won the bidding for the contract with the $825 million revenue pledge. As soon as it won the contract, it asked the state to agree to a reduced profit commitment that was crucial to its winning bid.

News reports indicate that Northstar wants nearly $140 million in concessions.

There is no question that Northstar has done a good job of ramping up the lottery. Despite falling short of its commitment, it produced record profit for the state by generating new games and expanding the number of retailers selling tickets.

But a deal ought to be a deal. No one put a gun to the head of Northstar managers as they prepared their bid. There is no reason to spare Northstar the consequences of its offer, and certainly no justification for paying a bonus for not meeting the agreed-upon revenue goals.

Sections (2):Editorials, Opinion
Categories (2):Editorials, Opinions

Comments

News-Gazette.com embraces discussion of both community and world issues. We welcome you to contribute your ideas, opinions and comments, but we ask that you avoid personal attacks, vulgarity and hate speech. We reserve the right to remove any comment at our discretion, and we will block repeat offenders' accounts. To post comments, you must first be a registered user, and your username will appear with any comment you post. Happy posting.

Login or register to post comments

Sid Saltfork wrote on August 09, 2012 at 10:08 pm

"Isn't a contract a contract?"  Tell the same thing to the State of Illinois employees who have a contract with the State of Illinois that has not been honored by the State of Illinois.  Wasn't there concerns when the contract was awarded to Northstar Lottery Group regarding conflicts of interest?

Sid Saltfork wrote on August 10, 2012 at 11:08 am

Evidently no one did their homework.  GTECH owns 80% of Northstar Lottery Group.  GTECH donated $1,520,000.00 to Gov. Quinn's 2010 election campaign.  Northstar Lottery Group was "awarded" the private state lottery contract by Gov. Quinn's panel evaluating the privatization of the state lottery six weeks before the 2010 gubernatorial election.  State of Illinois Auditor General, Bill Holland, found a conflict of interest in the process.  One of the governor's panel members was already named as Northstar Lottery Group's executive of lottery sales.  Mr. Victor Golden was at the same time a State of Illinois employee.  He is the State Deputy Lottery Superintendent earning $109,248.00 per year.  Northstar later denied that Victor Golden was an employee of theirs.  GTECH which owns 80% of Northstar Lottery Group has donated $200,000.00 to both the Democratic Governors Association, and the Republican Governors Association.  Currently; the states of Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Michigan are moving forward to privatizing their state lotteries with Northstar as a bidder.  The states of Washington, and Ohio are considering privatization of their state lotteries with Northstar as a contenter.  Both political parties are corrupt.  Yet, the citizens in the states have no idea of the deals made that cost them tax monies.  Imagine all of the tax breaks, pork barrel projects, and contracts that result in campaign donations.  That is what makes it so attractive for people to "serve" in politics.