By Lauren N. Johnson
While Illinois lawmakers did not vote on some of the large and controversial issues that are looming in the closing days of the spring legislative session, such as workers’ compensation reform and changes to retirement benefits for current public employees, they sent several other bills to Gov. Pat Quinn.
FOID cards
The names and information for at least 4 million firearm owners in Illinois would be exempt from inspection, copying, or being released by the Illinois State Police for purposes of criminal investigations, under House Bill 3500, sponsored by Rep. Richard Morthland of Cordova and Sen. Kirk Dillard of Hinsdale, both of whom are Republicans.
“Every state police director, regardless of political party, over the last couple of decades has opined that from a law enforcement perspective, it is a bad idea to release the names of firearm owners ID holders,” Dillard said.
The measure came after an opinion by Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan in favor of releasing the names. “I do not understand for the life of me why would we give a map to allow criminals to systematically pick and choose and burglarize our homes and farms,” Dillard said.
Gov. Pat Quinn told reporters today that he agreed with the position of the Illinois State Police on firearm owner identification cards, stating the names should not be released, but Quinn would not comment on whether he supports this specific bill.
DNA testing
House Bill 3238, sponsored by Sen. Kwame Raoul, a Chicago Democrat, and former Rep. Susana Mendoza, a Chicago Democrat, would require DNA testing of those arrested for crimes including first degree murder, home invasion and predatory and aggravated sexual assault of a child or an adult, and would mandate that the specimens must be provided within 14 days after an indictment or sentencing.
Lawmakers and state officers, including Attorney General Lisa Madigan, say requiring all registered sex offenders to provide a DNA specimen in cases of violent crimes would strengthen the state’s DNA database and further help clear those who were wrongfully convicted.
The bill would also require automatic disposal of the DNA – taken during the case – if the arresting charges were dismissed or if the individual was acquitted.
The bill passed the Senate with little opposition. It passed the House in April.
Financial advisory panel
Senate Bill 2149, sponsored by Sen. John Sullivan, a Rushville Democrat, and Rep. Roger Eddy, a Hutsonville Republican, would allow financially struggling school districts – except Chicago Public Schools – to petition the State Board of Education to request a financial oversight panel step in to help with their budgets. “It takes several parts of the school code dealing with financial oversight and existing panels and kind of puts them all in one place and gives them some additional authority,” said Eddy, who also is a school superintendent in Hutsonville.
Racial and ethnic impact
Chicago Democrats Sen. Mattie Hunter and Rep. La Shawn Ford sponsored Senate Bill 2271, which would create a racial and ethnic impact research task force to determine ways to measure the potential impact of proposed legislation on minority groups. The group would also would propose a system to collect data on the racial and ethnic identity of individuals arrested by state and local law enforcement.
Disparities commission
House Bill 1547, sponsored by Chicago Democrats Rep. Monique Davis and Sen. Mattie Hunter, would creates a panel called the Commission to End the Disparities Facing the African-American Community to study and recommend ways to address racial inequality in the state.
The bipartisan commission would consist of 24 lawmakers and advocates for African-American rights involving education, health care services and employment. It would submit a report to the legislature and governor by December 31, 2013. Commission members would not be paid.
The bill passed both chambers, but some Republicans such as Sen. Kyle McCarter of Lebanon had a problem with the number of commission members, . “This is my project, not your project,” said Hunter, who took offense to Senate Republicans’ demands that she cut the number of unpaid commission members. The bill returns to the House to wait for a concurrence vote.
Good Samaritan
House Bill 1549, sponsored by Rep. Jil Tracy, a Mount Sterling Republican, and Sen. A.J. Wilhelmi, a Joliet Democrat, states that anyone with CPR training in accordance with the standards of the American Red Cross or the American Heart Association who in good faith provides emergency care to someone in need of resuscitation would not liable for civil damages. The Senate must concur with the legislation before it can head to the governor’s desk.
Unpaid tax refunds
Senate Bill 1741, sponsored by Rep. Carol Sente, a Vernon Hills Democrat, and Sen. David Luechtefeld, an Okawville Republican, would require the Illinois Department of Revenue to allow individual taxpayers or corporations that are owed unpaid taxes refunds from the state to credit the money the state owes them against future tax bills.
Lawmakers in favor of the bill say it is overdue and clarifies confusion among businesses and schools in the state of whether they will be paid on time.
Rep. Jil Tracy, a Mount Sterling Republican, said she had a similar bill, HB 2914, which addressed the same problem. “We had so many people call my district office and complain that the state was not allowing them to use an offset for taxes overpayment; instead they would have to pay their taxes on time, even though the state of Illinois owed them quite a refund,” said Tracy.
The Senate must vote to agree to changes made in the House before the bill can be sent to Quinn.
Showing posts with label FOIA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label FOIA. Show all posts
Friday, May 20, 2011
Wednesday, December 01, 2010
Civil unions bill heads to the governor
By Jamey Dunn
Same-sex couples are a mere pen stroke away from having the option for civil unions in Illinois.
The Illinois Senate passed Senate Bill 1716 today,after a long debate about family, religion, insurance and pension benefits.
Sen. David Koehler, a Peoria Democrat, said he wanted to sponsor the bill because his lesbian daughter does not have the same rights in Illinois as his other two daughters. “I see this issue now through the eyes of a father who has a gay child.”
Koehler’s daughter, Maggie, watched from the gallery with her partner, Brennan Kramer. The couple are engaged and plan to hold a ceremony next September.
“I am one of the proudest children in Illinois today,” Maggie Koehler said after the vote.
Sen. Koehler said couples who enter into civil unions would get all the “legal obligations, responsibilities, protections and benefits as afforded or recognized by the law of Illinois that relates to spouses.”
The measure is intended to give same-sex and heterosexual couples who opt for civil unions rights such as the ability to be involved in their partners’ health and end-of-life decisions, as well as hospital visitation and shared property rights.
Some opponents argued that the legislation was same-sex marriage by another name. Sen. John Sullivan, a Democrat from Rushville, said he voted against the bill because many of his constituents do not support it, and he couldn’t determine a difference between the civil unions described in the measure and marriage.
Others said it was morally wrong and would damage marriage as an institution between a man and a woman for the purpose of creating a stable environment for children.
“The reason marriage exists is that sexual intercourse between men and women … produces children. If intercourse did not actually produce vulnerable children who add to the population of a country, neither society nor the government would have much reason, let alone a valid reason, to regulate people’s emotional unions,” said Sen. Chris Lauzen, and Aurora Republican.
He added: “What the institution and policy of marriage aims to regulate is the sex, not love and commitment. Marriage exists to solve the major challenge that arises from sexual intercourse between men and women but not from sex between partners of the same gender — what to do about its potential generation of vulnerable children. ”
Sen. Dan Rutherford from Chenoa was the only Republican to cross the aisle and support the bill. “The people of Illinois, they don’t want discrimination. There’s going to be a bunch said about this legislation, I understand that. But one thing that I do know, it’s the right thing to do,” said Rutherford, who is leaving the Senate to take office as state treasurer in January.
Some Republicans said they support the concept but could not back the bill because it would require the state to give same-sex couples pension benefits and may require insurance companies to offer spousal coverage to gay and lesbian couples. “Our cup of debt is full, and we cannot take one more drop of financial strain,” said Sen. Dan Duffy, a Lake Barrington Republican.
However, Koehler said Illinois already offers health care benefits to domestic partners. He also said people pay a small amount into the pension system to potentially cover a spouse, and if they are not married when they retire, they get the money back. “In a sense, everybody has been paying into that all along.”
“The fiscal impact … I don’t see it,” said Kathryn Eisenhart, a professor of legal studies at the University of Illinois Springfield and a member of the Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Committee for the Illinois State Bar Association. “The state budget is a horrible mess. It was a horrible mess before this got passed. It will remain a horrible mess after this got passed.”
Eisenhart said that from a legal point of view, the bill would likely not result in drastic changes for same-sex couples. She said she would advise all couples to take some of the steps that same-sex couples have — in lieu of being granted explicit recognition — to access legal protection, such as getting power of attorney or a living will, to protect themselves in emergency situations.
She added that same-sex couples may still find themselves in the situation of having to “show their papers” to visit their partners in the hospital or make medical decisions — a situation that was used as an example of unfair treatment during the debate in the House.
“If you [are part of a heterosexual couple] and show up and say, "I am Mrs. so-and-so," they aren’t going to ask you for a marriage license,” she said. “If you are of the same sex, they can still say, ‘Where’s your papers?’ … It’s much more likely to happen.”
Eisenhart characterized the bill as a first-step toward equality for same-sex couples. “It’s a beginning. … [Some advocates are] pretty excited about the fact that we have a governor who will sign it and a Senate who is pretty strongly willing to support it.”
She added, “The fight starts again on Monday, and the reality is that this is just a beginning.”
Gov. Pat Quinn has pledged to sign the bill. If he does, it would go into effect June 1.
Public Employee Evaluations
The Senate overrode Quinn’s veto on House Bill 5154, which would seal public employee evaluations. Quinn changed the bill so only evaluations for law enforcement personnel would be sealed, citing safety and security reasons.
Maywood Democrat Kimberly Lightford, the sponsor of the bill, said she supports making employment information such as salaries available to the public. But she thinks open evaluations go too far.
Proponents of the original legislation have said that opening the evaluations will make managers hesitant to be honest in evaluations, for fear of negative comments making it into the public sphere. Opponents say they legislature is already chipping away at newly enacted transparency laws.
The House already overrode the measure, so the original version of the bill, which exempts public employee evaluations from the Freedom of Information Act, becomes law.
Gaming Expansion
With virtually no floor debate, the Senate passed a large gaming expansion package before it adjourned this evening.
If it becomes law, the measure would allow for new casinos in Chicago, Rockford, Danville, Park City and a yet-to-be-named location in the suburbs south of Chicago. Operating casinos would be able to increase the number of gaming positions to 1,600 each and 2,000 each in 2013. Horse racing tracks would also be allowed to have slot machines.
Sen. President John Cullerton said SB 737 would bring in $424 million immediately and higher levels of gaming revenue in the future.
The money would go to pay down the state’s backlog of overdue bills and capital projects. The legalization of video poker throughout the state, which was one of the major funding mechanisms of the capital bill, has stalled in getting off the ground and may not bring the revenues that were originally projected.
Sen. Kirk Dillard, a Republican from Hinsdale, said he supported the bill because putting slots in at race tracks would help the agricultural sector — specifically horse breeding and training. “When these jobs are lost, they are next to impossible to replace in rural Illinois.”
Dillard added that he thinks the bill is still being negotiated and will not pass in the House without some changes. “This is not the final product. This thing is going to be back.”
Waukegan Democratic Sen. Terry Link, the sponsor of the bill, characterized it as a “huge” expansion but said something needs to be done to address the state’s “huge deficit.”
Gov. Pat Quinn said at a news conference earlier in the day that he did not support “top-heavy” gaming expansion. He said he has yet read the bill but that is strikes him as “top heavy.”
Redistricting
The Senate also passed SB 3976, which would change the redistricting process used to reconfigure legislative and congressional boundaries after each census.
The measure, which passed with bipartisan support, would add protection for minority populations and require public hearings on the process throughout the state. These provisions were included in the Democrats' redistricting bill, which failed to pass in April. The lack of those provisions is also the reason Democrats cited for voting down the “Fair Map” amendment, which was backed by Republicans and the League of Women Voters.
On Thursday, the Senate plans to take up a measure to reform police and firefighter pensions. The House in not scheduled to return until January.
Same-sex couples are a mere pen stroke away from having the option for civil unions in Illinois.
The Illinois Senate passed Senate Bill 1716 today,after a long debate about family, religion, insurance and pension benefits.
Sen. David Koehler, a Peoria Democrat, said he wanted to sponsor the bill because his lesbian daughter does not have the same rights in Illinois as his other two daughters. “I see this issue now through the eyes of a father who has a gay child.”
Koehler’s daughter, Maggie, watched from the gallery with her partner, Brennan Kramer. The couple are engaged and plan to hold a ceremony next September.
“I am one of the proudest children in Illinois today,” Maggie Koehler said after the vote.
Sen. Koehler said couples who enter into civil unions would get all the “legal obligations, responsibilities, protections and benefits as afforded or recognized by the law of Illinois that relates to spouses.”
The measure is intended to give same-sex and heterosexual couples who opt for civil unions rights such as the ability to be involved in their partners’ health and end-of-life decisions, as well as hospital visitation and shared property rights.
Some opponents argued that the legislation was same-sex marriage by another name. Sen. John Sullivan, a Democrat from Rushville, said he voted against the bill because many of his constituents do not support it, and he couldn’t determine a difference between the civil unions described in the measure and marriage.
Others said it was morally wrong and would damage marriage as an institution between a man and a woman for the purpose of creating a stable environment for children.
“The reason marriage exists is that sexual intercourse between men and women … produces children. If intercourse did not actually produce vulnerable children who add to the population of a country, neither society nor the government would have much reason, let alone a valid reason, to regulate people’s emotional unions,” said Sen. Chris Lauzen, and Aurora Republican.
He added: “What the institution and policy of marriage aims to regulate is the sex, not love and commitment. Marriage exists to solve the major challenge that arises from sexual intercourse between men and women but not from sex between partners of the same gender — what to do about its potential generation of vulnerable children. ”
Sen. Dan Rutherford from Chenoa was the only Republican to cross the aisle and support the bill. “The people of Illinois, they don’t want discrimination. There’s going to be a bunch said about this legislation, I understand that. But one thing that I do know, it’s the right thing to do,” said Rutherford, who is leaving the Senate to take office as state treasurer in January.
Some Republicans said they support the concept but could not back the bill because it would require the state to give same-sex couples pension benefits and may require insurance companies to offer spousal coverage to gay and lesbian couples. “Our cup of debt is full, and we cannot take one more drop of financial strain,” said Sen. Dan Duffy, a Lake Barrington Republican.
However, Koehler said Illinois already offers health care benefits to domestic partners. He also said people pay a small amount into the pension system to potentially cover a spouse, and if they are not married when they retire, they get the money back. “In a sense, everybody has been paying into that all along.”
“The fiscal impact … I don’t see it,” said Kathryn Eisenhart, a professor of legal studies at the University of Illinois Springfield and a member of the Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Committee for the Illinois State Bar Association. “The state budget is a horrible mess. It was a horrible mess before this got passed. It will remain a horrible mess after this got passed.”
Eisenhart said that from a legal point of view, the bill would likely not result in drastic changes for same-sex couples. She said she would advise all couples to take some of the steps that same-sex couples have — in lieu of being granted explicit recognition — to access legal protection, such as getting power of attorney or a living will, to protect themselves in emergency situations.
She added that same-sex couples may still find themselves in the situation of having to “show their papers” to visit their partners in the hospital or make medical decisions — a situation that was used as an example of unfair treatment during the debate in the House.
“If you [are part of a heterosexual couple] and show up and say, "I am Mrs. so-and-so," they aren’t going to ask you for a marriage license,” she said. “If you are of the same sex, they can still say, ‘Where’s your papers?’ … It’s much more likely to happen.”
Eisenhart characterized the bill as a first-step toward equality for same-sex couples. “It’s a beginning. … [Some advocates are] pretty excited about the fact that we have a governor who will sign it and a Senate who is pretty strongly willing to support it.”
She added, “The fight starts again on Monday, and the reality is that this is just a beginning.”
Gov. Pat Quinn has pledged to sign the bill. If he does, it would go into effect June 1.
Public Employee Evaluations
The Senate overrode Quinn’s veto on House Bill 5154, which would seal public employee evaluations. Quinn changed the bill so only evaluations for law enforcement personnel would be sealed, citing safety and security reasons.
Maywood Democrat Kimberly Lightford, the sponsor of the bill, said she supports making employment information such as salaries available to the public. But she thinks open evaluations go too far.
Proponents of the original legislation have said that opening the evaluations will make managers hesitant to be honest in evaluations, for fear of negative comments making it into the public sphere. Opponents say they legislature is already chipping away at newly enacted transparency laws.
The House already overrode the measure, so the original version of the bill, which exempts public employee evaluations from the Freedom of Information Act, becomes law.
Gaming Expansion
With virtually no floor debate, the Senate passed a large gaming expansion package before it adjourned this evening.
If it becomes law, the measure would allow for new casinos in Chicago, Rockford, Danville, Park City and a yet-to-be-named location in the suburbs south of Chicago. Operating casinos would be able to increase the number of gaming positions to 1,600 each and 2,000 each in 2013. Horse racing tracks would also be allowed to have slot machines.
Sen. President John Cullerton said SB 737 would bring in $424 million immediately and higher levels of gaming revenue in the future.
The money would go to pay down the state’s backlog of overdue bills and capital projects. The legalization of video poker throughout the state, which was one of the major funding mechanisms of the capital bill, has stalled in getting off the ground and may not bring the revenues that were originally projected.
Sen. Kirk Dillard, a Republican from Hinsdale, said he supported the bill because putting slots in at race tracks would help the agricultural sector — specifically horse breeding and training. “When these jobs are lost, they are next to impossible to replace in rural Illinois.”
Dillard added that he thinks the bill is still being negotiated and will not pass in the House without some changes. “This is not the final product. This thing is going to be back.”
Waukegan Democratic Sen. Terry Link, the sponsor of the bill, characterized it as a “huge” expansion but said something needs to be done to address the state’s “huge deficit.”
Gov. Pat Quinn said at a news conference earlier in the day that he did not support “top-heavy” gaming expansion. He said he has yet read the bill but that is strikes him as “top heavy.”
Redistricting
The Senate also passed SB 3976, which would change the redistricting process used to reconfigure legislative and congressional boundaries after each census.
The measure, which passed with bipartisan support, would add protection for minority populations and require public hearings on the process throughout the state. These provisions were included in the Democrats' redistricting bill, which failed to pass in April. The lack of those provisions is also the reason Democrats cited for voting down the “Fair Map” amendment, which was backed by Republicans and the League of Women Voters.
On Thursday, the Senate plans to take up a measure to reform police and firefighter pensions. The House in not scheduled to return until January.
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Little action in first week of veto session
By Jamey Dunn
In their first week back after the general elections, Illinois lawmakers did not take up many of the issues statehouse watchers expected to be on the table for the veto legislative session.
Legislators were lobbied this week by activists asking for the repeal of the death penalty, local government officials asking for reforms to the pension system for police and firefighters, mayors asking for casinos to combat unemployment, anti-gambling groups hoping to fight the spread of casinos and slot machines and citizens asking for civil unions rights for same-sex couples, to name a few.
However, the General Assembly failed to act on any of these hot-button issues.
The House rejected two of governor Quinn’s amendatory vetoes with no debate. His changes to House Bill 5206 would create a citizen’s initiative program, which would allow voters to propose ethics legislation. The original bill, which was preserved in Quinn’s changes, allowed county officials to more easily purge deceased voters from their rolls. Rep. Dan Brady, a Republican from and the sponsor of the bill, said he did not oppose Quinn’s changed in theory, but he was concerned they might bog the bill down or make it unconstitutional.
The House also overrode Quinn’s changes to a controversial measure, which would seal state employee evaluations from the public. He wanted evaluations public expect for law enforcement, citing safety and security concerns.
A Senate committee heard testimony on a gaming expansion bill, and a House committee did the same on police and firefighter pension reform. But neither took a vote.
Speaker Michael Madigan made positive statements about civil unions to reporters and characterized passing the measure as an “appropriate” thing to do. But the bill did not come up for a vote or debate.
Senate President John Cullerton and Senate Minority Leader Christine Radogno formed two bipartisan legislative committees to research Medicaid and workers' compensation reforms, two issues Radogno has said she wants to see addressed before Republicans will vote in favor of borrowing or a tax increase. The groups are scheduled to present their findings to the Senate by January 3. Cullerton dropped a $4 billion borrowing plan to pay the state’s pension payment for this fiscal year from the schedule of a committee hearing, saying he would not move the bill without Republican support.
Cullerton also introduced HB 5057 that would boot over 700 appointed officials who have remained at their positions after the expiration of their terms. New nominations would have to be approved by the Senate, and those who were removed would be eligible for nomination again.
“This is not in any way passing judgment on those serving in these positions. Rather, it is an effort to return to the important system of checks and balances in the Illinois Constitution,” Cullerton said.
Many of the positions that would be affected by the bill are unpaid posts and some are vacant. However, some include members of the governor’s cabinet.
Cullerton expects lawmakers to take up the bill when they return to session after the Thanksgiving holiday. The Illinois House is scheduled to return November 29 and the Senate November 30.
In their first week back after the general elections, Illinois lawmakers did not take up many of the issues statehouse watchers expected to be on the table for the veto legislative session.
Legislators were lobbied this week by activists asking for the repeal of the death penalty, local government officials asking for reforms to the pension system for police and firefighters, mayors asking for casinos to combat unemployment, anti-gambling groups hoping to fight the spread of casinos and slot machines and citizens asking for civil unions rights for same-sex couples, to name a few.
However, the General Assembly failed to act on any of these hot-button issues.
The House rejected two of governor Quinn’s amendatory vetoes with no debate. His changes to House Bill 5206 would create a citizen’s initiative program, which would allow voters to propose ethics legislation. The original bill, which was preserved in Quinn’s changes, allowed county officials to more easily purge deceased voters from their rolls. Rep. Dan Brady, a Republican from and the sponsor of the bill, said he did not oppose Quinn’s changed in theory, but he was concerned they might bog the bill down or make it unconstitutional.
The House also overrode Quinn’s changes to a controversial measure, which would seal state employee evaluations from the public. He wanted evaluations public expect for law enforcement, citing safety and security concerns.
A Senate committee heard testimony on a gaming expansion bill, and a House committee did the same on police and firefighter pension reform. But neither took a vote.
Speaker Michael Madigan made positive statements about civil unions to reporters and characterized passing the measure as an “appropriate” thing to do. But the bill did not come up for a vote or debate.
Senate President John Cullerton and Senate Minority Leader Christine Radogno formed two bipartisan legislative committees to research Medicaid and workers' compensation reforms, two issues Radogno has said she wants to see addressed before Republicans will vote in favor of borrowing or a tax increase. The groups are scheduled to present their findings to the Senate by January 3. Cullerton dropped a $4 billion borrowing plan to pay the state’s pension payment for this fiscal year from the schedule of a committee hearing, saying he would not move the bill without Republican support.
Cullerton also introduced HB 5057 that would boot over 700 appointed officials who have remained at their positions after the expiration of their terms. New nominations would have to be approved by the Senate, and those who were removed would be eligible for nomination again.
“This is not in any way passing judgment on those serving in these positions. Rather, it is an effort to return to the important system of checks and balances in the Illinois Constitution,” Cullerton said.
Many of the positions that would be affected by the bill are unpaid posts and some are vacant. However, some include members of the governor’s cabinet.
Cullerton expects lawmakers to take up the bill when they return to session after the Thanksgiving holiday. The Illinois House is scheduled to return November 29 and the Senate November 30.
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Quinn wants police evaluations sealed
By Jamey Dunn
Employees working in state law enforcement would have their performance evaluations sealed from the public under an amendatory veto issued by Gov. Pat Quinn.
House Bill 5154 originally blocked all public employees’ performance evaluations from potentially being accessed under the Illinois Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). However, Quinn said in his veto message that such a broad exemption would undermine FOIA reform approved just last year.
Quinn said law enforcement evaluations could be used to influence the criminal justice process. “If disclosed, these evaluations could be used by criminal suspects or defendants to undermine a police investigation or attack the credibility and integrity of a police officer."
Opponents say it is too soon to make any changes to the new FOIA regulations. “This is poor public policy on so many levels. The new FOIA law needs to be given time to work before being assaulted with attempts to make changes and exemptions. We urged the Governor to veto the entire bill and still believe that was the best action to take.” Dennis DeRossett, executive director of the Illinois Press Association, said in a written statement.
“We really wanted the governor to completely veto the legislation because we feel transparency is the best alternative," said Melissa Hahn, president of the Illinois News Broadcasters Association. However, we are pleased that he at least took the step of limiting the scope of the bill to police officers. … People should be able to find out if all sorts of public employees -- whether it be teachers police of state government workers -- are doing their jobs and are doing their jobs well. After all, we’re all paying for it.”
Supporters of the original legislation point to its bipartisan support from lawmakers and say that opening up the records could interfere with the evaluation process. Managers considering the possibility of an evaluation becoming public may not be as honest with criticism.
“We had urged the governor to sign the bill. It was commonsense legislation to preserve the confidentiality of private records containing personal info ... not just for reasons of personal privacy but in order to ensure that managers at all levels of government know that their evaluations will serve their intended purpose,”said Anders Lindall, spokesman for Council 31 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, state government's largest union.
Employees working in state law enforcement would have their performance evaluations sealed from the public under an amendatory veto issued by Gov. Pat Quinn.
House Bill 5154 originally blocked all public employees’ performance evaluations from potentially being accessed under the Illinois Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). However, Quinn said in his veto message that such a broad exemption would undermine FOIA reform approved just last year.
Quinn said law enforcement evaluations could be used to influence the criminal justice process. “If disclosed, these evaluations could be used by criminal suspects or defendants to undermine a police investigation or attack the credibility and integrity of a police officer."
Opponents say it is too soon to make any changes to the new FOIA regulations. “This is poor public policy on so many levels. The new FOIA law needs to be given time to work before being assaulted with attempts to make changes and exemptions. We urged the Governor to veto the entire bill and still believe that was the best action to take.” Dennis DeRossett, executive director of the Illinois Press Association, said in a written statement.
“We really wanted the governor to completely veto the legislation because we feel transparency is the best alternative," said Melissa Hahn, president of the Illinois News Broadcasters Association. However, we are pleased that he at least took the step of limiting the scope of the bill to police officers. … People should be able to find out if all sorts of public employees -- whether it be teachers police of state government workers -- are doing their jobs and are doing their jobs well. After all, we’re all paying for it.”
Supporters of the original legislation point to its bipartisan support from lawmakers and say that opening up the records could interfere with the evaluation process. Managers considering the possibility of an evaluation becoming public may not be as honest with criticism.
“We had urged the governor to sign the bill. It was commonsense legislation to preserve the confidentiality of private records containing personal info ... not just for reasons of personal privacy but in order to ensure that managers at all levels of government know that their evaluations will serve their intended purpose,”said Anders Lindall, spokesman for Council 31 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, state government's largest union.
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Lawmakers approve FOIA exemptions
By Rachel Wells
Public employee evaluations would be sealed to the public if Gov. Pat Quinn signs a measure that opponents say would roll back major reforms made last year in the state’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).
The change would expand an exemption that Quinn signed into law earlier this year exempting performance evaluations of teachers, principals and superintendents. The new changes are part of legislation meant to improve Illinois’ chances at earning federal education grant funding. Proponents argued that opening up the evaluations to the public would devalue them, as those writing the evaluations might be less candid, and that treating educators differently from other state employees would not be fair.
“There has to be a line that we draw that we do protect the personal interest of people, [that] we do let them know that because you are a public employee, we trust that you will come to work and do a good job,” said Sen. Kimberly Lightford, a Maywood Democrat and sponsor of House Bill 5154. “And if you don’t, then you will be disciplined by the employer, not by John Q Public. There has to be a dividing line.”
Opponents call the measure a step back in Illinois’ progress toward a more open government and worry lawmakers will further degrade last year’s FOIA reforms.
“We are concerned that more bills will come down the pike to further shove public information into the shadows,” said Melissa Hahn, president of the Illinois News Broadcasters Association.
Although Lightford has said there’s no connection between the union-backed FOIA change and recent changes to the state’s pension systems, which unions adamantly opposed, Hahn said she’s not convinced.
“The unions lost when it came to pensions, so lawmakers are giving them this to help make up for it,” Hahn said.
The pension legislation went through both houses in one day on March 24, about a year after Quinn first proposed the measure. The House approved the FOIA changes on March 11 , and the Senate approved the measure today.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
FOIA law may be tweaked again
By Rachel Wells
Concerned citizens would no longer have access to any portion of any public employee performance evaluations, under a measure that moved through a Senate committee today.
Earlier this year, evaluations for teachers, principal sand superintendents became exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act as legislators worked to gain enough support for Race to the Top legislation, which ties student growth to educators’ evaluations. The latest legislation, HB 5154, stems from related negotiations and would expand the exemption to all public employee evaluations.
Treating all public employees equally is important, said Tim Drea, secretary-treasurer of Illinois’ American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO), adding that disclosing evaluations could devalue them. “If a supervisor believes that an evaluation will be made public, he or she may say, ‘Well, you’re fine, I just don’t want any problems from anybody,’” Drea said. “Other employees are looking, and it just does not contribute to a healthy work environment.”
Itasca Republican Sen. Carole Pankau, who opposes the measure, said that evaluation results, a final rating or grade for instance, should become public information. “I think that’s a reasonable request,” Pankau said.
“I think verifying employment is fair, but to go into great details, I think that’s a little unfair,” said the bill’s sponsor, Sen. Kimberly Lightford, a Maywood Democrat.
Those who successfully pushed FOIA reforms last year in SB 189 say the new measure would unravel those efforts.
“It shoots a major hole in one of the reforms that we had badly wanted,” said Beth Bennett, government relations director with the Illinois Press Association. Last year, the association had worked to make the results of performance evaluations available for public scrutiny. Personal information such as medical concerns and Social Security numbers remained exempt, Bennett said.
The Illinois attorney general’s office, which pushed for last year’s reforms, agreed the new legislation weakens the FOIA law.
“The reworking of FOIA has just been in effect for four months,” attorney general spokesperson Scott Mulford said. “It has to be given time to work.”
None of the opponents, who also included the Illinois News Broadcasters Association and American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois, testified during today’s Senate hearing. Bennett said conversations with Senate members lead the Press Association “to believe that there probably wasn’t going to be a real debate of the issue.”
Concerned citizens would no longer have access to any portion of any public employee performance evaluations, under a measure that moved through a Senate committee today.
Earlier this year, evaluations for teachers, principal sand superintendents became exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act as legislators worked to gain enough support for Race to the Top legislation, which ties student growth to educators’ evaluations. The latest legislation, HB 5154, stems from related negotiations and would expand the exemption to all public employee evaluations.
Treating all public employees equally is important, said Tim Drea, secretary-treasurer of Illinois’ American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO), adding that disclosing evaluations could devalue them. “If a supervisor believes that an evaluation will be made public, he or she may say, ‘Well, you’re fine, I just don’t want any problems from anybody,’” Drea said. “Other employees are looking, and it just does not contribute to a healthy work environment.”
Itasca Republican Sen. Carole Pankau, who opposes the measure, said that evaluation results, a final rating or grade for instance, should become public information. “I think that’s a reasonable request,” Pankau said.
“I think verifying employment is fair, but to go into great details, I think that’s a little unfair,” said the bill’s sponsor, Sen. Kimberly Lightford, a Maywood Democrat.
Those who successfully pushed FOIA reforms last year in SB 189 say the new measure would unravel those efforts.
“It shoots a major hole in one of the reforms that we had badly wanted,” said Beth Bennett, government relations director with the Illinois Press Association. Last year, the association had worked to make the results of performance evaluations available for public scrutiny. Personal information such as medical concerns and Social Security numbers remained exempt, Bennett said.
The Illinois attorney general’s office, which pushed for last year’s reforms, agreed the new legislation weakens the FOIA law.
“The reworking of FOIA has just been in effect for four months,” attorney general spokesperson Scott Mulford said. “It has to be given time to work.”
None of the opponents, who also included the Illinois News Broadcasters Association and American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois, testified during today’s Senate hearing. Bennett said conversations with Senate members lead the Press Association “to believe that there probably wasn’t going to be a real debate of the issue.”
Monday, August 17, 2009
Quinn: "This will be a week of reform"
By Bethany Jaeger
The end of August marks a deadline for Gov. Pat Quinn, who has to act on legislation approved by the General Assembly before bills automatically become law. In Chicago today, Quinn deemed this week as a “week of reform,” starting with today’s enactment of the revamped laws to ensure public access to information. He could soon act on ethics legislation to limit the amount individuals and political organizations could donate to candidates.
Freedom of Information Act = Senate Bill 189
Quinn signed SB 189, which rewrites the Freedom of Information Act (background here). Starting in January 2010, the process of requesting public information is supposed to get faster and more accountable.
In addition to new training requirements and higher standards for denying access to information, the new FOIA will require public bodies to reply to requests for information within five business days, as opposed to the current seven days. And if a public body denies a request, individuals will have to take fewer steps and less time to appeal that denial.
“The main thing this new act does is enforce many of the good words that were already part of Illinois law that were ignored by public officials,” said Hanke Gratteau, a member of Quinn’s Illinois Reform Commission and former investigative reporter and managing editor for the Chicago Tribune. “There is now recourse if that is avoided, and that’s why it’s good enough for me.”
The end of August marks a deadline for Gov. Pat Quinn, who has to act on legislation approved by the General Assembly before bills automatically become law. In Chicago today, Quinn deemed this week as a “week of reform,” starting with today’s enactment of the revamped laws to ensure public access to information. He could soon act on ethics legislation to limit the amount individuals and political organizations could donate to candidates.
Freedom of Information Act = Senate Bill 189
Quinn signed SB 189, which rewrites the Freedom of Information Act (background here). Starting in January 2010, the process of requesting public information is supposed to get faster and more accountable.
In addition to new training requirements and higher standards for denying access to information, the new FOIA will require public bodies to reply to requests for information within five business days, as opposed to the current seven days. And if a public body denies a request, individuals will have to take fewer steps and less time to appeal that denial.
“The main thing this new act does is enforce many of the good words that were already part of Illinois law that were ignored by public officials,” said Hanke Gratteau, a member of Quinn’s Illinois Reform Commission and former investigative reporter and managing editor for the Chicago Tribune. “There is now recourse if that is avoided, and that’s why it’s good enough for me.”
Local and state governments still can deny access to information under a series of exemptions, and the legislature still can withhold internal documents such as staff analyses and final reports drafted by consultants.
But there are new penalties, something absent from the current FOIA. Under the new version, if a court finds that a public official intentionally violated the FOIA or Open Meetings Act, the official could be fined between $2,400 and $5,000 for each offense.
The Illinois Municipal League, however, believes the new FOIA will place a heavy burden on local governments and won’t go as smoothly as lawmakers think in the next four and a half months, said Roger Huebner, the organization’s deputy executive director and general counsel. Every governmental body covered by the FOIA now has had its primary function fundamentally redefined to field information requests, regardless of whether their budgets have been slashed, he added. More background on the Municipal League’s statements are online.
Quinn’s enactment of the new FOIA comes after the governor came under media scrutiny for reportedly using his personal cell phone rather than using a state-provided phone that is subject to public access laws. Quinn said in Chicago today that taxpayers do not pay for his private cell phone and that he doesn’t use it for official state business.
“I do not use this phone to make e-mails to government employees or conduct any kind of communication with government employees,” he said. “As the person of the attorney general’s office who oversees this law [determined], private phone calls that don’t come out of public funds are not subject to the Freedom of Information Act.”
Transparency = House Bill 35
The state also launched a new Web site where anyone with Internet access can look up state employee salaries, state contacts and state-issued licenses. It’s called the Illinois Transparency and Accountability Portal.
Individuals also can look up all board and commission members, as well as their terms and whether they get paid at a new site dedicated to executive appointments. It was created under Senate Bill 1602, which also establishes new ethics requirements for board and commission members.
Campaign finance reform = House Bill 7
Quinn indicated he also could act as soon as tomorrow on legislation that would limit the amount individuals and political organizations could donate to political campaigns. HB 7 won legislative approval but was not the version recommended by the governor’s own Illinois Reform Commission. (Background here.)
But there are new penalties, something absent from the current FOIA. Under the new version, if a court finds that a public official intentionally violated the FOIA or Open Meetings Act, the official could be fined between $2,400 and $5,000 for each offense.
The new law also gives new powers to the Illinois attorney general's office, where members of the public, media or government can seek help from a specialized lawyer to settle disputes about whether information should be released. The so-called public access counselor will have new authority to issue binding opinions and to subpoena information.
“Today, we can say that Illinois will officially make it out of the Stone Age of transparency,” Attorney General Lisa Madigan said. “We will end the culture of secrecy that surrounds our government, and we will have, I think, a better relationship and better trust with members of the public.”
“Today, we can say that Illinois will officially make it out of the Stone Age of transparency,” Attorney General Lisa Madigan said. “We will end the culture of secrecy that surrounds our government, and we will have, I think, a better relationship and better trust with members of the public.”
The Illinois Municipal League, however, believes the new FOIA will place a heavy burden on local governments and won’t go as smoothly as lawmakers think in the next four and a half months, said Roger Huebner, the organization’s deputy executive director and general counsel. Every governmental body covered by the FOIA now has had its primary function fundamentally redefined to field information requests, regardless of whether their budgets have been slashed, he added. More background on the Municipal League’s statements are online.
Cara Smith, deputy chief of staff of policy and communications for the attorney general's office, said she disagrees and that the new law could lessen the burden on local governments because they will have a built-in resource with access to a public access counselor, as opposed to an outside legal counsel.
Heubner referred to commercial requests, in particular, as problematic because they tend to be broad, time-consuming requests. “That’s going to become a financial nightmare.” Local governments still can reject requests by deeming them unduly burdensome.
Heubner also said the new FOIA isn’t written for lay people and that information requests immediately will become legal matters if disputed. “This bill has gone from the hope to help the laymen to the lawyer’s dream.”
Heubner referred to commercial requests, in particular, as problematic because they tend to be broad, time-consuming requests. “That’s going to become a financial nightmare.” Local governments still can reject requests by deeming them unduly burdensome.
Heubner also said the new FOIA isn’t written for lay people and that information requests immediately will become legal matters if disputed. “This bill has gone from the hope to help the laymen to the lawyer’s dream.”
Smith said: "If the public body has denied a request and the citizen comes to us for help, then the public body will have to decide if they want to interact with us informally or if they have to get a lawyer. It's certainly not necessary." She added, "I recognize that the public bodies have not looked at this as a benefit to them, but I think that over time, they will see it as just that."
Quinn’s enactment of the new FOIA comes after the governor came under media scrutiny for reportedly using his personal cell phone rather than using a state-provided phone that is subject to public access laws. Quinn said in Chicago today that taxpayers do not pay for his private cell phone and that he doesn’t use it for official state business.
“I do not use this phone to make e-mails to government employees or conduct any kind of communication with government employees,” he said. “As the person of the attorney general’s office who oversees this law [determined], private phone calls that don’t come out of public funds are not subject to the Freedom of Information Act.”
Transparency = House Bill 35
The state also launched a new Web site where anyone with Internet access can look up state employee salaries, state contacts and state-issued licenses. It’s called the Illinois Transparency and Accountability Portal.
Individuals also can look up all board and commission members, as well as their terms and whether they get paid at a new site dedicated to executive appointments. It was created under Senate Bill 1602, which also establishes new ethics requirements for board and commission members.
Campaign finance reform = House Bill 7
Quinn indicated he also could act as soon as tomorrow on legislation that would limit the amount individuals and political organizations could donate to political campaigns. HB 7 won legislative approval but was not the version recommended by the governor’s own Illinois Reform Commission. (Background here.)
Quinn could use his amendatory veto power to change the legislation, although he said he uses that power judiciously. “I’m going to use that only where it’s needed and where it can advance the common good. I think that’s the way we have to do it. We don’t do it to kick the legislature in the shins. I don’t believe in that.”
Patty Schuh, spokeswoman for the Senate Republicans, said Minority Leader Christine Radogno asked the governor to veto the bill in its entirety "because it’s been called worse than nothing. We believe there is ample opportunity to revisit this if everyone is committed to change,” Schuh said.
Thursday, May 28, 2009
FOIA rewrite passes both chambers
By Bethany Jaeger
All public bodies could be held to much higher standards when withholding documents and other information from the public. Legislation to strengthen the Illinois Freedom of Information Act and its enforcement will be sent to the governor’s desk. The House and Senate approved SB 189 with only one person voting against it.
The measure is part of a series of government reforms approved by the General Assembly in response to two consecutive governors being targeted by federal corruption charges. It’s also one area targeted by Gov. Pat Quinn’s Illinois Reform Commission.
We’ll have more about how the commission and the legislature have worked together — or not — soon. But the FOIA revisions demonstrated one area where all interested parties made compromises.
The negotiation process wasn’t exactly smooth, however. One week ago, the Illinois Press Association deemed a draft of the proposal “worse than existing law.” But the new version contained within SB 189 won “enthusiastic” support from the association.
Commissioner Hanke Gratteau said the FOIA revisions represent a “giant step forward” for transparency in government. They also would narrow the number of exemptions that allow public bodies to withhold otherwise public information, and the law would have stronger teeth with the addition of a so-called public access counselor and the ability to level civil penalties for noncompliance.
A representative of the Illinois Municipal League, however, said lawmakers would start to find out soon after the bill became law that it would place a heavy burden on local governments.
If signed into law by Quinn, a specialized lawyer would monitor and mandate the release of public information. The public access counselor is housed in the Illinois attorney general’s office, which would gain significant power by being able to subpoena information. The counselor would be able to issue binding opinions about whether public bodies, in fact, must release the information being requested.
The process also would get faster. Public bodies would have to reply to requests within five business days, as opposed to the current seven days. And if a public body denied a request, the public would have to take fewer steps and less time to appeal that denial.
“It used to be request, denial, appeal, denial. Now it’s just request, denial, and you’re ready to go,” said Don Craven, interim executive director of the Illinois Press Association. “So we shortened the process.”
Not all of the association’s recommendations made it into the final version, according to Craven. For instance, the association wanted final reports or documents prepared by consultants or independent contractors to be made public. Craven said that suggestion refers back to former Gov. George Ryan’s administration, when the state hired a private firm to issue a report about the economic impact of bringing Boeing Corp. to Chicago. The firm prepared a final report, gave it to the governor and the court held that a FOIA request was exempt because the report was “pre-decisional,” despite being the final report that guided policy, Craven said. Such reports, as well as internal staff analyses, remain exempt from the FOIA.
Some legislators expressed concern about a change to the personal private exemption. Ann Spillane, the attorney general’s chief of staff, said the reforms clarify the standard of a “clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy.” For instance, employees’ electronic time sheets — when they’re officially on the state’s clock — is public information and should be subject to the FOIA. However, if an employee clocked out to go to a doctor’s appointment, the reason for clocking out would be redacted.
Here are some other highlights of the final version, which would become law if the governor signs SB 189:
All public bodies could be held to much higher standards when withholding documents and other information from the public. Legislation to strengthen the Illinois Freedom of Information Act and its enforcement will be sent to the governor’s desk. The House and Senate approved SB 189 with only one person voting against it.
The measure is part of a series of government reforms approved by the General Assembly in response to two consecutive governors being targeted by federal corruption charges. It’s also one area targeted by Gov. Pat Quinn’s Illinois Reform Commission.
We’ll have more about how the commission and the legislature have worked together — or not — soon. But the FOIA revisions demonstrated one area where all interested parties made compromises.
The negotiation process wasn’t exactly smooth, however. One week ago, the Illinois Press Association deemed a draft of the proposal “worse than existing law.” But the new version contained within SB 189 won “enthusiastic” support from the association.
Commissioner Hanke Gratteau said the FOIA revisions represent a “giant step forward” for transparency in government. They also would narrow the number of exemptions that allow public bodies to withhold otherwise public information, and the law would have stronger teeth with the addition of a so-called public access counselor and the ability to level civil penalties for noncompliance.
A representative of the Illinois Municipal League, however, said lawmakers would start to find out soon after the bill became law that it would place a heavy burden on local governments.
If signed into law by Quinn, a specialized lawyer would monitor and mandate the release of public information. The public access counselor is housed in the Illinois attorney general’s office, which would gain significant power by being able to subpoena information. The counselor would be able to issue binding opinions about whether public bodies, in fact, must release the information being requested.
The process also would get faster. Public bodies would have to reply to requests within five business days, as opposed to the current seven days. And if a public body denied a request, the public would have to take fewer steps and less time to appeal that denial.
“It used to be request, denial, appeal, denial. Now it’s just request, denial, and you’re ready to go,” said Don Craven, interim executive director of the Illinois Press Association. “So we shortened the process.”
Not all of the association’s recommendations made it into the final version, according to Craven. For instance, the association wanted final reports or documents prepared by consultants or independent contractors to be made public. Craven said that suggestion refers back to former Gov. George Ryan’s administration, when the state hired a private firm to issue a report about the economic impact of bringing Boeing Corp. to Chicago. The firm prepared a final report, gave it to the governor and the court held that a FOIA request was exempt because the report was “pre-decisional,” despite being the final report that guided policy, Craven said. Such reports, as well as internal staff analyses, remain exempt from the FOIA.
Some legislators expressed concern about a change to the personal private exemption. Ann Spillane, the attorney general’s chief of staff, said the reforms clarify the standard of a “clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy.” For instance, employees’ electronic time sheets — when they’re officially on the state’s clock — is public information and should be subject to the FOIA. However, if an employee clocked out to go to a doctor’s appointment, the reason for clocking out would be redacted.
Here are some other highlights of the final version, which would become law if the governor signs SB 189:
- Courts could decide to impose a fine ranging from $2,400 to $5,000 for public bodies that intentionally failed to comply with FOIA. And if a public body waited too long to reply to a request, then it couldn’t charge a copying fee or rely on the exemption that says the request was “unduly burdensome.”
- Courts would be required to award attorneys’ fees to individuals or entities who had to file a lawsuit to force a public body to release public information. Current law permits courts to do so but does not force them.
- Public bodies could still redact, or black out, information from public records, but they’d still have to provide the rest of the information.
- The bill does include a higher standard for proving a public body’s denial of a request.
- Public bodies would have to designate specific employees to complete training about the FOIA and the Open Meetings Act.
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Recall returns, other reforms coming
By Bethany Jaeger and Jamey Dunn
The legislature continues to advance measures that would try to prevent the alleged wrongdoing by former Gov. Rod Blagojevich from going on long enough for a federal indictment to intervene.
Rep. Jack Franks, a Woodstock Democrat and longtime Blagojevich critic, revived his effort to change the state Constitution so voters could “recall” elected officials. The effort failed last year. This time, however, he’s calling for a constitutional amendment that would only focus on allowing voters to recall the governor, not other statewide officeholders or legislators.
Franks called it a first step and said that recall should only be used in extreme situations, describing recall authority as a “nuclear option” to remove corrupt or inept officials. He pointed to 18 other states that have some version of a recall provision, but it’s only been used twice in recent history, the most recent in California in 2003.
The bill is scheduled for a committee hearing tomorrow morning. We’ll have more then.
Sen. Susan Garrett, a Lake Forest Democrat, also is sponsoring a measure to increase transparency in the way the governor appoints people to boards and commissions. While Gov. Pat Quinn’s office already published a Web site listing all appointments, Garrett’s bill, SB 1602, would aim to increase transparency, prevent conflicts of interest and “ensure the process isn’t dominated by political insiders.” She referred to several Blagojevich appointments involved in the ongoing federal investigation of using public office for private gain.
Both Franks and Garrett said the legislature continues to advance reform measures not addressed by Quinn’s Illinois Reform Commission. Franks said the panel did good work, “but by no means is it all inclusive or the only reasonable voice.”
The commission did not make a specific recommendation, for instance, about whether to let voters recall elected officials. Commissioner Patrick Collins previously said the group only gave recommendations that received unanimous support, and recall was not unanimous but deserved additional consideration.
One area the commission did make specific recommendations was campaign finance. While last week’s attempt to debate so-called contribution limits soured, another attempt could be made as soon as tomorrow. Sen. Don Harmon, an Oak Park Democrat, went as far to say he expects some form of contribution caps to pass both chambers tomorrow. The process is expected to start with a Senate committee hearing in the afternoon.
Harmon has been negotiating a compromise with lawmakers and the Illinois Reform Commission. He said there is “if not broad agreement, at least broad acceptance” of $5,000 contribution limits for individual donors. That’s a more lenient limit than the $2,400 cap recommended by the commission. But the bigger sticking point, according to Harmon, is whether to limit the amount statewide political parties can donate to their candidates.
But a statement from House Speaker Michael Madigan today made it seem as though that issue may be close to a resolution among Democrats.
A public TV program called Illinois Lawmakers reported that Madigan said he and Senate President John Cullerton have come to an agreement on capping the amount of money political parties can transfer to candidates’ campaign committees. Both leaders have withheld their support of the idea in the past.
“We are moving in the right direction.” Madigan said. “There should be caps on contributions. There should be caps on transfers between committees.”
FOIA rewrite advances
One area where lawmakers did strike a compromise with competing versions is strengthening the Freedom of Information Act and the Open Meetings Act.
The Illinois Press Association and the Illinois Attorney General expressed disappointment with a watered down version last week, but both enthusiastically supported the version that won House approval today. “This bill did not have everything we wanted, but we were very happy with this bill,” said David Porter, spokesman for the Illinois Press Association.
Senate Bill 189 would increase the standard for public bodies to proving a requested document is exempt from the law. It also would shorten the time public bodies would have to respond to requests from seven business days to five.
One major change is that a certified “public access counselor” would have authority to review and determine whether documents should have been released under the FOIA, and he or she would be able to subpoena documents. The counselor could go as far as issuing binding opinions to resolve disputes and sue to enforce those opinions.
We’ll have much more in the next few days.
The legislature continues to advance measures that would try to prevent the alleged wrongdoing by former Gov. Rod Blagojevich from going on long enough for a federal indictment to intervene.
Rep. Jack Franks, a Woodstock Democrat and longtime Blagojevich critic, revived his effort to change the state Constitution so voters could “recall” elected officials. The effort failed last year. This time, however, he’s calling for a constitutional amendment that would only focus on allowing voters to recall the governor, not other statewide officeholders or legislators.
Franks called it a first step and said that recall should only be used in extreme situations, describing recall authority as a “nuclear option” to remove corrupt or inept officials. He pointed to 18 other states that have some version of a recall provision, but it’s only been used twice in recent history, the most recent in California in 2003.
The bill is scheduled for a committee hearing tomorrow morning. We’ll have more then.
Sen. Susan Garrett, a Lake Forest Democrat, also is sponsoring a measure to increase transparency in the way the governor appoints people to boards and commissions. While Gov. Pat Quinn’s office already published a Web site listing all appointments, Garrett’s bill, SB 1602, would aim to increase transparency, prevent conflicts of interest and “ensure the process isn’t dominated by political insiders.” She referred to several Blagojevich appointments involved in the ongoing federal investigation of using public office for private gain.
Both Franks and Garrett said the legislature continues to advance reform measures not addressed by Quinn’s Illinois Reform Commission. Franks said the panel did good work, “but by no means is it all inclusive or the only reasonable voice.”
The commission did not make a specific recommendation, for instance, about whether to let voters recall elected officials. Commissioner Patrick Collins previously said the group only gave recommendations that received unanimous support, and recall was not unanimous but deserved additional consideration.
One area the commission did make specific recommendations was campaign finance. While last week’s attempt to debate so-called contribution limits soured, another attempt could be made as soon as tomorrow. Sen. Don Harmon, an Oak Park Democrat, went as far to say he expects some form of contribution caps to pass both chambers tomorrow. The process is expected to start with a Senate committee hearing in the afternoon.
Harmon has been negotiating a compromise with lawmakers and the Illinois Reform Commission. He said there is “if not broad agreement, at least broad acceptance” of $5,000 contribution limits for individual donors. That’s a more lenient limit than the $2,400 cap recommended by the commission. But the bigger sticking point, according to Harmon, is whether to limit the amount statewide political parties can donate to their candidates.
But a statement from House Speaker Michael Madigan today made it seem as though that issue may be close to a resolution among Democrats.
A public TV program called Illinois Lawmakers reported that Madigan said he and Senate President John Cullerton have come to an agreement on capping the amount of money political parties can transfer to candidates’ campaign committees. Both leaders have withheld their support of the idea in the past.
“We are moving in the right direction.” Madigan said. “There should be caps on contributions. There should be caps on transfers between committees.”
FOIA rewrite advances
One area where lawmakers did strike a compromise with competing versions is strengthening the Freedom of Information Act and the Open Meetings Act.
The Illinois Press Association and the Illinois Attorney General expressed disappointment with a watered down version last week, but both enthusiastically supported the version that won House approval today. “This bill did not have everything we wanted, but we were very happy with this bill,” said David Porter, spokesman for the Illinois Press Association.
Senate Bill 189 would increase the standard for public bodies to proving a requested document is exempt from the law. It also would shorten the time public bodies would have to respond to requests from seven business days to five.
One major change is that a certified “public access counselor” would have authority to review and determine whether documents should have been released under the FOIA, and he or she would be able to subpoena documents. The counselor could go as far as issuing binding opinions to resolve disputes and sue to enforce those opinions.
We’ll have much more in the next few days.
Friday, May 22, 2009
If not today, Thursday?
By Bethany Jaeger and Jamey Dunn
The day that was supposed to be “Ethics Day” in the General Assembly came and went with confusing and dramatic developments that sent lawmakers and reformers back to the drawing table, with less than nine days left in the legislature’s regularly scheduled spring session.
And the legislature took Memorial Day weekend off, returning to Springfield Tuesday. And they still hope to adjourn May 29, although the actual deadline isn’t until the 31st.
Gov. Pat Quinn started the day by saying he doesn’t intend to sign a $26 billion infrastructure program until the legislature sends him an operating budget and a series of government reform measures. But movement on a significant portion of the reform measures is delayed until the day before Senate President John Cullerton hoped to adjourn.
Campaign contribution limits, for instance, were supposed to be debated today in the Senate. But a string of misunderstandings and tension-ridden conversations resulted in no action.
The Senate did agree with the House and approved two of House Speaker Michael Madigan’s measures. If signed by the governor, they would revamp the way the state buys products and services and shine more light on investigations into corruption within state government. Senate Bill 51 addresses procurement, while Senate Bill 54 addresses state employee ethics laws and lobbyist registration. The Senate did not, however, approve Madigan’s “fumigation” bill to terminate up to 750 employees appointed by former Govs. Rod Blagojevich and George Ryan.
Enforcement
The governor’s Illinois Reform Commission did present the first of its major proposals, which also happened to be a rather complex and controversial topic of state-level prosecution of public corruption cases. Only one of nine provisions won Senate approval today.
A visibly frustrated Collins held an impromptu news conference after a Senate hearing. “That’s not the process that we were promised,” he said after the votes. “We did not get enforcement reform today.”
According to Collins, the package was designed to give state prosecutors more ‘tools” to investigate corruption. The commission also sought greater penalties for such crimes. The amendment that met the most opposition would have expanded state’s attorneys’ authority to record conversations, including giving them power to wiretap telephones, with a judge’s approval.
Collins also advocated for making it harder for someone convicted of public corruption to get off with just probation, unless he or she cooperated with the investigation.
One attorney opposed the idea because he said it would take sentencing powers away from judges. Attorney Robert Loeb joined the Illinois Bar Association in opposing all of the commission’s the ideas because he said they would create extreme penalties for some minor offenses. He added that many aspects of the proposals already are covered by existing law.
Sen. Bill Haine, an Alton Democrat who voted “present” on all of the proposals, said that he was hesitant to greatly expand the powers of state’s attorneys because they are elected rather than appointed and might use political power to target opponents.
Sen. Kwame Raoul, a Chicago Democrat, said he worried about giving greater eavesdropping powers to state’s attorneys because there are 102 of them throughout the state, challenging consistency in training and enforcement.
The only provision that won approval was crafted by Sen. Dan Kotowski, a Park Ridge Democrat. It had no opposition.
Collins said while the legislators complained about not having enough time to consider the commission’s proposals, they approved Kotowski’s provision the same day it was filed.
Kotowski designed the measure to strike at the heart of Blagojevich’s alleged wrongdoings: his political campaign fund. The measure, which won Senate approval this afternoon and now heads to the House, would punish an individual who was convicted of public corruption the same as if he or she were a convicted drug dealer. The person would be subject to forfeiting property, assets or political funds.
“If you commit the act of corruption and graft, you’re going to lose your property, you’re going to lose your campaign fund, you’re going to lose anything that you acquired as a result of that,” Kotowski said.
Kotowski added that the commission’s enforcement provisions include rather far-reaching reforms that could take time to educate legislators and the public. “I’m not giving up on this stuff,” he said, adding that the ideas could be negotiated and brought up during the legislature’s annual fall session. “It’s not everything that we want to accomplish, not by any stretch. But it’s a really good first step, and I am excited about that.”
Campaign finance
The debate about campaign contribution limits has been bumped back to May 28 at the request of Collins, who said he needed time to negotiate an agreement between competing bills. “We’re at different places,” he said during his second Statehouse news conference of the day.
The commission proposes limiting individual donations at $2,400, while other proposals would limit them to $5,000 or $10,000. The commission also wants to limit large transfers of money from statewide political parties to their candidates. A Democratic proposal would not limit such transfers.
“Hopefully we can close that gap in the next few days,” Collins said. “And if we don’t, we’ve been assured many different ways with a lot of witnesses that we will get an up-or-down vote on the [commission’s] bill.”
Senate Minority Leader Christine Radogno has sponsored two different versions (a $10,000 limit and a $2,400 limit on behalf of the commission), none of which have been called for debate. She said it sounded as if Democratic leaders were trying to “run out the clock” on campaign finance limits. “I think there are people who want the status quo to continue, and those would be the people who have the majorities in this institution right now, the Democrats. They don’t want to change it.”
Senate President John Cullerton disagreed and said leadership was trying to five the commission’ time to negotiate bills. “These issues are not simple black and white issues. They require a lot of nuance.”
FOIA
Efforts to strengthen the understanding and enforcement of the Freedom of Information Act are still in the works, although the Illinois Press Association and attorney general’s office expressed dissatisfaction with some water-downed versions. The Illinois Reform Commission is still trying to negotiate and could try to advance a revised measure Thursday, as well.
FYI: Here's the Illinois Reform Commission's full report.
The day that was supposed to be “Ethics Day” in the General Assembly came and went with confusing and dramatic developments that sent lawmakers and reformers back to the drawing table, with less than nine days left in the legislature’s regularly scheduled spring session.
And the legislature took Memorial Day weekend off, returning to Springfield Tuesday. And they still hope to adjourn May 29, although the actual deadline isn’t until the 31st.
Gov. Pat Quinn started the day by saying he doesn’t intend to sign a $26 billion infrastructure program until the legislature sends him an operating budget and a series of government reform measures. But movement on a significant portion of the reform measures is delayed until the day before Senate President John Cullerton hoped to adjourn.
Campaign contribution limits, for instance, were supposed to be debated today in the Senate. But a string of misunderstandings and tension-ridden conversations resulted in no action.
The Senate did agree with the House and approved two of House Speaker Michael Madigan’s measures. If signed by the governor, they would revamp the way the state buys products and services and shine more light on investigations into corruption within state government. Senate Bill 51 addresses procurement, while Senate Bill 54 addresses state employee ethics laws and lobbyist registration. The Senate did not, however, approve Madigan’s “fumigation” bill to terminate up to 750 employees appointed by former Govs. Rod Blagojevich and George Ryan.
Enforcement
The governor’s Illinois Reform Commission did present the first of its major proposals, which also happened to be a rather complex and controversial topic of state-level prosecution of public corruption cases. Only one of nine provisions won Senate approval today.
A visibly frustrated Collins held an impromptu news conference after a Senate hearing. “That’s not the process that we were promised,” he said after the votes. “We did not get enforcement reform today.”
According to Collins, the package was designed to give state prosecutors more ‘tools” to investigate corruption. The commission also sought greater penalties for such crimes. The amendment that met the most opposition would have expanded state’s attorneys’ authority to record conversations, including giving them power to wiretap telephones, with a judge’s approval.
Collins also advocated for making it harder for someone convicted of public corruption to get off with just probation, unless he or she cooperated with the investigation.
One attorney opposed the idea because he said it would take sentencing powers away from judges. Attorney Robert Loeb joined the Illinois Bar Association in opposing all of the commission’s the ideas because he said they would create extreme penalties for some minor offenses. He added that many aspects of the proposals already are covered by existing law.
Sen. Bill Haine, an Alton Democrat who voted “present” on all of the proposals, said that he was hesitant to greatly expand the powers of state’s attorneys because they are elected rather than appointed and might use political power to target opponents.
Sen. Kwame Raoul, a Chicago Democrat, said he worried about giving greater eavesdropping powers to state’s attorneys because there are 102 of them throughout the state, challenging consistency in training and enforcement.
The only provision that won approval was crafted by Sen. Dan Kotowski, a Park Ridge Democrat. It had no opposition.
Collins said while the legislators complained about not having enough time to consider the commission’s proposals, they approved Kotowski’s provision the same day it was filed.
Kotowski designed the measure to strike at the heart of Blagojevich’s alleged wrongdoings: his political campaign fund. The measure, which won Senate approval this afternoon and now heads to the House, would punish an individual who was convicted of public corruption the same as if he or she were a convicted drug dealer. The person would be subject to forfeiting property, assets or political funds.
“If you commit the act of corruption and graft, you’re going to lose your property, you’re going to lose your campaign fund, you’re going to lose anything that you acquired as a result of that,” Kotowski said.
Kotowski added that the commission’s enforcement provisions include rather far-reaching reforms that could take time to educate legislators and the public. “I’m not giving up on this stuff,” he said, adding that the ideas could be negotiated and brought up during the legislature’s annual fall session. “It’s not everything that we want to accomplish, not by any stretch. But it’s a really good first step, and I am excited about that.”
Campaign finance
The debate about campaign contribution limits has been bumped back to May 28 at the request of Collins, who said he needed time to negotiate an agreement between competing bills. “We’re at different places,” he said during his second Statehouse news conference of the day.
The commission proposes limiting individual donations at $2,400, while other proposals would limit them to $5,000 or $10,000. The commission also wants to limit large transfers of money from statewide political parties to their candidates. A Democratic proposal would not limit such transfers.
“Hopefully we can close that gap in the next few days,” Collins said. “And if we don’t, we’ve been assured many different ways with a lot of witnesses that we will get an up-or-down vote on the [commission’s] bill.”
Senate Minority Leader Christine Radogno has sponsored two different versions (a $10,000 limit and a $2,400 limit on behalf of the commission), none of which have been called for debate. She said it sounded as if Democratic leaders were trying to “run out the clock” on campaign finance limits. “I think there are people who want the status quo to continue, and those would be the people who have the majorities in this institution right now, the Democrats. They don’t want to change it.”
Senate President John Cullerton disagreed and said leadership was trying to five the commission’ time to negotiate bills. “These issues are not simple black and white issues. They require a lot of nuance.”
FOIA
Efforts to strengthen the understanding and enforcement of the Freedom of Information Act are still in the works, although the Illinois Press Association and attorney general’s office expressed dissatisfaction with some water-downed versions. The Illinois Reform Commission is still trying to negotiate and could try to advance a revised measure Thursday, as well.
FYI: Here's the Illinois Reform Commission's full report.
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
FOIA proposals diluted in legislation
By Dana Heupel
Proposed legislation to revise the Illinois Freedom of Information Act is significantly watered down from recommendations to lawmakers by the Illinois Reform Commission, the state attorney general and others, according to the interim head of the Illinois Press Association.
“Only in Illinois would this be defined as reform or transparency,” Don Craven, the association’s interim executive director, said during a telephone news conference today. The association first learned of the changes about midnight Tuesday in a draft of the bill obtained from Illinois House leadership.
Craven, an attorney who has represented news organizations and others seeking public records for more than 25 years, said he and other press association staff will recommend that the organization’s directors oppose the legislation “if it moves forward in this fashion.” He said he favors the current Freedom of Information Act, which he still views as flawed, over the new proposal.
The proposed revisions will be Senate Bill 1265 but have not yet been officially filed in the General Assembly, Craven said. Among the recommendations that differ from those of the Reform Commission, the attorney general and media organizations are:
* Criminal penalties, which the organizations had proposed, are not in the new bill, although it does provide for civil penalties against government bodies. But that only means, Craven said, that “the taxpayers get to pay when a public official violates the law.”
* Language that would have imposed a waiver of most exemptions from the act if a government body refused to respond to a FOIA request in the allotted time period has been removed.
* Certain automatic privacy exemptions in current law were deleted from the groups’ proposal but have been reinstated in the legislation. Among those automatic exemptions, Craven said, are “personnel files, medical files and ‘similar files,' whatever a similar file might be.”
* Every FOIA request would have to go through a public agency’s FOIA officer, and the agency could demand the request in writing. Although the initial time frame for the agency to respond to the request has been shortened from seven to five working days, under the new legislation, the clock won’t start running until the request is in the FOIA officer’s hands. That means it could be delayed if, for instance, the FOIA officer is on vacation, Craven said.
* Current law specifies that information requested under the FOI law should be provided in the format in which it’s kept – if an agency keeps electronic files, for instance, the requested information should be supplied in electronic form. That would no longer be required under the proposed changes, according to Beth Bennett, the press association’s director of government relations.
Craven and Bennett said they weren’t entirely happy with the final recommendations the Reform Commission, the attorney general and others made to the General Assembly because they had been weakened during the process, but the organization still supported those proposed revisions. With the revelation of the new contents of the legislation, the support “went from lukewarm to just pathetic,” Craven said.
"The attorney general strongly opposes these changes and will continue to fight to restore the bill to the form that was agreed on by the Illinois Reform Commission and all of our allies," said Cara Smith, deputy chief of staff for Attorney General Lisa Madigan. "The agreed-upon language was the result of months and months of hard work, and we feel it would bring a tremendous level of transparency to Illinois."
Proposed legislation to revise the Illinois Freedom of Information Act is significantly watered down from recommendations to lawmakers by the Illinois Reform Commission, the state attorney general and others, according to the interim head of the Illinois Press Association.
“Only in Illinois would this be defined as reform or transparency,” Don Craven, the association’s interim executive director, said during a telephone news conference today. The association first learned of the changes about midnight Tuesday in a draft of the bill obtained from Illinois House leadership.
Craven, an attorney who has represented news organizations and others seeking public records for more than 25 years, said he and other press association staff will recommend that the organization’s directors oppose the legislation “if it moves forward in this fashion.” He said he favors the current Freedom of Information Act, which he still views as flawed, over the new proposal.
The proposed revisions will be Senate Bill 1265 but have not yet been officially filed in the General Assembly, Craven said. Among the recommendations that differ from those of the Reform Commission, the attorney general and media organizations are:
* Criminal penalties, which the organizations had proposed, are not in the new bill, although it does provide for civil penalties against government bodies. But that only means, Craven said, that “the taxpayers get to pay when a public official violates the law.”
* Language that would have imposed a waiver of most exemptions from the act if a government body refused to respond to a FOIA request in the allotted time period has been removed.
* Certain automatic privacy exemptions in current law were deleted from the groups’ proposal but have been reinstated in the legislation. Among those automatic exemptions, Craven said, are “personnel files, medical files and ‘similar files,' whatever a similar file might be.”
* Every FOIA request would have to go through a public agency’s FOIA officer, and the agency could demand the request in writing. Although the initial time frame for the agency to respond to the request has been shortened from seven to five working days, under the new legislation, the clock won’t start running until the request is in the FOIA officer’s hands. That means it could be delayed if, for instance, the FOIA officer is on vacation, Craven said.
* Current law specifies that information requested under the FOI law should be provided in the format in which it’s kept – if an agency keeps electronic files, for instance, the requested information should be supplied in electronic form. That would no longer be required under the proposed changes, according to Beth Bennett, the press association’s director of government relations.
Craven and Bennett said they weren’t entirely happy with the final recommendations the Reform Commission, the attorney general and others made to the General Assembly because they had been weakened during the process, but the organization still supported those proposed revisions. With the revelation of the new contents of the legislation, the support “went from lukewarm to just pathetic,” Craven said.
"The attorney general strongly opposes these changes and will continue to fight to restore the bill to the form that was agreed on by the Illinois Reform Commission and all of our allies," said Cara Smith, deputy chief of staff for Attorney General Lisa Madigan. "The agreed-upon language was the result of months and months of hard work, and we feel it would bring a tremendous level of transparency to Illinois."
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Change is inevitable
Illinois' budget deficit looks worse, but the cooperation and transparency within state government looks better.
Gov. Pat Quinn has said in the past and confirmed again today that the state’s budget deficit could exceed the previously projected $9 billion next fiscal year. And the federal stimulus funds won’t come close to helping the state close the gap between the amount the state spends versus the amount the state collects in revenue. Jack Lavin, the governor’s chief operating officer, said last week that the current projection is that stimulus funds could help knock off $2 billion of the deficit. That means a lot more changes are in order, and those changes could be painful.
The Senate is gearing up for a series of public hearings to discuss where to cut and how to bring in more revenue. Senate President John Cullerton and Minority Leader Christine Radogno are setting up a special committee, with an even number of Democrats and Republicans, to talk about where to scrutinize spending, including public employee pension systems, health and human services, education and state government operations. The committee is slated to produce a report with potential recommendations by March 25, one week after Quinn proposes his first state budget to the General Assembly.
While Cullerton said everything is on the table, he previously said that there wasn’t much room to cut from state employee payroll and that he couldn’t imagine cutting health care programs when so many people already lack health insurance. Republicans could have a completely different approach. So the creation of this new bipartisan committee gives Democrats and Republicans equal credit — or blame — for the product. It also means Republicans can’t sit back and say it’s a Democratic-controlled plan to which they can only voice opposition. Now they have to come up with some ideas, too.
Word of the day = transparency
Quinn also initiated another effort to change the climate within executive agencies and offices. Consistent with last week’s recommendations of public access advocates, including Attorney General Lisa Madigan, Quinn urged agency directors to err on the side of disclosure. “The people of Illinois demand an open, honest and transparent government,” Quinn said in a statement. “State government must take all steps necessary to make information as accessible as possible.”
In his memo to agency directors, he said, “No decision to withhold information sought [through the Freedom of Information Act] shall be made to avoid embarrassment or for any speculative or other improper purpose.”
Quinn also required that each agency submit a report within 45 days detailing the type of information that could be available online.
State parks to reopen
Quinn also will announce Thursday morning at the Springfield State Fairgrounds that the state will reopen seven state parks previously shut by former Gov. Rod Blagojevich.
Gov. Pat Quinn has said in the past and confirmed again today that the state’s budget deficit could exceed the previously projected $9 billion next fiscal year. And the federal stimulus funds won’t come close to helping the state close the gap between the amount the state spends versus the amount the state collects in revenue. Jack Lavin, the governor’s chief operating officer, said last week that the current projection is that stimulus funds could help knock off $2 billion of the deficit. That means a lot more changes are in order, and those changes could be painful.
The Senate is gearing up for a series of public hearings to discuss where to cut and how to bring in more revenue. Senate President John Cullerton and Minority Leader Christine Radogno are setting up a special committee, with an even number of Democrats and Republicans, to talk about where to scrutinize spending, including public employee pension systems, health and human services, education and state government operations. The committee is slated to produce a report with potential recommendations by March 25, one week after Quinn proposes his first state budget to the General Assembly.
While Cullerton said everything is on the table, he previously said that there wasn’t much room to cut from state employee payroll and that he couldn’t imagine cutting health care programs when so many people already lack health insurance. Republicans could have a completely different approach. So the creation of this new bipartisan committee gives Democrats and Republicans equal credit — or blame — for the product. It also means Republicans can’t sit back and say it’s a Democratic-controlled plan to which they can only voice opposition. Now they have to come up with some ideas, too.
Word of the day = transparency
Quinn also initiated another effort to change the climate within executive agencies and offices. Consistent with last week’s recommendations of public access advocates, including Attorney General Lisa Madigan, Quinn urged agency directors to err on the side of disclosure. “The people of Illinois demand an open, honest and transparent government,” Quinn said in a statement. “State government must take all steps necessary to make information as accessible as possible.”
In his memo to agency directors, he said, “No decision to withhold information sought [through the Freedom of Information Act] shall be made to avoid embarrassment or for any speculative or other improper purpose.”
Quinn also required that each agency submit a report within 45 days detailing the type of information that could be available online.
State parks to reopen
Quinn also will announce Thursday morning at the Springfield State Fairgrounds that the state will reopen seven state parks previously shut by former Gov. Rod Blagojevich.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Spotlight on ethics — and politics
By Bethany Jaeger and Jamey Dunn
The legislature’s effort to improve government ethics in the aftermath of former Gov. Rod Blagojevich today shifted the spotlight onto partisan politics — and the ongoing public-perception battle of U.S. Sen. Roland Burris.
Illinois Republicans continued to bring attention to the way Democratic leadership, particularly Majority Leader Barbara Flynn Currie, handled information regarding Burris’ appointment. She chaired the special House committee that recommended Blagojevich’s impeachment last month.
Currie today responded to accusations that she purposely withheld an affidavit filed by Burris, which explained that he had contact with a handful of Blagojevich’s advisers prior to his appointment to fill the U.S. Senate seat vacated by President Barack Obama. Republicans alleged that Currie did not share the affidavit as soon as she received it because it might have embarrassed Democrats.
From the House floor, Currie said she glanced at Burris’ letter and assumed the entire document contained routine follow-up information about his lobbying clients. Before the affidavit was shared with staff or with Republican committee members, Currie said, Burris released the document to Chicago media.
“Any suggestion that I engaged in a deliberate cover up, that I purposely delayed the distribution of the information, is totally false,” she said. “Any suggestion that I should do a better job of reading my mail in a timely fashion is a suggestion I enthusiastically and more than a little ruefully embrace.”
She has since posted on the committee’s Web site numerous follow-up letters regarding the impeachment report.
Rep. Jim Durkin, Republican co-chair of the special House impeachment committee, said he does not want the committee to reconvene because it could create a legal loophole for Burris to avoid prosecution for potential perjury. Durkin cited a state statute (scroll down to Sec. 32-2c). It says a witness can admit to giving false testimony during an ongoing trial and later correct the statement without facing perjury charges.
Some Democrats agree with Durkin. Reps. Jack Franks of Woodstock and Susana Mendoza of Chicago called on Burris to resign today, joining a growing list of state and federal officials doing so. Both Democrats said they did not want the House committee to hear from Burris again.
“It makes no sense to give somebody who we know lied, who purposefully lied — there’s no doubt in my mind — an opportunity allow himself to squirm his way out of potentially having to go before a court and explain his actions,” Mendoza said.
House GOP members called once more for special election to fill the seat. “This is so tainted, said Rep. Roger Eddy, a Huntsville Republican. “This is so dirty that the only disinfectant that will work is the will of the people. … I don’t have any idea why we continue to be afraid of an election in a democracy.”
Franks and Mendoza both called for a special election. Mendoza, who originally opposed a special election, said she deserved part of the blame for the current situation. She said that she assumed no one would have the “lack of integrity and the blind ambition” to accept an appointment from Blagojevich. “I never thought that this would happen.”
Joint ethics committee
When Democrats and Republicans of both chambers met to discuss ethics reforms this morning, GOP leaders cited the handling of the Burris affidavit and said Democratic control has been unfair and turbid. “The actions of the majority party have been anything but open, have been anything but transparent, have been anything to reflect sunshine over the last two to three weeks,” said House Minority Leader Tom Cross. He and other GOP leaders said the makeup of the ethics reform committee — 10 Democrats and 6 Republicans — fails to ensure bipartisan cooperation and sharing of information.
Durkin said the effort to improve transparency includes information between lawmakers. “Openness is not just with the public, but it also has to be between Republicans and Democrats. And I hope we can do a better job of it in the future.”
Democratic leaders -- House Speaker Michael Madigan and Senate President John Cullerton -- said the makeup of this committee, like all others, reflects the Democratic majority in the legislature. Madigan added that as the majority party, Democrats will be held accountable for the committee’s actions.
Ethics reforms in the works
The purpose of today’s ethics committee was to hear testimony about reforming the state’s Freedom of Information Act and Open Meetings Act. Attorney General Lisa Madigan was among those who offered such recommendations. They include:
Update provisions about the use of technology to produce documents to the public.
The legislature’s committee will meet again at 9 a.m. February 24 in the state Capitol, while Gov. Pat Quinn’s ethics reform commission will meet at 11 a.m. February 23 at the University of Illinois at Springfield. All hearings are open to the public.
The legislature’s effort to improve government ethics in the aftermath of former Gov. Rod Blagojevich today shifted the spotlight onto partisan politics — and the ongoing public-perception battle of U.S. Sen. Roland Burris.
Illinois Republicans continued to bring attention to the way Democratic leadership, particularly Majority Leader Barbara Flynn Currie, handled information regarding Burris’ appointment. She chaired the special House committee that recommended Blagojevich’s impeachment last month.
Currie today responded to accusations that she purposely withheld an affidavit filed by Burris, which explained that he had contact with a handful of Blagojevich’s advisers prior to his appointment to fill the U.S. Senate seat vacated by President Barack Obama. Republicans alleged that Currie did not share the affidavit as soon as she received it because it might have embarrassed Democrats.
From the House floor, Currie said she glanced at Burris’ letter and assumed the entire document contained routine follow-up information about his lobbying clients. Before the affidavit was shared with staff or with Republican committee members, Currie said, Burris released the document to Chicago media.
“Any suggestion that I engaged in a deliberate cover up, that I purposely delayed the distribution of the information, is totally false,” she said. “Any suggestion that I should do a better job of reading my mail in a timely fashion is a suggestion I enthusiastically and more than a little ruefully embrace.”
She has since posted on the committee’s Web site numerous follow-up letters regarding the impeachment report.
Rep. Jim Durkin, Republican co-chair of the special House impeachment committee, said he does not want the committee to reconvene because it could create a legal loophole for Burris to avoid prosecution for potential perjury. Durkin cited a state statute (scroll down to Sec. 32-2c). It says a witness can admit to giving false testimony during an ongoing trial and later correct the statement without facing perjury charges.
Some Democrats agree with Durkin. Reps. Jack Franks of Woodstock and Susana Mendoza of Chicago called on Burris to resign today, joining a growing list of state and federal officials doing so. Both Democrats said they did not want the House committee to hear from Burris again.
“It makes no sense to give somebody who we know lied, who purposefully lied — there’s no doubt in my mind — an opportunity allow himself to squirm his way out of potentially having to go before a court and explain his actions,” Mendoza said.
House GOP members called once more for special election to fill the seat. “This is so tainted, said Rep. Roger Eddy, a Huntsville Republican. “This is so dirty that the only disinfectant that will work is the will of the people. … I don’t have any idea why we continue to be afraid of an election in a democracy.”
Franks and Mendoza both called for a special election. Mendoza, who originally opposed a special election, said she deserved part of the blame for the current situation. She said that she assumed no one would have the “lack of integrity and the blind ambition” to accept an appointment from Blagojevich. “I never thought that this would happen.”
Joint ethics committee
When Democrats and Republicans of both chambers met to discuss ethics reforms this morning, GOP leaders cited the handling of the Burris affidavit and said Democratic control has been unfair and turbid. “The actions of the majority party have been anything but open, have been anything but transparent, have been anything to reflect sunshine over the last two to three weeks,” said House Minority Leader Tom Cross. He and other GOP leaders said the makeup of the ethics reform committee — 10 Democrats and 6 Republicans — fails to ensure bipartisan cooperation and sharing of information.
Durkin said the effort to improve transparency includes information between lawmakers. “Openness is not just with the public, but it also has to be between Republicans and Democrats. And I hope we can do a better job of it in the future.”
Democratic leaders -- House Speaker Michael Madigan and Senate President John Cullerton -- said the makeup of this committee, like all others, reflects the Democratic majority in the legislature. Madigan added that as the majority party, Democrats will be held accountable for the committee’s actions.
Ethics reforms in the works
The purpose of today’s ethics committee was to hear testimony about reforming the state’s Freedom of Information Act and Open Meetings Act. Attorney General Lisa Madigan was among those who offered such recommendations. They include:
- Require training of public employees who respond to FOIA requests.
- Charge fines for people who violate the FOI law.
- Codify the public access counselor, which she created in 2004 in response to Blagojevich’s administration, and allow that lawyer’s opinions to be legally binding rather than advisory.
- Allow findings of ethical violations of state employees to be made public and to be referred to law enforcement.
Update provisions about the use of technology to produce documents to the public.
- Tighten rules about when information is exempt from public access. Illinois currently has about 45 exemptions, while the average in other states is about 15, she said.
- Ensure people are only charging for the actual cost of reproducing the documents.
The legislature’s committee will meet again at 9 a.m. February 24 in the state Capitol, while Gov. Pat Quinn’s ethics reform commission will meet at 11 a.m. February 23 at the University of Illinois at Springfield. All hearings are open to the public.
Thursday, December 18, 2008
Impeachment: Day 3
The evidence gathered during the third day of the Illinois House’s impeachment investigation will play a role in committee members’ decisions about whether to recommend impeachment of Gov. Rod Blagojevich. Yet the answers committee members could not get from witnesses today is likely to be just as important, if not more, in determining whether the governor is fulfilling his constitutional duties.
Questions floated during today’s nearly seven-hour hearing focused on three things:
Ultimately, the committee is looking for a pattern of behavior. Today’s testimony offered information that dated back to 2003, the first year Blagojevich took office.
“For those of us who have been around the building for the last six or seven years, some of it’s old news,” said Steve Brown, spokesman for House Speaker Michael Madigan, who is presiding over the impeachment investigation. “But in the context of a pattern of abuse of power, abuse of law, abuse of the appropriations process, I think it all shows a real pattern of behavior.”
The known work of the committee is done, Brown said. But it’s unknown yet whether the U.S. attorney’s office will give the OK to invite testimony from people involved in the ongoing criminal investigation(s), mainly Ali Ata and Joseph Cari (see the Day 1 blog). The committee went home for the weekend but will return to the state Capitol at noon Monday. Rep. Barbara Flynn Currie, committee chair, told members to be prepared for two days of work, but the specific agenda is unknown.
Here are some highlights of information gathered from today’s hearing:
Administrative authority (JCAR)
Committee members could not get straight answers about who ultimately made the decision to expand the state-sponsored health insurance program despite rejections the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules. Simply called JCAR, the bipartisan legislative panel reviews administrative rules to make sure they stay true to the legislative intent. Read lots of background information about the expansion of FamilyCare in previous blogs.
A group of businessmen filed a lawsuit against the governor, claiming that he expanded a state-sponsored health care program to middle-income families without legislative approval and without specific spending authority to pay for it.
Director Barry Maram pointed out that court rulings have not specifically addressed whether the Department of Healthcare and Family Services had authority to expand the program. Court decisions so far have only determined that the eligibility criteria used for the FamilyCare expansion don’t abide by federal employment rules (see more here).
Fun fact: Since JCAR was created 31 years ago, nearly half of the rules it has suspended or prohibited have happened during the past six years of the Blagojevich administration, according to Vicki Thomas, executive director of JCAR.
The governor’s office has said JCAR is just an advisory body. Thomas said if the state didn’t have a JCAR, it would lead to “abuse of power and serious problems of separation of powers because then you would have the administration making law.”
Audits
Auditor General Bill Holland cited a June 2005 audit that documented significant problems in the agency where the governor consolidated many of the state’s important functions, Central Management Services. So-called efficiency initiatives turned out to be not so efficient, costing state agencies more money than they saved, Holland said. But the agency’s contracting practices were even more problematic. Many times, members of the governor’s staff played key roles in selecting the companies that would receive the state contract, which is unusual, he said. In one instance, a state contract was granted to an agency that did not yet exist.
Holland said routine requests for such information as contracts and travel vouchers also have been problematic. “Every year those are questions we’re going to ask … but when we ask for information and it is now being routinely given to legal staff, that is not making it any easier. It is making it more complex,” he said.
Holland also repeated the scenario in which he said the governor illegally tried to import doses of flu vaccine after initial scare of a shortage, but the U.S. government never approved the European vaccine. It eventually was meant to ship to Pakistan, but it didn’t get used there, either, because it expired.
Freedom of Information
The administration had shown “disregard” and “contempt” of the law on rather routine requests for public documents under the state’s Freedom of Information Act, said Jay Stewart, executive director of the Chicago-based Better Government Association. He said the administration repeatedly denied his requests, which isn’t that unusual. But what is unusual is that officials couldn’t confirm whether they had the information requested, and if they did have the information, they wouldn’t provide it. Stewart said it was the first “hypothetical denial” he’s ever received. The association has been trying to get access to federal grand jury subpoenas served upon the administration.
Questions floated during today’s nearly seven-hour hearing focused on three things:
- Has the governor exceeded his authority, and is he directly responsible for the expansion of a state health care program without legislative approval?
- Do particular state audits of his administration document a habitual ignorance or flat-out disregard for state and federal laws?
- Has his administration unnecessarily and inappropriately withheld information from the public?
Ultimately, the committee is looking for a pattern of behavior. Today’s testimony offered information that dated back to 2003, the first year Blagojevich took office.
“For those of us who have been around the building for the last six or seven years, some of it’s old news,” said Steve Brown, spokesman for House Speaker Michael Madigan, who is presiding over the impeachment investigation. “But in the context of a pattern of abuse of power, abuse of law, abuse of the appropriations process, I think it all shows a real pattern of behavior.”
The known work of the committee is done, Brown said. But it’s unknown yet whether the U.S. attorney’s office will give the OK to invite testimony from people involved in the ongoing criminal investigation(s), mainly Ali Ata and Joseph Cari (see the Day 1 blog). The committee went home for the weekend but will return to the state Capitol at noon Monday. Rep. Barbara Flynn Currie, committee chair, told members to be prepared for two days of work, but the specific agenda is unknown.
Here are some highlights of information gathered from today’s hearing:
Administrative authority (JCAR)
Committee members could not get straight answers about who ultimately made the decision to expand the state-sponsored health insurance program despite rejections the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules. Simply called JCAR, the bipartisan legislative panel reviews administrative rules to make sure they stay true to the legislative intent. Read lots of background information about the expansion of FamilyCare in previous blogs.
A group of businessmen filed a lawsuit against the governor, claiming that he expanded a state-sponsored health care program to middle-income families without legislative approval and without specific spending authority to pay for it.
Director Barry Maram pointed out that court rulings have not specifically addressed whether the Department of Healthcare and Family Services had authority to expand the program. Court decisions so far have only determined that the eligibility criteria used for the FamilyCare expansion don’t abide by federal employment rules (see more here).
Fun fact: Since JCAR was created 31 years ago, nearly half of the rules it has suspended or prohibited have happened during the past six years of the Blagojevich administration, according to Vicki Thomas, executive director of JCAR.
The governor’s office has said JCAR is just an advisory body. Thomas said if the state didn’t have a JCAR, it would lead to “abuse of power and serious problems of separation of powers because then you would have the administration making law.”
Audits
Auditor General Bill Holland cited a June 2005 audit that documented significant problems in the agency where the governor consolidated many of the state’s important functions, Central Management Services. So-called efficiency initiatives turned out to be not so efficient, costing state agencies more money than they saved, Holland said. But the agency’s contracting practices were even more problematic. Many times, members of the governor’s staff played key roles in selecting the companies that would receive the state contract, which is unusual, he said. In one instance, a state contract was granted to an agency that did not yet exist.
Holland said routine requests for such information as contracts and travel vouchers also have been problematic. “Every year those are questions we’re going to ask … but when we ask for information and it is now being routinely given to legal staff, that is not making it any easier. It is making it more complex,” he said.
Holland also repeated the scenario in which he said the governor illegally tried to import doses of flu vaccine after initial scare of a shortage, but the U.S. government never approved the European vaccine. It eventually was meant to ship to Pakistan, but it didn’t get used there, either, because it expired.
Freedom of Information
The administration had shown “disregard” and “contempt” of the law on rather routine requests for public documents under the state’s Freedom of Information Act, said Jay Stewart, executive director of the Chicago-based Better Government Association. He said the administration repeatedly denied his requests, which isn’t that unusual. But what is unusual is that officials couldn’t confirm whether they had the information requested, and if they did have the information, they wouldn’t provide it. Stewart said it was the first “hypothetical denial” he’s ever received. The association has been trying to get access to federal grand jury subpoenas served upon the administration.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
