Here is part of Woodstock's revised raffle law

A copy of the new, proposed ordinance for Woodstock's raffle law follows. Look at the highlighted words...

Section One, C: "Licensee Qualifications: Raffle licenses shall be issued only to bon (sic) fide charitable, educational, labor, religious and veterans' organizations that operate without profit to their members ... (five year history requirement) ... or to a non-profit fundraising organization that the licensing authority determines is organized for the sole purpose of providing financial assistance to an identified individual or group of individuals suffering extreme financial hardship as the result of illness, disability, accident or disaster." (emphasis added)

A benefit for an individual will likely never qualify to be so determined by the City of Woodstock's Liquor Commission, which is the arm of the City that controls issuance of raffle permits. This is because it is highly unlikely that the State of Illinois will approve a non-profit tax status for an organization that benefits only one person. But maybe it will.

This is just my opinion of the Illinois Raffle Act (www.ilga.gov; 230 ILCS 15/ )

The City shall issue, according to the revised proposed ordinance (if it wasn't altered at the City Council meeting (the typo probably was corrected)), a permit to a "non-profit fundraising organization." An individual or a small informal group of friends would not be considered an "organization". And it won't be a "fundraising organization." And, even if it is, it won't be a "non-profit" organization, which is a designation by the State of Illinois after approval of an application for that status (after filing of corporate papers, by-laws, etc.). If the "organization" tells the State that it intends to raise money for one individual, I suspect that the State very likely will deny the application.

The City administration's cover letter to the City Council and Mayor misinforms them by giving an example of a raffle for an individual or group of individuals, adding that "The proposed added language is taken directly from the State Raffle Act. It is not.

The cover letter reads, "An example of this type of raffle would be one organizaed and conducted by a group (emphasis added) established to raise funds for an individual suffering from a catastrophic illness."

The operative word in the statute is "organization", not "group".

Why am I harping on this? Because earlier this year I learned that the City would have issued a raffle permit for the Beth Bentley fundraiser at Gus's Roadhouse, had the Bentley friends found a non-profit organization to apply for a raffle permit. That would have been wrong, but apparently the City was willing to look the other way, had the friends gotten some group to agree to apply for the raffle.

The City gets its advice from the City Attorney. Now it has an attorney on the City Council. Most attorneys are pretty good about reading the law. Do they advise on how to get around something or do they advise on the consequences of doing something not allowed under the law? I recognize that the newly-appointed City Council member does not act as a lawyer to the City Council, but he has legal education, knowledge and training not possessed by other members of the City Council, and the residents should expect to use it.