The state’s public rail and bus systems have so far made it largely unscathed through the difficult budget process, in which Quinn is trying to steer the state out of a $13 billion deficit.

“(Downstate agencies) actually have experienced an increase in operating funding over the last couple of years,” said Laura Calderon, executive director of the Illinois Public Transit Association, adding that the allocations in the draft budget was “about what’s expected.”

Under Quinn’s proposed $27 billion budget, presented last week to a joint session of the Illinois General Assembly, downstate transit agencies are slated to see a 10 percent increase in grant money from the state. For MSW Projects, a small transit agency in Henry, Ill., that means a bump from $252,000 this year to $277,000 in 2011.

The increase is welcome news for the rural agency, which offers senior rides and runs fixed routes through Henry County with minivans and a 15-person van. But MSW faces a bigger problem, Calderon said – reimbursements from the state are being sent months after they are due and apprehensive banks are refusing to dole out loans to ailing agencies.

As a result, MSW Projects recently put all its employees on a four-day work schedule to avoid having to take more drastic measures.

“That is enough to keep them afloat right now,” Calderon said.

The picture is slightly different for transit in the Chicago area. The Regional Transit Authority, which includes the CTA, Metra and Pace, saw its state grants drop slightly in Quinn’s budget proposal, from $292 million this year to $285 million next. And that’s down from $302 million in FY 2009.

But Brian Imus, spokesman for the Illinois Public Interest Research Group, a consumer advocacy group, said he too is more concerned that the state is late in paying nearly $250 million for transit service in the Chicago area.

“The delay, if it isn’t fixed, could have a disastrous effect on commuters,” Imus wrote in an e-mail. “The governor’s budget proposal this week doesn’t make me any more confident the state is going to be able to address this shortfall.”

Ed Heflin, manager of the Illinois Rural Transit Assistance Center, said that investing in public transit during a recession is wise because it leads to greater economic development. Every $1 spent on public transit brings a $3 return to the area, he said, and in some cases the return is as much as $8.

Public transit may be the least of lawmakers’ worries this week. Education took the brunt of the damage in Quinn’s 475-page draft budget, shouldering $1.3 billion in proposed cuts. Lawmakers now find themselves entrenched in a battle over Quinn’s suggested fix – a temporary 33 percent income tax hike to fund schools. Health, human services and local governments are also facing a loss of about $300 million apiece.

Quinn’s budget must be approved by both houses of the legislature before it can take effect for the fiscal year that begins July 1. But with lawmakers’ concerns over the November election getting in the way, some expect that serious budget reform will not take place until a special legislative session after the election.

State Rep. Deb Mell (D-Chicago) introduced a bill last month that would force chains such as McDonald’s, Burger King, Subway and Potbelly to disclose on their menu boards the number of calories contained in each meal.

“I found my idea from last summer when I took a short trip to New York City. I saw that restaurants have to disclose information,” said Mell.

Mell, a first-term lawmaker and daughter of longtime Chicago Ald. Richard Mell (33rd), said she found the information useful because she was counting calories using an application on her iPhone.

“I am amazed how [many restaurants in Illinois] we have, and we don’t know what the ingredients are [in each entree]. Sure, there are nutritional fact sheets, but nobody will pay attention when ordering,” she said.

Mell said the new measure would not cost a lot of money because chains already calculate the calories, and they would only have to pay for reprinting the menus.

Jeff Cronin, communications director for the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a national advocacy group for healthier eating, applauded the new bill.

“Labeling on menu boards really helps to control consumers’ weight and health,” Cronin said.

Cronin said his group has been working with New York City officials since that city’s legislation was enforced in 2008. Since that time, there has been a big impact on public perceptions.

According to an online survey reported by the Center for Science in the Public Interest, after consumers learned the calorie count of menu items, 71 percent of the people said they wanted to order lower-calorie options. Also, 51 percent said they would no longer order certain items.

The survey was conducted in early 2009, nearly a year after the law had taken effect, among 755 consumers who live in the five New York City boroughs.

“A new law could be a powerful tool to provide information, but we don’t know if consumers would change their habits,” said Dawn Jackson Blatner, a registered dietician and spokeswoman for the American Dietetic Association.

Blatner said focusing on fast-food restaurants is a good start because two out of every three people in the county are overweight and fast-food restaurants offer food that is high in calories.

Some would like to extend the idea of posting calories counts to more restaurants.

Denise Wilson, a communications officer for Burger King, said the fast-food chain is fully compliant with current local regulations to post calories on restaurant menu boards.

However, Wilson said the company supports the Labeling Education and Nutrition Act (LEAN Act) introduced last year in the U.S. Congress because it would create a standard for the industry in all 50 states.

Besides Illinois, a dozen other states have introduced labeling laws, but only four have signed them into law. California will be the first one to enforce its law in January 2011. Maine, New Jersey and Oregon will follow suit a short time later.

“Currently, there is a growing patchwork of inconsistent state and local laws governing menu labeling. We will roll out consistent nutritional in-restaurant menu labeling once a federal standard is enacted,” said Wilson.

The National Restaurant Association also said the industry needs a national approach.

“Unfortunately, the current legislation is not the right approach for consumers to get the right information,” said spokeswoman Sue Hensley.

She said the association wants to develop a label that could be similar to the nutrition facts that can be found on food packages.

To fight this growing problem, Rep. Greg Harris (D-Chicago) introduced House Bill 4672, which would require teachers, principals, guidance counselors and all personnel who work with students in grades 7 through 12 to be trained in suicide prevention two hours each year.

Harris joined forces with the Jason Foundation, which was founded by Clark Flatt after his son, Jason, committed suicide at 16. Harris said youth suicide is preventable — if teachers and school officials know what to look out for.

“When it comes to our schools, youth organizations and various programs, suicide just isn’t on the radar as something that a 12-year-old could be planning,” Harris said. “Ninety percent of the time, these kids are reaching out. We just don’t know how to recognize it.”

In the case of 10-year-old Aquan Lewis, the Evanston student who hanged himself by his shirt collar on a hook in an Oakton Elementary School restroom stall on Feb. 2, 2009, officials said the fifth-grader had made threats about killing himself.

Dr. Ron Davidson, professor in the Department of Psychiatry at the University of Illinois at Chicago, agreed that there are almost always warning signs leading up to a suicide. In the case of Lewis, Davidson said he had serious concerns.

“It seemed this was a situation that could have been avoided. The boy made some kind of statement announcing his plans and how he was feeling, and it either wasn’t listened to or he wasn’t taken seriously,” he said.

Relatives of Lewis have filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the school district alleging that Evanston-Skokie School District 65 was negligent. Attorney Todd Smith, who is representing the family, couldn’t be reached for comment.

Oakton Elementary school officials also couldn’t be reached for comment.

If passed, Illinois would be the fifth state to pass legislation requiring in-service training for all school officials. In 2007, Tennessee became the first state to pass the Jason Flatt Act, followed by Louisiana, Mississippi and California. The Jason Foundation has trained 117,000 teachers so far and is currently working with five other states to pass legislation.

“It is not the only thing any state should do, but it is the single most important thing any state should do,” said Clark Flatt, chief executive officer of the Jason Flatt Foundation. “The single most important aspect of suicide prevention is training and specifically training the teachers and school officials to be able to recognize at-risk behavior.”

Davidson said he “whole-heartedly” agrees that the bill should be passed.

“It is absolutely necessary,” he said.

Flatt said the Jason Foundation, along with all organizations involved with suicide prevention, would provide free training to all school personnel.

Mary Kay Dawson, a legislative volunteer for the Jason Foundation who is working with state legislators to get the bill passed, said suicide is the third leading cause of death among young people and “is a real problem.”

“There has been great support in Illinois,” she said. “Everyone agrees with the bill in theory. We are just working on language so when we bring the bill to the table everyone is in agreement. We want this to be a team effort.”

Davidson said he is concerned when he hears any kind of objection to this type of bill.

“Lay the body of a dead child next to the issues people have against this bill, and I am certain the body of a dead child trumps any sort of irresponsible response to not taking immediate action,” he said.

Harris said he hopes there will be vote on the bill next month.

“Typically, these are organizations that are in competition against each other for limited state dollars, but instead we are banding together to say there is not enough state money,” said Daniel Schwick, assistant to the president of Lutheran Social Services of Illinois.

The Responsible Budget Coalition, with 40 buses of supporters in tow, went to Springfield Feb. 16, where they held a press conference at the state Capitol, followed by a rally in support of House Bill 174 on Feb. 17.

“It’s hard; people don’t understand that this is really about them,” said John Bouman, leader of the Responsible Budget Coalition and president of the Sargent Shriver National Center on Poverty Law. “If we don’t get this done the right way, we will see everything from teacher layoffs to whole institutions closing.”

House Bill 174 would raise the state personal and corporate income tax from 3 to 5 percent and expand the state sales tax to certain consumer services. It would also provide tax relief by raising the personal exemption from $2,000 to $3,000, doubling the state property tax credit and tripling the Earned Income Tax Credit, which targets low-income families.

This increase would fall only on those who can afford it, said Rev. Alexander Sharp, executive director of Protestants for the Common Good, because the bill will include tax credits for those who cannot afford to pay more.

Instead of a progressive income tax that applies a greater share of the burden to wealthier taxpayers, Illinois is currently one of only six states to have a fixed income tax. So the state’s poorest residents pay 3 percent of their income in state tax, as do Illinois’ wealthiest citizens.

The bill was passed through the Senate last May, and is now waiting on an approval from the House.

Sharp said citizens are fighting against tax increases because they aren’t aware of the services they will lose due to a lack of funding.

“I think there is a mentality that is really unwilling to pay for services that we expect to be provided for us. We have to rise above that and realize the needs of our state,” Sharp said.

Kathy Ryg, president of Voices for Illinois Children, said it is crucial the bill is approved before the Nov. 2 general election, which is why the coalition has started the “We Can’t Wait” campaign.

“We feel very strongly that any delay on having a responsible budget will be very costly to the state as far as programs and services and successful initiatives go. They will either be gone, or their funding will be inadequate to meet the needs of the state,” Ryg said.

Ryg said the current deficit for the 2011 budget is $12.8 billion, which includes unpaid bills to social service agencies and state vendors.

Rep. David Miller (D-Dolton), a supporter of HB174, said he hopes now that the Feb. 2 primary election is past, the legislation will move forward.

“We have proved we can pass the bill in the Senate, now we need to see what we can do with it from here,” Miller said.

“I have a terrible medical history, and smoking cannabis for medical purpose improved my lifestyle by 80 percent,” said the 54-year-old, who did not want to be fully identified for fear of being arrested.

Lisa’s situation could change soon if the Illinois General Assembly passes a measure that would allow for the medical use of marijuana, joining a dozen other states with similar law already on the books.

The bill, called the Compassionate Use of Medical Marijuana Pilot Program Act, is sponsored by Sen. William Haine (D-Alton).

The Illinois Senate approved the measure last spring with a close 30-28 vote, and it cleared the House Rules Committee at the end of January. The bill is now on the calendar for a final debate before voting.

Gov. Pat Quinn said earlier this year that he supports the use of medical marijuana.

Under Senate Bill 1381, Illinoisans would be allowed to have six cannabis plants, no more than three of which can be mature, during a 60-day period. The original bill set a limit of seven plants.

It would also establish a patient registry to control cannabis distribution. Patients or caregivers who distribute marijuana to someone who is not allowed to use it for medical purposes could face a $2,000 fine and up to two years in prison.

With the new law, Lisa said she would live in peace of mind and have a better control about the pot she purchases.

“Right now, I have to be really careful because I do not know the quality or where the product I am inhaling came from,” said Lisa. “With the new law, I could make sure to get an organic product and not chemical.”

The Illinois Family Institute, a group that promotes the protection of traditional family values, argues that cannabis should not be legalized for any medical reason.

“We believe that kids and teenagers could think that cannabis is like a pill for relaxing, and Illinois would have a higher rate of young users,” said Kathy Valente, director of operations of the group. She said she based her statement on a study from the National Household Survey on Drug Abuse.

Valente said THC, a substance in marijuana, is already present in many medications, and people should use those instead of an illegal drug.

The Illinois State Medical Society also opposes the bill.

“We are against the use of cannabis for medical purposes because there is no scientific evidence that it could be good for patients,” said the society’s president-elect, Steven Malkin.

Malkin said there are many anecdotes about the use of marijuana, but smoking and inhaling any substance is not healthy and not the right way to administer treatment.

Dan Linn, executive director of the Illinois Cannabis Patients Association, disagrees.

“The patients and the doctors should decide what is  best, and the law should not be influenced by other people,” he said.

Linn said he worked with Sen. Haine to write the bill.

“We made a lot of concessions, and we are now confident that the bill will be adopted,” Linn said. “We are still contacting state lawmakers to make sure they understand the bill, but we should have the 60 votes needed.”

Linn said one major change was that the proposed bill is a pilot project, meaning that lawmakers would have to enact a permanent law in a couple years.

The incumbent received 69 percent of votes, giving him an overwhelming majority against his challenger, Adolfo Mondragon.

Munoz, who was not available for comment during the week leading up to the Feb. 2 primary, was a difficult candidate to beat, said Kent Redfield, a political science professor who specializes in campaign finance at the University of Illinois, Springfield.

“The short time of the election is something that worked well for the incumbent,” said Redfield, referring to Illinois’ early Feb. 2 elections — the first primary in the nation since its move from April two years ago, which gave then-presidential candidate Barack Obama an early win.

Redfield said that January is the time to push campaigns, which left Mondragon just one month to work against Munoz’s money and organizational support. Since January 2009, the veteran politician was able to raise around $200,000 in campaign contributions, compared to Mondragon’s $29,000, reports the Illinois State Board of Elections.

Both the Chicago Sun-Times and the Chicago Tribune endorsed Mondragon, citing his virgin politics as a plus against Munoz’s longstanding membership with the Democratic machine. The papers specifically mentioned Munoz’s relationship with the now-defunct Hispanic Democratic Organization, most notably his close political ties to Angelo Torres, who was convicted of running the city’s Hired Truck Program.

“He’s been mediocre at best. He has really not worked with the people who are on the ground,” said Mondragon on Election Day.

Mondragon, who currently works as a public interest attorney, criticized Munoz for ignoring his community’s complaints about two controversial coal-fired power plants on the Southwest Side.

Pilsen Environmental Rights and Reform Organization (PERRO) has asked Munoz to get involved with the Fisk and Crawford plants, which it calls environmental hazards. Instead, Munoz has accepted over $10,000 in campaign contributions over the past decade from Midwest Generation, owner of the two plants, according to the Illinois State Board of Elections.

“Unfortunately, we see a lot of old die-hard habits when it comes to voting for Democratic candidates. And when in doubt, people will vote for the name they recognize,” said Dorian Breuer, member of PERRO and assistant secretary for Chicago Southwest Side Greens, a local Green Party affiliate.

While Munoz isn’t known for his environmental initiatives, it’s likely he’ll continue to push legislation related to crime and to address the district’s high Hispanic population.

As for a change in leadership in the 1st District, that will have to wait.

“Electorally, with how to beat the machine candidates, it’s not enough to have a good background. It really requires the old school method of having your army on the ground,” said Breuer.

Whether that played a role in Tuesday’s election, one thing is for certain: low voter turnout didn’t help.

devin.katayama@loop.colum.edu

Steans, who is currently serving her first senate term, tallied more than 13,900 votes, or 65 percent of her district, according to the unofficial election results. Madigan, an attorney from Buena Park who ran on a platform of reform, carried 35 percent. About one in four registered voters city-wide went to the polls.

Steans will now face Republican Adam Robinson in the Nov. 2 general election in the race to represent a diverse swath of the North Side encompassing Uptown, Lincoln Square, Andersonville and Rogers Park. But in the overwhelmingly Democratic city of Chicago, that party’s primary elections tend to be a good indication of who will inevitably win the seat.

Madigan, who would have been the first openly gay state senator in Illinois history, positioned himself as a reform candidate in a campaign season abuzz with anti-corruption rhetoric. Still, Steans’ win did not come as a surprise to most political insiders.

“(Steans) is the incumbent, she has a good bit of money, she had robo-calls,” said Dick Simpson, a political science professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago. “And she has the support of the Democratic committee.”

Campaign contribution records show Steans raised more than $220,000 in 2009; Madigan raised half that amount.

Steans kept a low public profile during her campaign, much to the chagrin of her challengers.

Robinson, whose campaign is focusing on lower taxes, school choice and – perhaps surprisingly – marriage equality, said Tuesday that he “applauded” Madigan for joining him in two candidate forums during the campaign. He added that “it was unfortunate that Sen. Steans declined both of those opportunities to address the issues.”

Steans declined requests for an interview.

Among the more controversial elements of the 7th District race, Madigan sent out a series of mailers criticizing the senator for giving more than $200,000 to the campaign of former Gov. Rod Blagojevich between the years of 2002 and 2007.

“If it had been television ads or maybe even radio ads with Blagojevich’s voice that had a more emotional impact, it might (have swayed the election),” Simpson said.

Andrew Hughes, a 27-year-old beer deliveryman from Ravenswood, said he voted for Steans despite the fact that he knew little about her. Instead, he went along with a flier listing Ald. Gene Schulter’s (47th) recommendations that he carried with him in his jacket pocket.

“I try to vote, because it’s all I can do. I’m a working person,” Hughes said. “But I couldn’t find any information … on most things, (politicians) are too vague.”

Steans, a graduate of Princeton and Harvard Universities, has worked for government agencies in Wisconsin and Illinois, serves as trustee of the Steans Family Foundation and formerly headed the board of WBEZ.

She won her senate seat in 2008 with the endorsement of former Sen. Carol Ronen, who abruptly resigned from the seat mid-term in October 2007.

It was the first time Burke had faced a challenge in a primary in nearly two decades of representing the 23rd House District in Southwest Chicago. Lozano, son of a slain Hispanic political activist, garnered nearly 45 percent of the vote to the lawmaker’s 50 percent, according to unofficial results.

Dick Simpson, head of the political science department at the University of Illinois at Chicago, said Tuesday before the polls closed that if the race was close, it would be a major statement indicating the machine’s strength weakening.

“If (Rudy) Lozano gets more than 40 percent of the vote, it would mean that (Dan) Burke can be defeated in a future election, if not the next election,” Simpson said. “It will mean the reform candidate can take back districts from the machine candidates. I see this race as a battle over the future of Latino politics.”

Lozano came close, willing 3,980 votes, while Burke had 4,414.

“The Latino population is growing at a rapid rate and is almost a third of the population in Chicago,” Simpson said. “This race will be a good indication about what the future of Chicago politics will look like and a tight race would be serious change in the future for machine candidates.”

Simpson said the 23rd District, a majority of which is in the 14th Ward, is over 70 percent Hispanic.

Burke hails from a powerful Irish family. His father, Joseph Burke, and brother, Edward, have served the 14th Ward in the Chicago City Council for a combined 55 years. Ald. Ed Burke is the longtime chair of the powerful Finance Committee and is married to Illinois Supreme Court 1st District Justice Anne Burke.

“This race has been entirely different for me,” Burke said in an interview just a day before Tuesday’s win. “In the past, if I voted I was elected. This is a new experience. I have ran a more than fair campaign. It has been a very positive experience, but I think I got what I anticipated.”

In addition to Lozano, there were two other Hispanic candidates in the race: Martin Meza-Zevala and Rene Diaz. These candidates kept a low profile, but may have taken some key votes away from Lozano. Meza-Zevala and Diaz combined received 5 percent of the vote.

Kelsey.Duckett@loop.colum.edu

Illinois has reduced funding for early childhood education, including before- and after-school programs, by 10 percent, said a spokesman for state Sen. Heather Steans (D-Chicago), who is the vice chairwoman of the Senate Education Committee. This could result in as many as 15,000 Chicago children losing eligibility for these programs.

The state’s budget deficit is up to $12.8 billion, forcing lawmakers to cut state funding. It’s these cuts that are destroying before-and-after school programs in Chicago, said Harry Wells, president of Chicago Youth Centers.

David Sinski, executive director for After School Matters in Chicago, said the cuts have significantly affected all nonprofit programs, and it doesn’t appear that the problem will be fixed any time soon.

“Given the current economic climate, After School Matters, like many nonprofit organizations, has experienced difficulty relying on continuous funding from all sources,” he said in an e-mail. “At the same time, challenging financial circumstances have escalated demand for and reinforced the need to expand out-of-school program opportunities for Chicago teens.”

After School Matters is a nonprofit organization that offers 25,000 program opportunities to Chicago teens. Sinski said the long-term goal is to double the capacity to 50,000 programs, which would be enough to accommodate about one-half of all Chicago public high school teens, specifically on the South and West Sides.

Wells said in the past year, his nonprofit organization has lost over $1 million in financial support.

“We have seven centers in Chicago that are for early childhood through teen education programs,” he said. “We lost $400,000 in state funding thus far, and it looks like that will double next year.

“That would be devastating to our program.”

Chicago Youth Centers serve eight neighborhoods: Altgeld Gardens, Riverdale, Roseland, South Shore, Grand Boulevard, Bridgeport, Humboldt Park and North Lawndale.

“Our goal was to expand our centers throughout Chicago, but right now we have to focus on finding funding to keep the doors open,” he said. “This program and others like it are vital in Chicago. The young people that come to us would otherwise be on the street after school and would be subject to drug and gang violence on the streets or they would drop out of school entirely.”

Ralph Martire, director at the Center for Tax and Budget Accountability, said the problem is just going to get worse unless state taxes are raised.

“All these elected officials seem to think they can solve the program without raising taxes, but they can’t say how,” he said. “The numbers are pretty simple, and they are staggering. It is impossible to solve this without a tax increase.”

Martire said the state’s financial situation is grave at best, and it’s just the start. Next year, he warned, these education programs are going to take a serious hit, receiving significantly less money, if any at all.

“This year, these programs can expect that they will get anywhere from 10 to 50 percent less than they thought they would get,” he said. “The following year, all bets are off. If you don’t have money, you don’t have programs.”

Jack Kaplan, director of public policy for the United Way, said his organization sent a survey to over 1,000 nonprofit organizations in Chicago. Of the 500-plus that have responded, 59 percent report they’re waiting on back payments from the state.

“These organizations were reporting over $80 million in back pay that is due to them,” he said. “The state has been slow paying any service they think they can do away with. The state feels these agencies can be a lower priority, when in fact they are necessity in Chicago.”

Kaplan said he doesn’t even want to think about what next year could bring.

“This is not a scare tactic or a ‘chicken little the sky’s falling’ thing,” he said. “The state needs a wake-up call. These before- and after-school programs, along with early childhood education, are absolutely critical for Chicago. If the state does away with the funding for these programs, the impact will be unspeakable.”

Kelsey.Duckett@loop.colum.edu

You can figure out which candidates have views that match your own — even among that daunting list of judges running for election. There are no perfect choices, but voting based on facts is betterthan voting blind or not voting at all.

Here is ChicagoTalks’ guide to the primary election on Tuesday, Feb. 2, 2010 in Chicago and Cook County. You can vote (if you haven’t done early voting) on Feb. 2 between 6 a.m. -  7 p.m., if you are registered voter.

If you have problems or see something that looks fishy, tell the election judge at your polling place and report it to your election authority for Chicago or Cook County. Then call ChicagoTalks. Here’s how:

• City of Chicago voters should call the Election Hotline at (312) 269-7870.

• County voters should call the Vote Fraud Hotline (Cook County, but not City of Chicago) at (312) 603-0909.

• Call ChicagoTalks at (312) 436-1820. We are working with reporters from Lake Effect News, Center Square Ledger and The Columbia Chronicle to report problems and voting irregularities.

Voting for judges doesn’t have to be hard or take long. First, go to http://voteforjudges.org/, a nonprofit site that explains the details of these elections and provides guides to help you gauge who is qualified and who is not. Print these guides and take them with you when you vote. Whether you are interested in justice and gender, justice and race, or justice and fairness, these guides are better than voting blind or not voting at all. Find more judicial recommendations you can use here.

• If you are voting in one of the 120-plus towns and villages in suburban Cook County, your election authority is the Cook County Clerk’s office. Here are resources for you:

• Find your polling place
• See a sample ballot
  
• What if I’m not listed as being registered?
• What options do voters with disabilities have?
• What will happen at the polling place?
• What kind of voting equipment will I use?
• How do I vote?
• What if I make a mistake?
• What if I need help on Election Day?

• If you are voting in the city of Chicago, your election information is at www.chicagoelections.com.
  • Chicago voter F.A.Q.
  • Check your registration and see a sample ballot

• The e-voter site is a non-partisan voting information site.

• From Lake Effect, former Ald. Dick Simpson on The Cook County Wars provides a quick review of how Cook County commissioners voted since the last election.

• Ben Joravsky and Mick Dumke tell all in Election Follies : Age-old feuds, nepotism, logrolling, and Moonies—it must be primary season in Chicago.

Remember, this is a PRIMARY election, so most candidates are running to be the official party candidate in the November election. If you don’t feel comfortable asking for a Democratic, Republican or Green Party ballot, you have the right to request a non-partisan one.

It’s not often that elected county officials visit the West Ridge and Rogers Park backwater, but visit they did, arriving with an entourage of TV news cameras and a prominent TV newscaster to a Democratic candidates’ forum for the Cook County Board President’s seat.

Sunday’s forum was organized by a new neighborhood group called the Rogers Park Organization, whose mission is to support and elect candidates who will represent the interests of Rogers Park and West Ridge residents. One of the organization’s goals is to organize candidates forums so that voters can ask questions and get candidates’ opinions on issues directly affecting them.

More than 100 residents filled the pews at Temple Menorah, 7360 N. California Ave., on Sunday afternoon to watch incumbent Todd Stroger defend his beleaguered term as Cook County Board President against challengers Ald. Toni Preckwinkle (4^th) and Cook County Circuit Court Clerk Dorothy Brown.

West Ridge resident and Metropolitan Water Reclamation District President Terry O’Brien, who is also challenging Stroger, arrived 45 minutes into the forum, apologizing profusely to his neighbors saying he had been held up at another campaign event.

Chicago Sun-Times political columnist, WTTW “Chicago Tonight” co-host and Channel 5 political editor Carol Marin moderated the forum, feeding audience questions to the candidates on topics ranging from property taxes, the county health care system, stabilizing the county budget, and patronage.

“People here in Rogers Park feel they don’t see too many Cook County elected officials in this part of their world,” Marin said. “What exactly does the county government do for them and how does it impact their lives in ways they may not see?”

Stroger, Preckwinkle and Brown each spoke of how county residents pay sales and property taxes, and use other services, including the county health care and criminal justice systems, and small business administration.

“Then there are many services like the Botanic Garden and Brookfield Zoo,” Brown said. “Even though they’re not here, you can go to them. The forest preserves are available as well. There are a lot of things that Cook County government can do for you and of course, you have to pay the various taxes in order to make those happen.”

Preckwinkle said the county government has two main missions, health care and the fair and equitable operation of the criminal justice system.

“About one-third of our felony resources and one-third of our budget goes to the health care system,” Preckwinkle said. “Our public health system is the safety net that provides for people who are uninsured or underinsured. The other big portion of the county’s budget and its focus is criminal justice. Likewise, it’s in all of our interest that the criminal justice system operates well and fairly to all who come in contact with it.”

Stroger spoke of the Cook County Sheriff’s Department’s interaction with Chicago police and other municipal police departments on drug, gang and bomb squad missions. He also mentioned the county’s vital records and highways departments, and help for small businesses.

“What people don’t think about is the highways,” Stroger said. “The county goes out and repairs the road and gives it back to the city and the city will take care of its maintenance … We’re planning a $200 million bond program where you’re giving money back to small businesses.”

Other audience questions were ripped right out of recent news headlines. Marin tossed a question to Stroger, asking how many of his relatives were on the county payroll and what jobs and salaries were they receiving.

“I believe my sister works for the chief judge. I never asked her what she makes and she doesn’t offer it up so I can’t really tell you,” Stroger said. “My brother-in-law works in facilities management. I suspect both have been there somewhere between 16 and 20 years. There you go.”

Preckwinkle was queried about the $40,000 in campaign contributions she received from convicted felon Tony Rezko in exchange for bringing business to the city’s 4^th Ward, where Preckwinkle has been alderman since 1991.

The alderman explained how her relationship with Rezko dissolved in the late 1990s, when she confronted him about affordable housing properties that he owned in the 4^th Ward after receiving complaints from the community and her staff about substandard conditions and criminal activity.

“Tony Rezko hasn’t given me a dime in decade since I called him,” Preckwinkle said.

Brown was asked how a supervisor could objectively receive cash gifts from employees or charge them to wear jeans to work. Brown said receiving and giving cash gifts to or from county employees was legally allowed, according to the Cook County ethics ordinance.

“The thing we do at the clerk of the court, we’re like a family. I give gifts and they give gifts. There’s been a lot of misreporting,” Brown said.

Regarding the infamous “jeans days,” in which circuit employees pay $2 to wear jeans to work on certain days which goes into coffers to be later given to charity or used for employee morale boosting events, Brown said the practice was started by her predecessor. She mentioned other county departments, such as the Cook County Recorder of Deeds, as well as various city agencies that had instituted “jeans days.”

“My employees wanted to continue because they wanted to be able to give to charitable causes …” Brown said. “The [Chicago] Department of Revenue just issued a memo they’re going to do jeans day every Thursday for Haiti. Some employees said to give $2 to wear jeans and have fun yet give to a good cause is a good thing for them.”

All of the candidates, including O’Brien, who by then had showed up to the forum, said they would lobby the Illinois General Assembly to extend the 7 percent property tax cap. Preckwinkle said the county needed to be more proactive on home foreclosures, adding that she would institute a mandatory foreclosure mediation process in the county’s circuit courts that would allow more homeowners to save their homes.

O’Brien supported seeking federal grants to reduce the county’s dependence on property taxes. Stroger said the county has not raised its portion of property taxes in 13 years, and that the county government saved 25,000 homes from foreclosure under his watch by helping homeowners readjust their mortgages.

Candidates were also asked whether they thought the county had a patronage or corruption problem. All of the candidates, with the exception of Stroger, agreed that county government had padded its payroll with patronage jobs.

Stroger said that unless patronage was going on “behind my back,” new hires made by the county during his term were made with a Shakman monitor in the room.

“I signed the Shakman decree before I came in … I talk to the Shakman monitor about every quarter,” Stroger added. “There is not one of us up here who doesn’t have a patronage employee. That’s the person you trust to look at your paperwork to make sure it gets done. That is part of being an elected official and I don’t think there is an office of any size that doesn’t have what they call patronage reports.”

Regarding budget cuts each candidate would make to stabilize the county budget, Brown said she would lobby the Illinois General Assembly for an early retirement program for county employees to bring in new hires at lower salaries.

Stroger supported a program that would allow retired county judges to review non-violent offenders eligible for electronic monitoring and home confinement to relieve the financial burden of housing prisoners in the county jail.

Preckwinkle said she would immediately take a 10-percent salary reduction.

O’Brien’s first order of business would be to eliminate one of the boards of elections.

“There’s two, the city and the county; it’s just duplication that’s not needed,” O’Brien said. “The second thing would be to consolidate all the purchasing aspects of the county. Why does every department need a purchasing department, when it should be just falling under one umbrella in which all the departments can feed from that one department.”

O’Brien added he was glad to hear the alderman’s offer of accepting a 10-percent salary cut if elected county board president, “considering that the alderman has voted four times to increase her own pay.”

“That’s true,” Preckwinkle replied.

The forum, Violence Against Women, held at Loyola University, is one of the first chances the candidates have had to delve deep into issues of rape, domestic violence, discrimination against people who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered and queer (LGBTQ), and sex trafficking in Chicago.

With the primary 11 days away, the candidates in attendance took every opportunity to steal time from one another and bring their platforms into the discussion.

All seven candidates running for Cook County Board president confirmed their attendance, but only four actually were present: Cook County Board President Todd Stroger, Ald. Toni Preckwinkle (4th), Cook County Clerk of the Circuit Court Dorothy Brown and Green Party candidate Tom Tresser.

Tresser came out swinging in his opening statement, addressing corruption in Chicago politics and calling out each candidate on issues he said are “unacceptable.”

“I don’t have as much experience as the other candidates up here,” Tresser said. “But I also don’t have the experience in hiring my cousins, getting cash from my workers for events and parties or making money from businesses I am supposed to regulate.”

Not one candidate responded to his claims, causing Tresser to smile and the audience to whisper amongst themselves.

Tresser was on a roll from the get-go, throwing punches in his opening statement and jabbing at each of his opponents throughout debate.

“Issues of violence against women and sexual assault are a big problem, but worthless spending and behind closed door meetings and corruption prevent the attention these programs need,” he said.

Tresser said these forums are necessary now more than ever.

“We have had years and years of Democratic rule in Cook County,” he said. “And we have nothing to show for it; nothing got done.”

As Tresser was stuck on the issue of corruption, Preckwinkle stayed on point, appearing confident and well-prepared to discuss the issue at hand.

“When I think about violence against women, I begin with rape,” she said. “In 2007, there were 5,600 reported rapes in Illinois, but only 30 percent result in arrests, and less than half that end in convictions. We need to focus our resources on these types of programs and bring these people to justice.”

Stroger offered unfocused, off-topic answers to some questions related to the forum’s theme.

When asked, “In your first 90 days how would you address violence against women, girls and LGBTQ?”

He answered: “What I have done in the three years I have been president; I have tried to reach out to everyone in all parts of the county. I have asked them how can we help. I recently had a meeting with the LGBTQ community, I asked what the county can do, and I hope to solidify what the county can do.”

Moderator Kimbriell Kelly asked Stroger the same question in the next round of questioning to try to get a more “clear and concise answer.”

Stroger again didn’t answer the question; instead he said: “We have 29 departments, and in 16 of those, we have women as deputies. We have helped open 35 businesses that are run by minorities, and 10 percent that are run by women. I have voted for pay equity for women and fought for human rights, but more work needs to be done.”

Tresser also didn’t answer the question. Instead he held up the front page of the Chicago Tribune and pointed to the headline: Madigan Rules.

“Until we get the corruption out of our government we will not be able to give you the true programs that the the citizens of Cook County need,” he said. “If you want to know you elected someone who is unbossed and unbought, you have to look to a new source of government.”

Preckwinkle stayed focused and on point as she answered questions, as if reading off a teleprompter.

“We need to create an environment where people feel safe so they can come forward and report crimes,” she said. “Then we need to make sure we get those offenders prosecuted. We need to focus our resources on violent offenders, sexual offenders, and we have to start to focus on the predators.”

When asked about the pending lawsuits against Cook County Sheriff Tom Dart for keeping pregnant inmates shackled while giving birth, Stroger was caught off guard and had no idea of the charges.

“I had no idea. I am surprised the sheriff would do anything that is against the law,” Stroger said, and when asked if he would look into the situation, he said, “Oh, yeah, I am the president.”

Brown, the clerk of the Cook County Circuit Court, also seemed to be shocked by the news of the pending lawsuits.

“I really cannot believe Sheriff Dart knew this was going on,” she said. When asked what she would do about the situation if she were president, Brown said, “I would send a strong letter to the sheriff letting him know under no circumstances should the practice be occurring. And as far as the pending litigation, I would recommend immediate settlement.”

At the end of the night it was Tresser who challenged the audience and challenged the “old ways of doing business.”

“The best predictor of the future is a person’s history,” he said. “You know they say the definition on insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”

In a bustling office in Austin, Ezzard sits, while snow falls outside on a brisk winter afternoon. Inside this well-kept space, half a dozen men sit at computers placed against one wall searching on-line job postings, while others work on resumes and speak to caseworkers.

The one thing that makes this office different from many others, though, is that its clients, including Ezzard, have one thing in common: they are newly released prisoners. They’ve come to the Westside Health Authority’s Prisoner Re-Entry Center to get a second chance at life.

Ezzard, 47, who was born and raised in Austin, has been a client of the program for two years now, after being released from an Illinois prison after serving 19 months. He was convicted of sexual assault with a deadly weapon, a Class X Felony.

The Westside Health Authority’s Prisoner Re-Entry Center assisted over 10,000 clients last year and has been working in the Austin neighborhood for nearly 10 years. The far West Side community has the highest number of ex-offenders in the state of Illinois, and according to the Westside Health Authority, there are over 300 individuals returning to Austin from prison each month.

“There are so many ex-offenders out there that are just so frustrated with the system, and they’ve lost hope. They don’t even know a second chance is available to them,” Ezzard said.

Ald. Ed Smith (28th) said it is often hard for released prisoners to turn their lives around because they don’t know where to start.

“It’s sad, they can’t find work, no one will take a chance on them because the state says they are criminals for the rest of their lives, and that’s not fair,” Smith said.

Ezzard said the label of being an ex-offender, in many cases, affects the way a person is seen for a lifetime.

“It makes it really hard to sit down and have a conversation with another person because you are wondering: ‘How do they see me?’” he said. “Do they visualize me only as this deviant person?”

Ezzard has been volunteering with Ald. Emma Mitts (37th) for just over a year now, assisting her with community outreach programs for at-risk residents in Austin.

Mitts said she believes everyone should have the opportunity for a second chance.

“In our kind of community we have to meet the needs of these people because they represent us. We can’t run from it,” she said.

“He is a great person that understood that he wanted to turn his life around. He just needs to make sure to surround himself with people who are doing the same,” Mitts said.

Ezzard said a second chance was given to him through the help of the center, where he is now working toward lifelong goals. He is currently enrolled in Harold Washington College and expects to graduate with his bachelor’s degree in 2012. After graduation he plans to attend law school in hopes of working to help other ex-offenders. Prior to incarceration, Ezzard drove semi-trucks cross country for a living.

“I want to roll up my sleeves,” he said. “I want all the pressure, and I want to whine about classes like other students because I want to earn this degree.”

The program, funded by the city of Chicago, is run by a faith-based organization that offers assistance in all areas of re-entry such as: job placement, training, mentorship, GED and ACT classes and counseling.

Ezzard, who received mentoring and job placement assistance over the last two years, will continue to work with the center and said without its help he would most likely have given up.

“Had I not been here, I probably would have gotten frustrated and said screw it, just take me back,” Ezzard said. “Everyone has the right, if you’re going to be a law abiding citizen, to start again—and that’s what I’m doing.”

Check out Chicago Talks’ related story: Program to Help Ex-Offenders Nearly Overwhelmed by Growing Demand for Services

COOK COUNTY BOARD PRESIDENT CANDIDATE FORUM:

FOCUSING ON VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND GIRLS

Thurs. Jan. 21st
6 p.m. (Doors open at 5:30)
Loyola University of Chicago, Water Tower Campus
111 E. Pearson St.
Beane Hall, 13th floor of Lewis Towers
Chicago

RSVP: No RSVP necessary. Free and open to the public.

Why focus on violence against women and girls?

The Cook County Board president oversees the country’s largest public health care system as well as the Sheriff’s Office and the county jail and detention centers. These systems intersect daily with survivors and perpetrators of violence against women and girls.

About the Forum:
After each candidate has spoken, audience members will have an opportunity to ask their own questions on topics such as domestic violence, sexual assault, trafficking, prostitution and other forms of violence. The Candidate Forum is a nonpartisan event.

All candidates have been confirmed: Dorothy Brown (D), John Garrido (R), Roger Keats (R), Terrence O’Brien (D), Toni Preckwinkle (D), Todd Stroger (D) and Tom Tresser (Green).

Accessibility:
Lewis Towers and the room, Beane Hall, are wheelchair accessible. If you have accessibility questions or requests, please contact Sharmili Majmudar at ccforum2010@gmail.com.

Check out Chicago Talks’ recent coverage of the County Board president race:

Chicago Talks Exclusive: Interview with Todd Stroger

Stroger, O’Brien on the Defensive at Forum as Cook County Board President Candidates Debate

O’Brien: Keeping Lake Michigan Clean?

Kelsey Duckett interviews Todd Stroger at the event (Photo: Thom Clark)

Cook County Board President Todd Stroger has spent the majority of his time over the last year clearing up what he considers misinformation about his platform and defending himself from what he said are daily attacks by the media, as well as attacks by his Democratic competition.

Stroger, who was elected as board president on Nov. 7, 2006, hasn’t been the most popular political figure in Chicago since he approved the penny-on-the-dollar sales tax hike in February 2008.

He has defended the tax since the 10-7 vote of approval by the Cook County Board of Commissioners, but has been criticized every step of the way.

“Everyone is talking about how they want to rollback the tax, but no one talked about how they are going to keep the government running,” he said. “No one said, ‘I am going to fill that $2 million hole with something else.’ They are offering no plans on how they are going to fill the void that would be created if they rollback the tax.”

Stroger said the Cook County budget hasn’t been increased during his time in office, and he said he has been forced to make difficult cuts. But he said rolling back the tax is a mistake.

“We have to look at this realistically and not just go for the emotional jolt that you can get from the newspapers when you say, ‘I am going to rollback taxes,’” he said.

It’s these same newspapers that Stroger said are being “biased and unfair” in their coverage of the race. He said he is “constantly being portrayed in a negative light.”

“The media has most definitely had me out in a negative light by saying sales tax, sales tax, sales tax,” he said. “They aren’t running the mayor’s face when he’s raising property taxes. They have treated me in a totally different fashion, and I am upset. They don’t have their facts straight on most issues; I work hard, and they only tell half the story.”

Stroger also said he is upset by the lack of support by the Democratic Party, specifically Mayor Richard M. Daley. He said there is no reason for the mayor not to “sign on in full support.”

“The mayor should say the county is running well,” Stroger said during the Jan. 9 debate, saying that county finances are in good shape. “If you look at the history of politics when an incumbent has done what I have done, which is balance the budget and make sure the services are intact, they have always endorsed the candidate for re-election.”

Defending and defining have become Stroger’s main objectives in this heated political race, and when asked about his plans if re-elected, he smiled, as if he hasn’t had the opportunity to answer this question in some time.

“We want to continue to bring new efficiency to the government,” he said. “I have put together a new committee that is working with an outside vendor to go into every department to find at least two percent of an efficiency rating out of their offices. Two percent doesn’t sound like a lot, but two percent out of $3 million is a lot of money.”

He said the biggest thing he will fight for is health care. He vows to make sure the “health care system stays intact.”

“Unfortunately it is always under attack, and part of it has been that the larger media doesn’t report the system as the safety net it is for people,” he said. “We need these clinics and hospitals to keep their doors open, and we need funding to provide them with the staff and equipment they need to provide the best treatment.”

The third point on his agenda is to continue to work towards reducing the jail population.

Stroger was clear in stating he has a solid agenda that has worked. He said there are no new ideas being put on the table by his competitors, and he is ready to serve the county for the next four years.

“When I look at county government in Chicago, I look at a government that is doing well,” he said. “We made significant changes during my first three years, and I am ready to get to work and continue to make positive changes for a better government in the next four years.”

Read Chicago Talks’ coverage of the Jan. 9 Cook County Board president candidates forum here.

Election websites of Stroger’s Democratic challengers:

Dorothy Brown, clerk of the Cook County Circuit Court

Terrence O’Brien, president of the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District

Toni Preckwinkle, alderman from Chicago’s 4th Ward

After each candidate presented their resume and qualifications to guests in attendance and a live radio audience, the debate quickly shifted to the dominant issue of sales tax. Candidates spent over half of the allotted 90-minute time frame on the issue, with the three challengers attacking incumbent Cook County Board President Todd Stroger’s penny-on-the-dollar sales tax hike.

Stroger has defended the tax hike since it was approved in February 2008. He said the tax is necessary to accommodate a budget that hasn’t been increased since he took office three years ago.

“The sales tax increase is only one cent on the dollar in the county,” Stroger said. “This helps pay for what this county needs: safety and health care.”

South Side Ald. Toni Preckwinkle (4th) said she would repeal the tax within four years, but when asked after the debate how she would continue to pay for the three hospitals and 14 clinics in Cook County, she didn’t provide specifics in her answer.

“The county needs to look at how it can get non-county resources to do the things we are going to do anyway, like provide health care,” she said. “So there is a combination of looking for additional resources and then trying to figure out how you can reasonably cut waste and consolidate services and programs and offices.”

Terrence O’Brien, president of the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago, who spent much of the debate under attack by Preckwinkle and Stroger, said he would repeal the tax immediately if elected.

“If you wait four years to repeal the tax, you will become dependent and will never repeal the tax,” he said. “I have said from day one that I will repeal the tax immediately. The economy is in horrendous shape in Cook County, and this tax is driving businesses and consumers away.”

O’Brien said that retail sales are down 14 percent in Cook County because of the regressive tax, and we “have to roll it back.”

Stroger continued to defend the tax and said, “Retail sales are down across the country, this is not just a problem in Cook County, it is a problem everywhere.”

Dorothy Brown also said she would repeal the tax, but remained quiet for much of the debate as she couldn’t get a word in edgewise and rarely continued an argument after being interrupted.

“I brought $260 million new dollars in revenue without raising taxes,” Brown said. “I am going to raise revenue in the county without raising taxes. I believe in new ideas, not new taxes.”

But Brown, clerk of the Circuit Court of Cook County, like Preckwinkle and O’Brien, failed to list specifically how she would make up for the deficit that the tax rollback would create in the county, Stroger said.

And it was Stroger who spent much of the debate on the defensive, responding to attacks and addressing his concerns about the lack of support by Mayor Richard M. Daley and the negative portrayal of what he called the “bias media.”

“The mayor should say the county is running well,” Stroger said, saying that county finances are in good shape. “If you look at the history of politics when an incumbent has done what I have done, which is balance the budget and make sure the services are intact, they have always endorsed the candidate for re-election.”

Moderator Dick Kay then suggested to Stroger that Daley is not backing him because he pushed through the tax increase. Stroger’s response: Daley has significantly increased property taxes, something the county has not done for more than a decade.

But Stroger remained strong in defending the sales tax, saying it is vital to run Cook County.

“The sales tax is why we still have a health care system that has clinics across the county and three hospitals,” he said. “The one-cent-on-the-dollar tax is necessary to keep the health care system afloat, among many other programs like public safety.”

At one point, Preckwinkle defended Stroger by pointing out that the two of them, along with Brown, were full-time public servants, while she directly criticized O’Brien for being both the president of the water reclamation district and profiting from outside ventures.

“You make $80,000 a year to be chairman of the water district, plus you get a share of the profits and you are representing some of the biggest polluters in the state,” Preckwinkle said to O’Brien.

Providing programs to get non-violent criminals out of the jail systems and out of the taxpayers’ pockets was another issue that sparked tension between the candidates.

Preckwinkle said it is these types of programs that will reduce spending in the county and also rehabilitate and “give non-violent criminals an alternative to detention.”

“We need to take a look at non-violent offenders; these shouldn’t be programs for violent offenders. They should remain in jail, away from us,” she said. “We need to focus resources in dealing with them. Then we need to focus on putting non-violent offenders in a situation where they can turn their lives around.”

Brown and O’Brien both said they plan to look into diversion programs for non-violent offenders, as opposed to locking them up, but neither provided specific details as to what steps would be taken if elected.

Stroger said these “new ideas” and “tactics” for bettering Cook County have already been addressed and are in motion under his watchful eye as president.

“If you look at it, every alternative they are offering is something we have already done or have looked into,” he said. “All of the ideas I have heard here are ideas we have already put in place. We have made every change we could in three years, and I am ready to continue to make changes in the next four years.”

The event was sponsored by www.ChicagoTalks.org, along with WCPT-AM/FM, Chicago’s Progressive Talk Radio, Community Media Workshop, Columbia College Chicago Department of Journalism and Northwestern University Democrats.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Stroger A No-Show At Candidates Forum, Calls Shenanigans On Opponents (chicagoist.com)
• Stroger Was For Override Reform Before He Was Against It (huffingtonpost.com)

Eapen is the former ward superintendent for the Chicago Streets and Sanitation Department; Ramos was a paid campaign worker for Stone in 2007. Stone has not been charged with any wrongdoing, but is said to be on the defense’s witness list. The men have opted for a bench trial, leaving their fate up to a judge.

Arguments for a directed verdict were to have taken place Jan. 6 before Cook County Judge Marcus Salone, but room 706 in the criminal courts building at 26^th and California was overbooked with a murder trial on Wednesday afternoon.

Salone interrupted his morning court call where the murder victim’s family had camped out in the first rows of the courtroom waiting for the trial of their loved one’s alleged killer to begin, to huddle with the defendants’ attorneys and Cook County assistant state’s attorneys.

Afterward, Eapen approached reporters and said, “Next month,” indicating that the trial had again been delayed.

Approaching the bench with their hands held behind their backs like any other defendant in the morning court call, Salone apologized to Eapen and Ramos, and anyone else who shelled out $13 for parking in the private lot across the street from the criminal courts building next to the Popeye’s Chicken restaurant.

“Let me apologize to all in this matter, but I overbooked my calendar for the day,” Salone said.

Eapen’s attorney, Tom Breen, could be overheard asking the judge for the opportunity to “formally supplement” his motion for a directed verdict based on prosecutors’ failure to provide evidence on charges that Eapen tampered with absentee ballots.

Ramos’s attorney, Rohit Sahgal, was not present in the courtroom.

Cook County prosecutors wrapped up their case on Dec. 8, when investigator Alexis Amezaga from the Chicago Inspector General’s office testified that challenger Salman Aftab, who finished last in a four-way race for 50^th Ward alderman in 2007, tipped off her office of alleged vote fraud occurring in West Ridge.

The trial has been beset by delays due mostly Salone’s busy court call schedule and the hundreds of cases that slog through the Cook County Criminal Courts on a daily basis.

One prosecutor told reporters after the trial had been rescheduled again, “I just want to get this over with.”

Said Eapen, who had to take Wednesday off from work where he was reassigned last fall as an office assistant to Chicago Streets and Sanitation Commissioner Thomas Byrne, “Another day, another dollar.”

The trial has been continued to Feb. 22.

See related stories on this case from Lake Effect News:

Aftab Triggered 50th Ward Vote Fraud Investigation

Cousin Says Ramos Filled Out Her Absentee Ballot

Witnesses Testify They Felt “Pressured” By Stone Campaign Workers

Stone’s Campaign Committee Paying for Ramos’s Attorney Fees

Witnesses Offer Chilling Testimony of Voting “Chicago Style”

Stone and Crown on Witness List In 50th Ward Vote Fraud Trial

“It’s my job to clean up our water and keep pollution out of Lake Michigan,” says MWRD president Terrence O’Brien in the first TV ad of his campaign for County Board president (watch it on youtube). “It’s time to clean up Cook County.”

In fact, as Newstips reported last April, under O’Brien the MWRD (Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago) has resisted calls to disinfect wastewater for nearly a decade. In a letter to the Tribune last February, O’Brien claimed it would cost $2 billion; Newstips reported the US EPA’s estimate that it would cost at most $650 million, and perhaps as little as $250 million, over 20 years.

“Environmental groups believe MWRD is exaggerating the cost of disinfection as part of a strategy of delaying action,” we wrote, citing John Quail of Friends of the Chicago River.

Ann Alexander of the Natural Resources Defense Council pointed out that MWRD is spending millions of dollars on lawyers and experts in its effort to prevent the Illinois Pollution Control Board from implementing a recommendation by the Illinois EPA (endorsed by the city) to require MWRD to disinfect.

As far as “keeping pollution out of Lake Michigan,” here’s what we reported in August of 2003:

“During ‘extreme storm events,’ locks are opened and river system water is released into Lake Michigan. ‘There is undoubtedly bacteria from the waterways system getting into the lake,’ said [Laurel] O’Sullivan [of the Lake Michigan Federation].

“‘The overall quality of the water sent out to the lake would be much higher if they disinfected.’”

UPDATE: Last year we reported a ruling was expected by the end of the year. Alexander now says she has no idea when a ruling will occur, noting this “has set the record for the length of a rulemaking proceeding.”

The delay results from MWRD’s effort “to contest the obvious,” she said.

“They’ve presented multiple purported experts before the pollution control board to defend the proposition that pathogens in the water aren’t really bad for you.” That’s forced NRDC to spend time and resources “to prove that in fact they are.”

It’s a remarkable story that to date has gone virtually untold. Will O’Brien’s candidacy give it any currency?

Illinois Fair Map has proposed a constitutional amendment that would create an independent commission that redraws state legislative maps. Illinois law mandates that legislative district boundaries be redrawn every 10 years, but that power currently is in the hands of officials seeking re-election. That legislators re-draw their own boundaries is unfair, according to the reform coalition.

“Partisan gerrymandering is not only legal, it is embedded in the Illinois Constitution,” according to a statement on the coalition’s website, www.ilfairmap.com. Legislators draw district lines behind closed doors to protect incumbents and prevent true competition in elections, according Illinois Fair Map, which cited statistics that show 98 percent of incumbents have been re-elected in Illinois since 2001.

“Mapmakers study voting patterns based on such variables as age, ethnicity, income, geography and education. Using sophisticated computer programs, they can draw maps that will virtually guarantee candidates of one political party will consistently be chosen over candidates from an opposing party,” states Illinois Fair Map.

“Obviously, the folks who are drawing the maps are making sure they win. Our current system is flawed and political. It’s a winner-take-all system that has benefitted insider Democrats and Republicans over the past decade. It is the Illinois voters who have lost out,” said Jan Czarnik, executive director of the League of Women Voters. Czarnik’s organization is the coalition member that started the initiative.

Other members of Illinois Fair Map are the Better Government Association, the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform, Illinois Reform Commission member Sheila Simon, and former members Patrick Collins and Brad McMillan. McMillan posted a statement on the Illinois Fair Map website.

“We were hopeful that the legislature was going to address redistricting reform in 2009, but with the year winding down now, it appears that we need to take it directly to the Illinois voters,” said McMillan in the Dec. 3 posting. “We want to put the power in the hands of the people – not the politicians.”

According to McMillan, the amendment would allow for an independent commission to draw the state’s legislative district boundaries after the 2010 census in an open and transparent process. The state’s practice of drawing from a hat to determine which party controls the redistricting process would be eliminated, instead calling upon the Supreme Court as the fail-safe. The amendment does not address congressional districts due to constitutional limits of citizens initiatives.

Andy Shaw, executive director of the Better Government Association, said his organization joined because it is committed to cleaning up Illinois government through civic engagement. “For too long, government has been run by people behind closed doors. This is a rare opportunity to actually let citizens have a voice – and decide on their representatives.”

The Illinois Fair Map proposal also gives voters a chance to participate by starting their own drive and collecting signatures. A copy of the petition and the amendment is available at the website. Supporters are urged to print copies, collect signatures, have the petitions notarized and submit them to Illinois Fair Map in care of the League of Women Voters by April 1.

“We’ve been getting a lot of positive feedback from people in the community,” said Mary Schaafsma, the Issues and Advocacy Coordinator for the League of Women Voters. “It’s a citizens’ initiative.”

Shaw is cautious yet optimistic that positive change may come either from passage of the amendment or from legislators themselves.

“It is an uphill battle every way – legally, practically, logistically – but there’s a reform movement in Illinois right now that’s unprecedented, and we have to take advantage of it. I think the chances are better than 50-50,” said Shaw.

“This is such a simple issue. Should we be able to choose our elected representatives, or should they choose us?” Shaw explained. “The answer, in Democracy 101, is pretty obvious to everyone but the [state] reps themselves, which is why an amendment may be necessary. If, however, state lawmakers get religion over the winter, they can enact this without the torturous referendum process. Let’s see what happens.”

“We’ve done more just praying in the last few weeks, instead of trying to counsel,” said Gura, an activist with the Chicago-based Pro-Life Action League. “It is pretty difficult.”

The new law places an eight-foot “safe zone” around people within 50 feet of a clinic entrance. Anti-abortion protesters who “knowingly approach” a person to distribute pamphlets, preach or educate without his or her consent now face a $500 fine.

Police spokesmen for District 16 and 18 – which police the Albany Medical-Surgical Center, located at 5086 N. Elston Ave., and Planned Parenthood, 1200 N. LaSalle Drive – could not immediately confirm whether any fines had been issued. Both said they were unaware of any confusion over the law.

The Chicago City Council passed the “bubble ordinance” in October after a 40-day, nationwide anti-abortion protest sparked concerns over safety outside the Near North facility.

During the “40 Days for Life” campaign, protests became “larger and more vicious,” Planned Parenthood spokeswoman Beth Kanter told a city council committee in October, and protesters used deceptive tactics, like wearing white lab coats, to confuse women entering the clinic.

Since the “bubble ordinance” took effect on Nov. 18, the law’s wording – particularly its use of the word “approach” – has been a source of confusion, said John Jansen, a spokesman for the Pro-Life Action League.

Protesters outside the Planned Parenthood facility have had run-ins with police over the definition of the word, Jansen said; one was videotaped and is posted on YouTube. And police officers outside the Albany clinic have mistakenly told protesters the law prohibits them from standing anywhere within 50 feet of the clinic door, he said.

Peter Breen, executive director of the Thomas More Society, a pro-life law firm in Chicago, has said he plans to file a lawsuit against the city. Breen did not respond for comment by press time.

Ald. Tom Tunney (44th) said the ordinance was modeled after a Colorado law. The legality of that law was challenged, but was inevitably upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court.

“We’re here to bring awareness to the massive cuts and layoffs,” said Keith Hill, a CTA bus driver for 13 years and union representative. “They’re laying people off at the coldest time of the year. The mayor has no compassion; the governor has no compassion.”

On Monday, Dec. 14 layoff notices for 1,067 union and 30 non-union workers were to be sent, telling workers they’ll be out of a job Feb. 7.

“We’re not happy about the fact that we have to cut service,” said CTA Board Chairman Terry Peterson.

The CTA is facing a $300 million deficit, and Peterson said the cuts are necessary to keep it functioning.

Carlos Acevedo, a union representative and CTA mechanic for 15 years, said the cuts would most hurt underserved communities.

“They’re eliminating a lot of the express routes, and of course, it’s affecting the low-income, minority areas mostly; six express routes cut on the South Side and one on the North Side,” Acevedo said.

Acevedo said these services are vital, and funds are available.

“They’re getting $700 million Jan. 1,” said Acevedo. “They’re sitting on $900 million. They need $320 million to avert all of this, so there are solutions.”

The union has made sacrifices, but the CTA won’t compromise, said Avecedo.

“They’re looking for concessions from the unions,” said Acevedo. “The level of service you have now is off the backs of the workers; the workers almost lost their pension due to concessions they gave.”

But CTA spokeswoman Noelle Gaffney said the unions haven’t made concessions.

“We’ve been meeting with the unions for the last two months,” said Gaffney. “We would be happy not to do the cuts if unions would agree to concessions that would help us.”

Gaffney points to the sacrifices non-union workers have made during the CTA budget crisis.

“Our non-union employees are taking up to 18 unpaid days, including unpaid holidays; they haven’t gotten raises in four years,” said Gaffney. “The unions got raises this year, and they’re getting raises next year. If the unions would agree to take some steps, we would have the necessary monies.”

Roger Smittle, spokesman for the Little Village Environmental Justice Organization, said the cuts are not only affecting low-income communities but violating the Americans with Disabilities Act. He said the disabled and seniors wouldn’t have regular daily bus service on the South Side.

Gary Arnold, a spokesman for the disabled group Access Living, said it targeted certain stations that weren’t accessible to help them get in compliance.

“Two years ago, the CTA bus line became officially 100 percent lift-equipped,” said Arnold. “We would like to see more CTA train stations more accessible but see how this won’t be given attention if there are services cuts.”

Michael Pitula, organizer for the Little Village Environmental Justice Organization, said these cuts would negatively impact Latino and African-American communities. His organization has tried to restore the bus route on 31st Street, which has been out of service for the past 13 years.

“Seven out of the 9 express routes CTA is cutting serve the South Side–predominately African-Americans and Latinos,” said Pitula. “The CTA is opening up a can of rooms here in terms of civil rights.”

Jeannetta Bradshaw, spokeswoman for Seniors Taking Action Together, said seniors, especially those with health issues, would be hurt by these cuts.

“Service cuts to us are devastating,” said Bradshaw. “I think in the areas where seniors take public transportation to go the doctor–these areas should be looked at first.”

If additional funding comes through, the CTA has a plan to rescind the layoff efforts and notify the public that service will be restored, said Gaffney.

“Mass transit is the life and blood of the city,” said Acevedo.

From the Skyway to the controversial parking meter lease, the city has sold assests while looking for other possible revenue streams — even the city’s public water system. Fioretti worries these may be signs of a larger issue within the city.

“What rabbit will they pull out of the hat next?” he wondered. “Is there even anything left in the hat?”

Earlier this month, Fioretti joined Ald. Thomas Tunney (44th) and Ald. Thomas Allen (38th) and voted against the 2010 budget in a 38-12 vote — one of the largest “no” votes of the Daley administration.

Mayor Daley challenged the aldermen to come up with alternatives to fill the $525 million budget gap. However, Fioretti said the offer was largely political.

“I don’t think [the Mayor] was listening. We still had a month to finalize the budget; he could have looked at our ideas,” Fioretti said.

Those ideas included borrowing less, suspending the city’s $35 million property tax assistance fund “if only for a year,” cutting waste and inefficiency, plus dipping into the city’s Tax Increment Financing (TIF) fund that is used for business development.

Fioretti also voted against the budget his first year in office in 2007, saying his constituents couldn’t afford the proposed tax hikes.

Now with the 2010 budget, although it has no new taxes or fines, he said he voted “no” because the budget “relies too heavily on borrowing with no detailed plan on how to pay any of it back.”

Fioretti said he was concerned because the city had already exhausted most of the $1 billion parking meter lease in the first year of the 75-year deal.

“This budget was a stopgap measure,” Fioretti explained. “I was surprised when I saw unemployment went down; they must have missed some numbers because we have people coming in here looking for jobs all the time.”

“Our ward represents the City of Chicago, we’re so diverse in everything we do,” he said of the roughly 80,000 residents that live in the bustling South Loop corridor — businessmen, students and families.

“We see the problems, and we try and stay ahead. If you can stay ahead and anticipate, you can be ahead of the game.”

“We don’t know what those reforms could be. It could be anything from streamlining the process, creating a uniform process, or it could be complete abolishment. But we’re not going to make that judgment prior to the hearing,” Cullerton spokeswoman Rikeesha Phelon said.

The new Senate president, who’s taking his first public stand on the controversial scholarship program, is reviewing it now because other Senate Democrats want to make changes, Phelon said.

Rep. Bill Black, one of 14 lawmakers who doesn’t participate in the program, called the Senate leader’s pledge to do something “hopeful.”

As one of the biggest opponents of the program, the Danville Republican plans to attempt once more to kill it when the legislature convenes in early 2010. This is the fourth time Black has tried to pass legislation to abolish the scholarships, a battle that dates back to 1995.

Getting rid of the century-old program won’t be easy, though critics of the program say the conviction of a former governor, Republican George Ryan, and the indictment of another, Democrat Rod Blagojevich, could give Black’s bill a boost.

“This might have been a perk of office that for the most part could be quietly doled out but is now increasingly under a spotlight, and so I think whether it’s Black’s bill or another bill, I think probably the odds of doing away with this practice are better now than they ever have been,” said Cindi Canary, executive director of the watchdog group Illinois Campaign for Political Reform.

Kent Redfield, professor emeritus of political science at the University of Illinois at Springfield, said lawmakers may decide the program isn’t worth the trouble.

“There is enough bad practice going on that it hurts the reputation of the members, lessens the legitimacy of the legislature in terms of things that they do, so members are advocating it saying that it’s just not worth it,” said Redfield.

Legislators have acknowledged misuse of the scholarships since the early 1970’s, according to transcripts of floor debate in 1995 of House Bill 1498, which would have eliminated the scholarships.

Rep. Dave Winters (R-Rockford) supported the bill, saying on the House floor when the legislation was debated that the scholarships do more harm than good to the General Assembly’s reputation.

“We simply have to maintain and enhance the reputation of the General Assembly by ridding us of the potential of fraud that we have with these particular perks,” said Winters, who participates in the program.

Rep. Kevin McCarthy (D-Orland Park), another opponent, doesn’t believe it should be his job to award scholarships, so he never has.

“I have voted six times, much to my colleagues’ disappointment, to abolish it. I wasn’t voted to be Santa Claus. I was voted to be a legislator,” said McCarthy, who was first elected in 1997.

Even with House Speaker Michael Madigan’s (D-Chicago) backing, a 1999 bill to end the program failed. Madigan spokesman Steve Brown said individual lawmakers have different perspectives on the issue and there just weren’t enough votes at the time to do away with the scholarships.

“There are people who believe as a legislator they have as much good judgment about scholarships as some bureaucrat at a university or bureaucrat at the student assistance commission, so there’s a diverse point of view,” Brown said.

The legislature voted again in 2003 and 2004 on legislation that sought to abolish the program, but the measures – sponsored by Rep. Naomi Jakobsson – failed both times.

Besides Black’s latest bill, Rep. Jack Franks (D-Woodstock) is pushing a similar piece of legislation to abolish the program. Franks said he hopes the two bills will put more pressure on fellow lawmakers to move on the issue and get something passed.

And in the Senate, Minority Leader Christine Radogno (R-Lemont) and Sen. Bill Brady (R-Bloomington) have each introduced legislation of their own to abolish the program, Senate Bill 2175 and Senate Bill 2472.

Radogno spokeswoman Patty Schuh said lawmakers are bound by very few criteria when deciding how to dole out the scholarships, and recent attention to the program may be worrying students who don’t want their names associated with controversy.

“A number of legislators will start to see that the perceived abuse is out there, that it makes the scholarships less attractive to students,” Schuh said.

Although Radogno, Brady and Franks want to stop the scholarships, they still give them out to constituents in their three districts, as do 160 other lawmakers, a team of Columbia College Chicago journalists discovered in a three-month investigation done in collaboration with Illinois Statehouse News.

The scholarships add up. In 2007-2008, the most recent data available, legislators awarded 1,509 scholarships worth $12.5 million. That’s money that could be far better spent, said Black.

He used to hand out thousands of dollars in free tuition to students in his downstate district until he realized in the mid-1990s that other students at the state’s public universities were paying for the scholarships.

“It finally dawned on me one day in going to meetings and going to seminars and being one who was concerned about tuition increases, it dawned on me that I was part of the problem,” Black said.

He decided to stop awarding scholarships in his district after the 1995 floor debate. There was also the uncomfortable moment when a constituent offered to donate money to his re-election campaign if his child received one of Black’s scholarships.

Black, McCarthy and other opponents say they’ve come to the conclusion that the legislative scholarships benefit very few students at the cost of many.

“You’re sending people off for a free – whatever that means – ride and others have to make up the difference. It’s really a classic cost-shift,” Black said.

If his bill dies in the House as it has in previous years, Black won’t have another chance since he’s planning to retire at the end of 2010. But he reassures himself that future members of the General Assembly, if not the current group, will realize they can’t keep asking universities to come up with the money for these scholarships and put an end to them.

“I’ll let somebody else pick up that torch.”

Laura Lane and Nicole Leonhardt contributed to this story.

Contact: emily.capdevielle@gmail.com

View more than 6,000 scholarships awarded by current lawmakers.

Other stories from Day Three:

For Richer or Poorer? Legislative Scholarships Should Target the Needy

Experts Suggest Changes to Legislative Scholarships

Stories from Day Two:

Some Lawmakers Turn a Right into a Requirement

Nobody’s Watching: Illinois Lawmakers Alone Decide How to Give Millions

No Method to the Madness: State Scholarships Award Some Students More than Others

Students’ Free Ride Proves Costly to Their Classmates

Stories from Day One:

One Scholarship, 163 Ways to Dole It Out

Evasive State Legislators Dodge Questions About Scholarships

Clout or Coincidence? Some Legislators Keep General Assembly Scholarships All in the Family

Scholarships for Some Grad Students a Big Burden for State and Schools

Zakiya Smith, policy adviser in the office of the under secretary at the U.S. Department of Education, says giving grant money to people who would have otherwise gone to college is not cost-effective.

David Longanecker, the president of the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education in Boulder, Colo., says if he were in charge, he would take the $12.5 million spent in 2007-2008 on legislative scholarships and put it toward the Illinois Monetary Award program. It would be better if Illinois lawmakers gave the needy a chance to go to college rather than reward wealthy kids for doing well, Longanecker said.

He said nationwide, the best programs for helping low-income students include the Indiana 21st Century Scholars Program, the Oklahoma Promise Program and the Oregon Shared Responsibility Program because each provides incentives for students to attend college and complete their degree.

There are no graduation incentives in the Illinois’ General Assembly Scholarship program. And because neither the legislature nor state education officials track the recipients, it’s unknown if the program actually increases the number of college graduates.

Last year, about 145,000 students received an Illinois Monetary Award, or MAP grant, through the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. The average MAP grant – which can be used for tuition and fees, but not for housing, food or transportation – totaled $2,637.

That same year, the Illinois General Assembly awarded 1,509 legislative scholarships each worth an average of $8,300. But unlike the MAP grants, which require students to complete a detailed financial aid application, few legislators require applicants to list their family income or submit other related information.

One who does — Rep. Jack McGuire (D-Joliet) — said helping needy students is a priority for him.

“What I try to do is look at the family income and how many kids they have in school . . . and see what kind of financial situation people are in,” McGuire said. “I think that’s the best way to do it, at least that’s the way I do it.”

McGuire is one of 163 lawmakers who participate in the scholarship program out of the 177-member General Assembly, a team of Columbia College Chicago journalists found. Each legislator decides which criteria, like grades or financial need, to use when selecting the winners, and even whether to use an application form at all, with some merely requiring a letter from the applicant.

It’s not good public policy to have so many different ways to select scholarship recipients for the same program, experts say. And they question why some legislators prohibit winners from applying for other financial aid, like the federal Pell Grant or the Illinois MAP grant. That extra money could help needy students pay for room, board and other indirect expenses not covered by the legislative scholarship.

“If you received a Pell Grant or any other tuition waivers, you’re ineligible,” said Rep. Frank J. Mautino (D-Spring Valley).

An aide in Sen. Mike Jacobs (D-East Moline) office said the MAP grant does the same thing as the legislative scholarship, so students have to choose between the two. Jacobs’ office asks students if they received a MAP grant before awarding them a legislative scholarship.

Even some of the 60-plus scholarship winners the Columbia team interviewed during a three-month investigation done in collaboration with Illinois Statehouse News say it would make sense for all lawmakers to consider a student’s financial need when awarding the free tuition.

“A lot of people who win scholarships are not as high need as other students,” said Daniel Roseland, a sophomore at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign who received a scholarship in 2008 from Sen. Gary Dahl (R- Peru). “I definitely think people who need the financial aid more should be getting that.”

Besides the legislative scholarship, Roseland also received a math scholarship and a need-based scholarship through his high school. Dahl, like some other lawmakers, allows legislative winners to apply for other financial aid. Still, Roseland ended up having to pay a couple thousand dollars out of pocket last year.

“I thought about reapplying, and we were told a lot of times schools don’t give you as much money because you’re on those scholarships,” Roseland said.

This year, Roseland, whose mom works for the Grundy County state’s attorney and whose dad is deceased, is paying for his education through financial aid, including a Pell and MAP grant. His out-of-pocket costs? Just $300 or so.

Laura Lane contributed to this story.

Contact: Stacey.Alletto@loop.colum.edu

View more than 6,000 scholarships awarded by current lawmakers.

Other stories from Day Three:

State Legislative Scholarships Could Be Eliminated

Experts Suggest Changes to Legislative Scholarships

Stories from Day Two:

Some Lawmakers Turn a Right into a Requirement

Nobody’s Watching: Illinois Lawmakers Alone Decide How to Give Millions

No Method to the Madness: State Scholarships Award Some Students More than Others

Students’ Free Ride Proves Costly to Their Classmates

Stories from Day One:

One Scholarship, 163 Ways to Dole It Out

Evasive State Legislators Dodge Questions About Scholarships

Clout or Coincidence? Some Legislators Keep General Assembly Scholarships All in the Family

Scholarships for Some Grad Students a Big Burden for State and Schools

They recommend a number of changes, from developing a consistent set of standards in choosing the winners to lawmakers being more upfront in financing the program.

“Given the state’s recent history, both at the governor’s office and U of I, serious consideration should be given to the elimination or radical restructuring of the program,” says Andrew Gillen, research director at the Center for College Affordability and Productivity in Washington, D.C.

Of the 163 lawmakers who participate, each uses a unique set of criteria to select the 1,500-some winners each year. Many legislators say they choose winners based on academic achievement, community service and financial need, but in some cases, less conventional criteria is used, like requiring applicants or their parents be registered to vote.

Whichever criteria they use, a majority of lawmakers have created independent committees to choose the winners – and to distance themselves from the controversial program, which exists in one form or another in a handful of states.

Kent Redfield, professor emeritus of political science at the University of Illinois at Springfield, believes adopting best practices that each legislator would adhere to during the selection process could go a long way to making it a more objective program.

“You want some kind of set of rules that will establish transparency, eliminate conflict of interest and establish current, clear criteria for which this committee will make a decision,” he says.

Mark Kantrowitz, publisher of FinAid.org, suggests the criteria be solely need-based. He believes the primary objective of a public scholarship should be to “enable students who wouldn’t otherwise be able to afford a college education.”

Zakiya Smith, policy adviser in the office of the undersecretary at the U.S. Department of Education, says the Obama administration’s focus is on sending students to college who can’t afford it.

“We don’t think it’s a good use from a public policy perspective to give grant money to people who were going to go to college regardless of the money,” she says.

There is no one agency or office that regulates the program, which experts say would be one way to ferret out abuse. The Illinois State Board of Education merely processes the paperwork of the scholarship winners and is not required to do any vetting of the applicants, said agency spokeswoman Mary Fergus.

Another challenge is making sure enough people know about the program and apply.

A team of Columbia College Chicago journalists, in collaboration with Illinois Statehouse News, contacted all 177 legislative offices and found that many do little or no publicizing of the scholarships, which in 2007-2008 were worth an average of $8,300. A number of legislative offices have no information at all about the scholarship on their web sites. Some lawmakers said they rely on high school guidance counselors to get the word out, while others said because the program has been around for so long, everyone knows to apply.

But Kantrowitz doesn’t believe the program has been publicized properly and notes there is no centralized place for students to apply – they have to contact their representative or senator. He suggests promoting the program on large national scholarship databases.

And he thinks the Illinois Student Assistance Commission is the “logical organization to actually run something like this.”

That’s because the state agency already serves as the main clearinghouse for college students looking for ways to pay for college. It promotes the legislative scholarship program on its web site but not in its brochures.

Paul Palian, director of communications, says it’s not his agency’s program to advertise, and the only financial aid promoted outside of its web site is what the Illinois Student Assistance Commission administers itself.

Cindi Canary, executive director of the watchdog group Illinois Campaign for Political Reform, wants the program abolished but says if it must continue, more transparency is needed because the legislative scholarships are “an incredibly valuable perk.”

“It’s not based on need or merit but on the whims of the legislator (who) gives it out,” Canary says. “There is a fundamental lack of equity at a level that I think most people understand.”

Canary suggests requiring all legislators publicize the program and establish an independent screening committee. And she wants each lawmaker to announce the names of the winners and losers, so people can determine for themselves if legislators are showing favoritism to campaign donors, political allies or other supporters.

Another main complaint: The program’s cost – roughly $12.5 million in 2007-2008, the most recent data available – falls to the universities and ultimately other students at each of the public institutions.

Rep. Bill Black (R-Danville), a long-time opponent who describes the program as “ripe for trouble,” believes the General Assembly should allocate money for the program rather than pushing the costs onto the universities.

He’s not the only one.

“Wishful thinking doesn’t make money grow on trees,” says FinAid.org’s Kantrowitz. “If you’re going to create a scholarship program, you should fund it.”

But Andy Shaw, executive director of the local watchdog group Better Government Association, doesn’t think enough can be done to improve the program.

“The solution is to pass better laws,” he says. “Unfortunately, you can’t pass better laws until you have a better legislature.”

Stacey Alletto, Laura Lane and Nicole Leonhardt contributed to this story.

Contact: shawna.lent@loop.colum.edu

View more than 6,000 scholarships awarded by current lawmakers.

Other stories from Day Three:

State Legislative Scholarships Could Be Eliminated

For Richer or Poorer? Legislative Scholarships Should Target the Needy

Stories from Day Two:

Some Lawmakers Turn a Right into a Requirement

Nobody’s Watching: Illinois Lawmakers Alone Decide How to Give Millions

No Method to the Madness: State Scholarships Award Some Students More than Others

Students’ Free Ride Proves Costly to Their Classmates

Stories from Day One:

One Scholarship, 163 Ways to Dole It Out

Evasive State Legislators Dodge Questions About Scholarships

Clout or Coincidence? Some Legislators Keep General Assembly Scholarships All in the Family

Scholarships for Some Grad Students a Big Burden for State and Schools

John Whitehead, president of the Virginia-based The Rutherford Institute, said lawmakers who require applicants vying for Illinois General Assembly scholarships to register are discriminating against students whose religious beliefs prevent them from participating in elections or those who simply choose not to vote.

“You have a right not to vote in America,” said Whitehead, a constitutional lawyer. “[People shouldn’t] be denied a public benefit like a scholarship because they exercise their right. Not only is it morally wrong, it’s constitutionally wrong.”

Whitehead said that if unsuccessful applicants are being denied a legislative scholarship – worth an average of $8,300 in 2007-2008 – because they’re not registered to vote, The Rutherford Institute would consider filing a lawsuit to stop the practice.

“This is totally discriminatory, and it should be thrown out the door because it’s just plain wrong,” said Whitehead.

A team of Columbia College Chicago journalists in collaboration with Illinois Statehouse News identified five legislators who require applicants to submit proof of voter registration for either themselves or their legal guardians: Rep. Dan Brady (R-Bloomington), Rep. Elizabeth Coulson (R-Glenview), Rep. Kenneth Dunkin (D-Chicago), Rep. Renée Kosel (R-Mokena) and Rep. Karen May (D-Highwood).

In all, 163 of the 177 members of the Illinois General Assembly participate in the century-old scholarship program. It’s up to each lawmaker to decide what applicants need to do to be considered for the tuition waivers that in 2007-2008 – the most recent data available – totaled $12.5 million statewide. State law requires only that scholarship winners live in the district of the lawmaker who selected them.

Rep. Kosel defended the requirement, saying she does not tell scholarship applicants how to vote or look at their voting records.

“I think it’s inappropriate not to be registered to vote in this country, and I cannot understand why anyone would question the appropriateness,” said Kosel. “It’s horrid.”

Rep. Kosel requires applicants to include a copy of their voter registration card to prove they live in her district. The introductory letter sent to students and schools states in bold font, “The application must also be accompanied by a copy of the applicant’s voter registration card (or in the event the student is not old enough to be a registered voter, a copy of his/her parent/guardian’s voter card).”

Rep. Coulson also requires that applicants register to vote to show residency. The introductory letter states: “Proof of Residency – a copy of your Illinois Driver’s License AND a copy of your Voter’s Registration if 18 or older.”

Coulson said attorneys looked over the requirement and said it was OK.

“It’s a way to verify you live in the district,” said Coulson.

But there are other ways to prove residency, like asking for a copy of a driver’s license or state identification card.

Ed Yohnka, director of communications for the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois, said it’s understandable that legislators want to ensure applicants live in the right district, but other pieces of identification could be used.

“It is a curious requirement,” said Yohnka, noting that property owners seeking tax breaks don’t have to prove they’re registered to vote.

“I’ve never heard of such a thing,” he said. “And as much as any of us would like for more people to engage in and participate in the legislative process, there simply isn’t a reason or any purpose in making that compulsory, or making the receipt of aid conditional on a compulsory participation in the electoral process.”

Rep. Brady’s application asks if the student is a registered voter and if he or she has ever voted. It also states, “If you have not reached your 18th birthday, you will be expected to register to vote within one month of your 18th birthday. (Can be done by mail; print form from Internet.) Do you pledge to comply with this requirement?”

Rep. May said she asks all applicants old enough to vote to be registered.

“Not that we’re telling you to pick a party, just that you register,” said May.

But that may be exactly what students think is expected of them when they see this requirement, said Cindi Canary, executive director of the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform.

“On the one hand, I can see them making this argument that it’s civic participation and it’s good and all that, and I do think people should vote. But I think it’s a quiet form of pressure,” said Canary. “It’s kind of like the old ward committeeman, ‘You should be registered to vote, and that means you should be voting for me.’”

Canary said she has a “degree of discomfort” with the requirement because it’s easy to determine whether someone voted in a Democratic or Republican primary.

“We have a secret ballot, but it’s only so secret,” said Canary.

One student who has received the scholarship for four years wondered if lawmakers check the voting records of applicants when making their selections. So Erika Strebel, a journalism major at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, decided to vote for the person running against her state representative, Randy Ramey (R-West Chicago). Because of the state of Illinois politics, Strebel said she could see legislators favoring those who voted for them.

“You know, this is Illinois, so I thought if I voted for the other guy, would I get the scholarship this year?” said Strebel. “I voted for the other guy.”

And Rep. Ramey chose her once again to receive a free year of tuition.

Kent Redfield, professor emeritus of political science at the University of Illinois at Springfield, said the voter registration requirement is just the sort of thing that could make students suspicious of legislators and the selection process.

“[Legislators are] just leaving [themselves] open to people connecting the dots [as to] whether it’s justified or not,” said Redfield. “I view it as being one more reason why there should be a clear set of criteria set down by law or propagated by the State Board of Education.” That way, legislators “don’t get into these kinds of situations.”

Some legal experts and good-government advocates don’t have a problem with the practice, saying it ensures students get involved in the electoral process.

Richard Briffault, the Joseph P. Chamberlain professor of legislation at Columbia University Law School, said it’s legal to restrict a scholarship to citizens, as this one does.

“One can use it as a measure of citizen engagement or something, and use it as an incentive and a reward for being registered to vote. Being registered to vote is a proxy for being a politically engaged citizen. There’s nothing offensive about that,” said Briffault, though he called the requirement odd.

Andy Shaw, executive director of the Better Government Association, said making students register to vote is a good policy because it guarantees there is a level of civic engagement.

Shaw said it’s a “very fair trade” for scholarship recipients to register to vote in exchange for getting free tuition.

“I think that if you want to be the beneficiary of a legislative perk, a perk provided by an elected lawmaker, that lawmaker has a right to say that you need to be a participant in the democratic process,” he said. “And the basic participation tool is the voting booth.”

Emily Capdevielle contributed to this story.

Contact: lane.lauraj@gmail.com

View more than 6,000 scholarships awarded by current lawmakers.

Other stories from Day Two:

Nobody’s Watching: Illinois Lawmakers Alone Decide How to Give Millions

No Method to the Madness: State Scholarships Award Some Students More than Others

Students’ Free Ride Proves Costly to Their Classmates

Stories from Day One:

One Scholarship, 163 Ways to Dole It Out
Evasive State Legislators Dodge Questions About Scholarships
Clout or Coincidence? Some Legislators Keep General Assembly Scholarships All in the Family
Scholarships for Some Grad Students a Big Burden for State and Schools

Stories from Day Three:

State Legislative Scholarships Could Be Eliminated

For Richer or Poorer? Legislative Scholarships Should Target the Needy

Experts Suggest Changes to Legislative Scholarships

Gutierrez, however, didn’t live in Ford’s district.

Illinois’ General Assembly Scholarship Program law requires winners to live in the district of the lawmaker who awards them free tuition to a public university.

Gutierrez isn’t alone. A team of Columbia College Chicago journalists in collaboration with Illinois Statehouse News identified three other scholarship winners over the last five years who lived outside the district of the legislator who selected them. This discovery follows a 1998 audit by the Illinois Auditor General’s office that found 19 out of 194 scholarship recipients randomly selected for verification did not live in their nominating lawmaker’s district.

It’s not surprising that state officials didn’t catch the out-of-district winners because it’s left up to each of the 163 lawmakers who hand out the free tuition to monitor themselves. Fourteen other state legislators don’t participate.

Mary Fergus, a spokeswoman for the Illinois State Board of Education, said her agency merely handles paperwork for the century-old program, acting simply as a middle man. “Our role is so limited . . . It’s up to the legislators to make good decisions.”

Just one board employee handles the paperwork along with other unrelated duties. Up until this fall when she retired, it was secretary Alison Harbour who processed the forms for the 1,000-plus recipients each year.

“It was tough,” said Harbour, who worked 25 years for the agency. “We were short-staffed because of the budget and all that, so it was difficult.”

There used to be one position at the board dedicated solely to the scholarship program, she said, but in recent years, financial constraints meant she had to perform other duties as well.

Harbour’s job – now being handled by another person at the state agency – consisted of making sure lawmakers and their nominees submitted two forms that contain basic information, like the student’s home address and the value of the scholarship, which in 2007-2008 was worth an average of $8,300.

She would then enter this information into databases. A review of the last six years of records entered in the electronic database – obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request – shows that over 8,000 scholarships worth more than $50 million were awarded.

But information for hundreds of students is incomplete because winners routinely fail to list the accurate value of their waivers on the forms. Harbour said it’s the universities that know the true cost of each waiver.

Harbour said she did her best during her five years managing the program to get as much information as possible but noted it’s up to lawmakers and their nominees to complete the paperwork.

No one at the Illinois Board of Education or the Illinois Student Assistance Commission – the other state agency mentioned in the scholarship law – checks to see that the forms are filled out correctly or verifies that each recipient lives in the nominating lawmaker’s district.

“We don’t have the ability to enforce,” said Matt Vanover, senior spokesman for the state education board. “That is solely the legislators’ discretion.”

Lawmakers have the option of delegating the selection of winners to a third party, a practice recommended by higher education experts concerned about the lack of regulation of Illinois’ program. That’s where the student assistance commission could step in.

But communications director Paul Palian notes his agency can perform that role only if lawmakers ask for help. The student assistance commission has never been tapped for this job, Palian said. “Historically, we have not really had any role.”

One of the program’s most-vocal opponents, Rep. Bill Black (R-Danville), said if the program is to continue – he wants it abolished – the selection must be delegated to a more objective party.

“I don’t think you can reform this system,” but if it remains, Black said he prefers that it be part of the student assistance commission.

Cindi Canary, executive director of the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform, notes that many lawmakers have created committees to screen and select winners. “But there has been no real system-wide push” for accountability and consistency among all members of the General Assembly, she said.

Kent Redfield, professor emeritus of political science at the University of Illinois at Springfield, thinks the program could be salvaged with regulation. “Either the legislature could set up a process in the statute, or they could give it to the state Board of Higher Education to set up a process that would make it uniform and minimize conflicts of interest.”

Others like Daniel Stasi, executive director of the Illinois School Counselor Association, say they don’t think more restrictions are the answer.

“I think if there are people who don’t have a better sense of ethics, they should be voted out of office by their constituents.”

In 2000, Stasi’s son received a legislative scholarship for two semesters of free tuition from then-Sen. Kathy Parker (R-Northbrook). Stasi said his son and many other students who’ve received the scholarships over the years could not have attended college without help from the “tremendous” program. He said he’s been asked to serve on a legislator’s selection committee in the past but declined to avoid any conflict of interest.

“I guess you could write regulations and restrictions, and maybe they would help,” Stasi said. “It comes down to our individual legislators exercising good judgment. And I think most of them are.”

Emily Capdevielle, Nicole Leonhardt and Nicholas Myers contributed to this story.

Contact: jay.grooms@loop.colum.edu

View more than 6,000 scholarships awarded by current lawmakers.

Other stories from Day Two:

Some Lawmakers Turn a Right into a Requirement

No Method to the Madness: State Scholarships Award Some Students More than Others

Students’ Free Ride Proves Costly to Their Classmates

Stories from Day One:

One Scholarship, 163 Ways to Dole It Out

Evasive State Legislators Dodge Questions About Scholarships

Clout or Coincidence? Some Legislators Keep General Assembly Scholarships All in the Family

Scholarships for Some Grad Students a Big Burden for State and Schools

Day Three Stories:

State Legislative Scholarships Could Be Eliminated

For Richer or Poorer? Legislative Scholarships Should Target the Needy

Experts Suggest Changes to Legislative Scholarships