Saying the Pritzker administration has refused to listen to their concerns, the trade association that represents most of Illinois’ bowling centers has sued the governor, demanding their businesses be treated the same in Pritzker’s pandemic reopening plan as casinos, restaurants and other comparable indoor entertainment facilities.
On July 14, the Lincolnwood-based Illinois State Bowling Proprietors’ Association filed its complaint in Lee County court in Dixon in northwest Illinois, accusing Pritzker overstepping his authority and violating their rights to equal protection under Illinois’ state constitution.
“They’ve dug their heels in,” said Bill Duff, executive director of the ISBPA. “Now, it’s gotten to the point where the only way we can demonstrate our concerns to them is to file this lawsuit.
Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker
“It’s unfortunate.”
The lawsuit is among the latest taking aim at Pritzker’s use of emergency powers he has delegated to himself under Illinois state law, as part of his strategy to combat the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic in Illinois.
Citing those powers, Pritzker has issued several dozen executive orders, laying down a raft of rules and guidelines for the state’s residents and businesses to follow. These included the so-called stay at home orders, issued from March to the end of June. Under those orders, Pritzker divided the state’s businesses and activities into categories of “essential” and “non-essential.”
Bowling centers landed on the list of non-essential businesses, and were ordered closed for more than three months.
However, as Pritzker began to lift social and business restrictions under his Reopen Illinois plan this summer, Duff said his association and bowling center owners were in constant communication with the state’s executive offices, and particularly the Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity, to discuss the rules under which they would be allowed to reopen.
Duff said the ISBPA and bowling center owners believed they had reached an understanding with the governor’s office, to allow them to reopen at about 50% customer capacity.
Duff said bowling center operators believed they could still turn a profit under those conditions, essentially leaving 11 feet of separation between groups of bowlers, by leaving every other bowling lane “dark.”
“Bowling centers are very large facilities, and are perfect for socially distanced activities,” Duff said.
The bowling centers could also require masks, and would provide hand sanitizer and other personal protective equipment, as required and desired.
However, when the governor’s office released its new rules governing reopening the bowling centers, the centers would only be allowed a maximum of 50 occupants.
“When we asked why, we received no real answer,” Duff said.
He said the rules are inexplicable and unjustifiable, since other indoor entertainment options, including casinos, are allowed to open at 50% capacity, with many more than 50 people in attendance.
“If you’re operating an 84-lane bowling center, there is no way to be profitable with just 50 customers at a time,” said Duff. “We just want to be equitable with other industries.”
The lawsuit, like many others targeting Pritzker for his COVID-related actions, asserts the governor overstepped the legal bounds of his authority.
As other lawsuits, the ISBPA complaint argues the Illinois Emergency Management Agency Act only allows the governor to govern by executive order for 30 days after he declares a disaster. After that, they argue, the governor must secure approval from the Illinois General Assembly to continue using his emergency powers.
In other similar cases, Pritzker and the Illinois Attorney General’s office have consistently argued the governor has the ability to continue governing by executive order for as long as he believes an emergency exists, so long as he issues new emergency declarations every 30 days.
For the most part, judges have sided with the governor on that question. However, in early July, a judge in southern Illinois sided with Darren Bailey, a state representative, who challenged those powers on similar grounds. Pritzker has indicated he will appeal that decision.
However, in the bowling association’s complaint, they also assert Pritzker has treated them too differently from other similar industries and businesses, violating their rights to equal protection under the law.
The lawsuit asks the court to issue a restraining order forbidding the Pritzker administration from applying the 50-customer limit to bowling centers, when the same rules don’t apply to gyms, retail stores, casinos, restaurants and other similar indoor entertainment businesses.
The 50-person capacity limit for bowling centers “makes no sense,” said Duff. He added the rule “is not based on science and needs to be addressed by the court.”
The ISBPA is represented by attorney James P. Fieweger, and others with the firm of Michael Best & Friedrich LLP, of Chicago.