33 Comments - OneMan - Monday, Jul 23, 12 @ 9:47 am: It seems to me that if these guys are gang leaders wouldn’t you send them further away than Wisconsin, heck depending on the jail they may end up closer to Chicago. - Oswego Willy - Monday, Jul 23, 12 @ 9:53 am: Maybe next time we need former Governor Jim Edgar to endorse Pat Quinn … - Yellow Dog Democrat - Monday, Jul 23, 12 @ 9:53 am: If the threat of Tamms reduces crime, why has the prison population in Illinois exploded since Tamms was built? Rather than using the threat of Tamms to theoretically reduce prison violence, why not increase the number of guards at other facilities? - Just sayin' - Monday, Jul 23, 12 @ 9:57 am: Governor Jim Who? - Secret Square - Monday, Jul 23, 12 @ 10:03 am: “If the threat of Tamms reduces crime, why has the prison population in Illinois exploded since Tamms was built?” Because the “threat of Tamms” was never intended to reduce crime in general — only to maintain order within the prison system. No one, as far as I know, ever went to Tamms for an “outside” crime; they go there ONLY for infractions committed in other prisons. - Lincoln Parker - Monday, Jul 23, 12 @ 10:04 am: $86 billion in budget cuts? They mean $86 million right? - Give Me A Break - Monday, Jul 23, 12 @ 10:19 am: Attention Tea Party and GOP Lawmakers and Candidates: This is what smaller government looks like. - bartelby - Monday, Jul 23, 12 @ 10:22 am: It is understandable that Edgar, who built Tamms supermax, would repeat the canard that it protects guards and prisoners. (The research clearly shows otherwise.) But less excusable is Henry Bayer’s defense. AFSCME was once a progressive union, marching beside the Rev. Martin Luther King in Memphis in 1968. The idea that they would now champion a form of imprisonment condemned by every major human rights group in the world is simply tragic. When will labor in Illinois quit its sad addiction to prisons? There are far better ways to keep people employed and union ranks growing. - cassandra - Monday, Jul 23, 12 @ 10:27 am: Does “begin a round of layoffs” at DCFS mean those affected are no longer employed or that advance notifications required by the collective bargaining contract are being made just in case. And how many of those affected would actually lose employment versus being shifted to other, frontline positions in the agency. In the 21st century, it’s hard to quarrel with a plan that decreases middle management and increases frontline service, whether it’s a govt agency or a business. This feels like the Quinn admin crying wolf again, as when they threatened to cut those day care payments and then suddenly got the legislature to provide the money. And remember those 2500 layoffs that never happened when Quinn took office. Isn’t there a more civilized way of conducting the state’s business, instead of lurching from one manufactured crisis to another in order to whip up public sentiment while scaring consumers and civil servants alike. What is it that Quinn really wants this time? Or does he know? - Dan Bureaucrat - Monday, Jul 23, 12 @ 10:38 am: Am I having deja vu or did Governor Edgar already get a generous full round of reporting on this? His own Task Force said that the facility should never be used for long-term isolation and that if they were going to have a supermax, they needed to have humanitarian and constitutional safeguards. Maybe if he had followed the original intent of the prison, it would still be open. http://www.progressillinois.com/posts/content/2012/03/06/several-lessons-be-learned-potential-closing-tamms-supermax-prison - Dan Bureaucrat - Monday, Jul 23, 12 @ 10:42 am: Secret Square- More than half of the men at Tamms were sent there even though they never committed a crime in a regular Illinois prison. This was revealed in 2009 in an expose by the Belleville News Democrat, that also showed how many men were attempting suicide, self-mutilating, and suffering from extreme mental illnesses without treatment. According to the IDOC, there are only 25 men who need the extra security at a place like Tamms. This is a huge confession. We don’t need to pay $26 million to keep a place open for 25 men no matter what kind of hash Henry Bayer is slinging. - Yellow Dog Democrat - Monday, Jul 23, 12 @ 10:49 am: @Secret Square - I’d expect that if the threat of Tamms were so awful, folks would want to avoid prison, get out of prison, and stay out of prison altogether. You’re suggesting that the prison inmates have found some sort of happy medium in minimum and maximum security facilities. They act with conscious regard of the potential consequences of their action to avoid going to Tamms, but apparently lack the forethought to realize that prison isn’t such a good place to be in the first place. I find that argument dubious at best. People commit crimes largely because they aren’t thinking or don’t think they will get caught. No rational person decides they are going to kill someone knowing they are going to lose the next twenty years of freedom. That is why longer prison sentences and “tougher” prison conditions do not deter crime. Frankly, proponents of Tamms would be better off arguing that Tamms is a necessary tool for disrupting prison gang operations. Except of course that gangs operate much more like terrorist organizations and much less like corporations, so cutting off the head doesn’t really stop them, just force them to reorganize. - RNUG - Monday, Jul 23, 12 @ 10:52 am: cassandra, The notices were going to the people in the job positions the State wants to cut. Since almost all positions including PSA’s are union, that will start the whole seniority bumping process, which can take a while to get sorted out because whoever gets bumped out of their job can then bump someone else until they get to the bottom person on the totem pole, who actually loses their job. If Quinn gets to move the $50M from IDOC to DCFS like he wants to, a fair amount of these layoffs won’t happen although I understand it will still result in a realignment of less management and more front line workers. - Demoralized - Monday, Jul 23, 12 @ 10:55 am: @cassandra: Do us all a favor and cease commenting. These are real layoffs and real cuts. I get really tired of your ignorant comments about the budget when it’s clear you have no idea what you are talking about. How about we lay you off from your job and see how happy you are about it. Shut up. - Cal Skinner - Monday, Jul 23, 12 @ 10:56 am: The legislature could make it an impeachable offense for an agency head not to spend appropriated money. - Shemp - Monday, Jul 23, 12 @ 10:56 am: Just going to throw this out there, but since the State clearly can’t afford what it has, has AFSCME really done anything to make serious concessions to preserve the jobs and make their employment more feasible? - Dan Bureaucrat - Monday, Jul 23, 12 @ 11:15 am: No one is losing a single job from the prison closures, unless they want to retire or refuse work. There are so many understaffed prisons, that all the employees will take jobs in other prisons, some very nearby Tamms. Using staff there will stabilize other prisons in the system. There are only 175 men in Tamms so that closure does not affect overcrowding. However, moving 302 employees from Tamms is a huge move for safety in the prisons and it will save the state millions in overtime. This is a win-win. Why aren’t they acknowledging that this is better policy? - Secret Square - Monday, Jul 23, 12 @ 11:20 am: “More than half of the men at Tamms were sent there even though they never committed a crime in a regular Illinois prison.” OK, I may have spoken too soon about no one going there for anything other than a crime committed in a regular prison. But even if people are being sent there merely for being too mentally ill or disruptive for the regular prison system to handle (I’m NOT saying I endorse this, just saying it’s being done) the fact remains that they had to be sentenced to another institution first. No one (as far as I know) is going straight from the courtroom or county jail to Tamms, no matter how heinous their crime. Therefore, my original point that Tamms does not reduce “outside” crime and was never intended to, stands. (Which is not necessarily an argument for or against its closure.) Also, I wouldn’t say this is necessarily what “small government” looks like. This is what disorganized, shortsighted and crisis-driven government, regardless of size, looks like. - Demoralized - Monday, Jul 23, 12 @ 11:23 am: @Cal: I hope you aren’t serious. That’s is the most ridiculous idea I’ve ever heard. - Amuzing Myself - Monday, Jul 23, 12 @ 11:47 am: “Also, I wouldn’t say this is necessarily what “small government” looks like. This is what disorganized, shortsighted and crisis-driven government, regardless of size, looks like.” Bingo. - Just Observing - Monday, Jul 23, 12 @ 11:51 am: I have no idea which prisons need to be closed, but I get really turned off by local communities rallying to keep prisons open for economic development reasons. I’m not diminishing the fact that people may lose jobs and that prisons may be an economic force in a community, but far worse than that is using incarceration as an economic driver. The prison industrial complex is very real and very scary. - carbaby - Monday, Jul 23, 12 @ 11:57 am: The DCFS layoffs are indeed very real. These are in addition to the many contract eliminations to many agencies that already took place, many of which the notifications literraly came out the last day of the fiscal year at 4pm with no prior notice. Our Adoption contract was eliminated. Any agency providing services not “mandated” or cover by Consent Decree were in fact cut. So agencies providing adoption home studies, interstate compact placement/supervision, post adopt education advocacy services and many other post adoption contracts etc amongst many others that I have not become aware of yet have been eliminated. Many of these cannot be recovered if the 50 million is restored. In addition, the 375 is reduced by the current nubmer of vacant positions(around 100) that will not be filled. Then you must take into account the slew of retirements that are occurring as we speak. There were so many by 6/30/12 that I lost track and there are more coming. There are people retiring that are the only people with specific knowledge/skill in their area that there will be no ability to replace that expertise. We will effectively see the largest brain drain I think I will ever have seen in my 18 years. I currently sit on 5 DCFS workgroups and Chair one of them and I do not work for DCFS. This entire reorganization and dire budge situation has taken perhaps an insurmountable toll on all of those who are affected by this. I deal with a very large cross section of staff from every level within DCFS all the way up to Deputy level and the anxiety in addition to lack of real communication about systemic changes has been overwhelming. From an outside observer it appears to be in utter chaos with no plan and that is what everyone inside feels because in fact this is the reality. When you have someone at the helm for whom systems are not their forte as well as no knowledge about how all of the systems work within the agency, this is to be expected. Intact family services are going to shift to 100% being serviced by Private agencies. DCFS currently provides 40%. That transition plan has been going on since early June. Since Jess McDonald has been back on contract(@$20,000/month) since March, I am expecting to see other shifts to privatizing the remainder of Placement services that he had been planning during his administration. That vision of the DCFS providing just Child Protection services only and being a regulatory body can then come into full effect. This is mostly how it has worked since 1995/96 anyway. That is how the system has been able to effectively shrink coinciding with reducing the number of children in care by reducing entry into the front door and moving children to permanent homes. A few from Jess’ former team have been rehired in key positions under the new administration which we anticipated happening considering he recommended the current Director for the position. - Give Me A Break - Monday, Jul 23, 12 @ 12:09 pm: Amuzing: What part of this don’t you understand, less government means less staff. Is that so hard for you to grasp? - Norseman - Monday, Jul 23, 12 @ 12:21 pm: Give Me A Break, will it be hard for you to understand that less staff will mean more children put in harms way? - Give Me A Break - Monday, Jul 23, 12 @ 12:30 pm: Norseman: I’m not disputing that. I would hope when the Tea Party types and the GOP members who tell the voters they are for smaller government also tell them that means layoffs and less staff. I won’t hold my breath waiting for McCarter, McCann and the rest of the “fire breathers” to come clean with their voters. - cassandra - Monday, Jul 23, 12 @ 12:59 pm: Well, $20,000 a month does seem a bit rich given the times, although I suppose the Quinn admin and the Dems were desperate, given the deterioration of DCFS in the years we elected Blago (twice!) and he pressured McDonald out (in 2004). And one would expect McDonald to bring in some of his former people on lush contracts, if only as a compensation for past injustice since Blago got rid of a lot of them too. But turning the DCFS executive partially over to contractors does seem a bit galling to us taxpayers who are footing the bill for both the contractors and the state executives who are supposed to be doing the work of running things. Seems like we are paying double. In the middle of an austerity drive. Why? As to the brain drain argument, I just don’t buy it. The world goes on when people retire, even lots of people at once. And more retirements probably means fewer layoffs in the aggregate. These days, that’s a plus. - state worker - Monday, Jul 23, 12 @ 2:15 pm: Henry Bayer is calling Quinn a tyrant and comparing him to Nixon for closing half-empty facilities in a time of fiscal catastrophe? I’m losing sympathy for the attitude that they are entitled to prison jobs, whether or not we need the prisons. And anyway, no one loses a job with the prison closures! Doesn’t AFSCME have some other issues they need to be working on? Like preserving jobs at DCFS where they really will be lost? - Alan Mills - Monday, Jul 23, 12 @ 2:29 pm: As to Edgar, he has no credibility. When Edgar was in charge, gangs ran rampant. Prison officials were permitted to make deals with the gangs: gangs made cell assignments, job assignments, and were allowed to charge “rent” to non-members. If a gang chief “played ball” with the administration, favors were showered on him. Edgar was Governor when the Richard Speck tapes were made, showing this notorious mass murderer having sex and snorting a mountain of cocaine. After Edgar left, many changes were made in the Department, and this type of deal-maiking with gangs is not allowed. Safe prisons depend on honest, fair management. Tamms has nothing to do with it. As to transfers–the fact that there are only a handful of guys that will be sent out of state is great evidence that Tamms is not needed. Further, based on past evidence, once the receiving states take an objective, fresh look at thesee guys, most will end up in medium or even minimum security prisons, as has happened regularly in the past. - lincolnlover - Monday, Jul 23, 12 @ 3:55 pm: Cassandra - You are obviously not aware that the state has had an unofficial no-hire policy for about 10 years. When someone retires, they are not replaced. In my tiny agency, we lost about 25% of our employees on June 30. They will not be replaced. Compounded by the fact that no one has been hired for a decade, pretty soon you question who is left to do the work? Overtime is not allowed, so there will be a lot that just simply doesn’t get done. - Panopticon - Monday, Jul 23, 12 @ 4:25 pm: @ yellow dog, Tamms was not built to deter crime on the streets. Theoretically you show your lack of understanding of criminal justice theory. More officers actually increases violence, as research has shown in many studies. Tamms has managed the inmate population, by removing really dangerous inmates from the population. Tamms has also controlled the gang leaders attempt at controlling the system, the way they used to, before Tamms was opened. Quinn and his administration are cowering down to inmate advocacy groups, and liberal think tanks that have different agendas. The inmate advocacy groups have ties to Chicago Street gangs, and corrupt Chicago politicians. The liberal think tanks are paying the state millions in grant money to conduct theoretical studies and experiments on the inmate population. This puts every inmate in IDOC in danger, every officer, and guess what Yellow-dog even the general public. There is a strong correlation with the uptick of staff assaults, and violence, including gang activity and rape since Quinn announced his plans to close Tamms. IDOC will have a major riot costing millions more in federal lawsuits to inmates claiming harm, and negligence. Not to mention the physical damage costs of a riot. Don’t worry conjugal visits, weekend furloughs, pic-nics, and milk and cookies before bed will make the Gangbangers feel better about their lack of remorse. - Panopticon - Monday, Jul 23, 12 @ 4:35 pm: Well if Edgar has no credibility from the gangs and the Speck tapes and all, how do you explain that Edgar built Tamms and it worked? Does Quinn have any credibility? Godinez was the Warden at Stateville when the Speck tapes came out, and he we fired for it. Quinn has made him the Director of IDOC! So much for your argument Alan! - wordslinger - Monday, Jul 23, 12 @ 4:35 pm: –There is a strong correlation with the uptick of staff assaults, and violence, including gang activity and rape since Quinn announced his plans to close Tamms.– That analysis came out quickly. Where would one find that? - Yellow Dog Democrat - Tuesday, Jul 24, 12 @ 8:59 am: @Panopticon - I’m glad we agree that the argument that Tamms is a “deterrent” is B.S., while the “disruption” argument is slightly more credible. Unfortunately, that argument doesn’t jive with AFSCME’s claim made over at least the last decade that prisons have become increasingly dangerous, primarily due to overcrowding/understaffing. So please, share your studies claiming that prisons would be safer if we reduced the number of prison guards. As for “disruption,” close Tamms and send them to Texas. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.