Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar » Updated Posts
SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax      Advertise Here      Mobile Version     Exclusive Subscriber Content     Updated Posts    Contact
CapitolFax.com
To subscribe to Capitol Fax, click here.
Ah, but the algorithms! That’s where I had them!

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2023 - Posted by Rich Miller

* Daily Southtown

The losing candidate in the 2022 race for Will County clerk is asking a judge to order a new election in the case, citing mathematic formulas alleging the final count was fraudulent.

Republican Gretchen Fritz filed the lawsuit Dec. 28, claiming she believes “mistakes and fraud have been committed in the casting and counting of ballots” in the Will County clerk’s race because her opponent, Democratic Will County Clerk Lauren Staley Ferry, received more votes than Democratic Gov. J.B. Pritzker. […]

“It appeared quite unusual that a candidate for Will County Clerk, listed at least eight offices below the office with the most media coverage and largest political spending in the state, would receive more votes than the gubernatorial candidate of her party,” according to the lawsuit. […]

Fritz’s attorney, David Shestokas, said Tuesday the lawsuit highlights a “21st Century approach to manipulating the election process.”

Man, Will County really dodged a bullet. Imagine that person overseeing elections. Whew.

* Also, Fritz’s lawyer David Shestokas ran for attorney general last year as a Republican. He has repeatedly claimed that the 2020 presidential election was corrupted by fraud and even outright stolen…


[Headline explained here.]

…Adding… Per a tip in comments, this is from September of 2020, right as the second wave was gaining steam

Several Will County Republican candidates in the Nov. 3 election say the Illinois Department of Public Health coronavirus data used to restrict Joliet area bars and restaurants from being open for indoor guests is flawed and it’s not accurate data. […]

Will County Board member Gretchen Fritz, District 5 Republican from Plainfield, said she does not believe Will County’s coronavirus data is accurate, either.

Fritz is running on the Nov. 3 ballot for Will County Recorder of Deeds. […]

Fritz contends the totals have been inflated because Pritzker wants to unfairly target the people in Will and Kankakee Counties. “We are never going to get an accurate positivity rate,” Fritz said.

  18 Comments      


*** UPDATED x1 *** Divided Downstate appellate court narrowly upholds limited TRO on assault weapons ban case

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2023 - Posted by Rich Miller

*** UPDATE *** Annie Thompson from the attorney general’s office…

The Protect Illinois Communities Act is an important tool in what must be a comprehensive approach to addressing gun violence throughout Illinois, and we remain committed to defending the statute’s constitutionality. We are reviewing the 5th District’s decision, and we will seek its review by the Illinois Supreme Court, and we will ask the court for an expedited schedule.

[ *** End Of Update *** ]

* Fifth Illinois Appellate Court

The narrow issue before us in this case is whether the circuit court of Effingham County properly granted a temporary restraining order (TRO) in favor of plaintiffs under Illinois law. In counts I, II, and III of plaintiffs’ verified complaint, plaintiffs alleged that the procedure by which Public Act 102-1116 (eff. Jan. 10, 2023) (Act or Protect Illinois Communities Act) became law violated the Illinois Constitution and therefore denied them due process of law. In count IV, plaintiffs alleged that the exemptions provided for in the Act violate the equal protection clause of the Illinois Constitution based on their right to keep and bear arms. […]

In order to obtain a TRO, plaintiffs are required to demonstrate the following elements: “(1) a clearly ascertained right in need of protection, (2) irreparable injury in the absence of an injunction, (3) no adequate remedy at law, and (4) a likelihood of success on the merits of the case.” … Once the plaintiff establishes a fair question that his or her rights were violated, the plaintiff has also established a fair question that he or she would likely prevail on his claim. […]

With regard to count I, plaintiffs alleged that the Act violated the “single subject rule” and therefore should be declared unconstitutional. … The Illinois Supreme Court enunciated a two-tier test to determine whether an act runs afoul of the single subject rule. … The court determines first whether the act involves a legitimate single subject and then whether the various provisions within an act all relate to the proper subject at issue. … Thus, in light of the test before the court, and the liberal construction afforded to the single subject rule (Cutinello, 161 Ill. 2d at 423), we cannot conclude that inclusion of these clarifications offends the subject matter so much as to violate the single subject rule. […]

We turn now to count II of the complaint, which alleged the Act violated the three-readings rule found in article IV, section 8 of the Illinois Constitution. … Plaintiffs acknowledged the enrolled-bill doctrine before the circuit court, and that the legislation at issue was certified pursuant to the doctrine. However, plaintiffs asserted the enrolled- bill doctrine should be abandoned and/or abrogated. The circuit court agreed, specifically stating that “the time to revisit this practice is now.” … We cannot agree. … Accordingly, in this case, the circuit court did not have the authority to decide if or when the Illinois Supreme Court should revisit the issue raised by the plaintiffs in count II, and this court does not have that authority either. […]

With regard to count III, plaintiffs alleged that the manner in which the Act was passed violated due process as required by article I, section 2 of the Illinois Constitution, and that accordingly the Act should be declared unconstitutional. Specifically, plaintiffs alleged they “were denied any meaningful opportunity to participate in the passage of [the Act] which attempts to materially impair their fundamental rights to bear arms.” As further explanation, plaintiffs alleged that the “due process violation being complained of herein is the complete and total failure of the [d]efendants to comply with express constitutional procedural guarantees afforded the [p]laintiffs under Ill. Const. 1970, art. IV, § 8(d).” In the response filed with this court, plaintiffs stated that the crux of count III is that plaintiffs “demand the legislative process comply with the procedural requirements of the Illinois Constitution, particularly the single subject rule and the three-readings rule.” However, because we have found there is no likelihood of success on the merits with regard to counts I and II, we must likewise conclude there is no likelihood of success on the merits of count III, because by its plain language it is contingent upon the existence of potentially meritorious claims on counts I and II. As such, we find the trial court erred in granting a TRO on this basis.

With regard to count IV, plaintiffs present an equal protection claim, based not upon the process by which the Act was passed, but upon the groups created by the enumerated exemptions found in the Act. … Defendants claim there is no fundamental right at issue here and so the level of scrutiny is rational basis. This standard requires the court to determine whether the statute bears a rational relationship to a legitimate government purpose. […]

[In Guns Save Life, Inc. v. Ali, the Illinois Supreme Court stated] “We agree that the ordinances impose a burden on the exercise of a fundamental right protected by the second amendment. At its core, the second amendment protects the right of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms for self-defense in the home.” […]

While there is no dispute that the Illinois Supreme Court did not find the right to bear arms under the Illinois Constitution was a fundamental right in 1984 when deciding Kalodimos, it is equally undisputable that the Illinois Supreme Court now accepts the second amendment as a “fundamental right” guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the fourteenth amendment. […]

Under the strict scrutiny analysis, legislation that significantly interferes with the exercise of a fundamental right will be upheld only if it is “necessary to serve a compelling state interest” and is “narrowly tailored” to effectuate that purpose. … Defendants have argued that plaintiffs have no right in need of protection and are unlikely to succeed on the merits; however, defendants’ arguments were based on an erroneous perception that plaintiffs’ right to keep and bear arms was not a fundamental right. As such, we find that plaintiffs’ allegation that the Act infringes on their rights as Illinois citizens to keep and bear arms is a sufficiently alleged right in need of protection. Here, plaintiffs’ complaint alleged that the legislation’s exemption of seven categories of persons from the now prohibited purchase and/or possession of assault weapons, assault weapons attachments, .50-caliber rifles, and .50-caliber cartridges had no basis and therefore violated equal protection guarantees.

In response, defendants claimed the purpose of the Act was to reduce firearm deaths and mass shooting casualties and the exempted categories were based on employment and/or training. We note, however, that no such purpose or basis for the exempted categories is found in the record. The closest this record comes is the naming of the Act as the Protect Illinois Communities Act. While intent of legislation can be found by reviewing the legislative history, based on the legislative procedures utilized for this Act, there is no legislative history. We only have post- enactment statements. Comments issued after legislation is passed is “subsequent legislative history,” not “legislative history,” and is entitled to little, if any, weight. … Accordingly, we find that plaintiffs alleged sufficient facts for a TRO to issue on count IV. […]

We hold no crystal ball allowing us to determine the likelihood of potential harm if the TRO is granted, but we temper our lack of prescience with recognition that both interests—whether through the regulation of firearms or through the fundamental right to keep and bear arms—are based on the increased desire to protect and defend loved ones in light of these horrifying and devastating shootings.

Here, we find it extremely relevant that no opportunity for discourse was provided to the citizens of this state that would allow for recognition of the competing interests in accomplishing what we believe is likely a common goal. Nor does it appear that the legislative process allowed for even a moment of debate between the lawmakers to ensure that the enactment of this law was “narrowly tailored” to effectuate the Act’s purpose in any manner that would allow a larger exempted group to retain their fundamental rights. For these reasons, we find that balancing the equities favors the issuance of a TRO for count IV, and therefore, we affirm the trial court’s order granting the TRO for count IV.

* From Justice James Moore’s dissent

I begin by stressing that in my view, this appeal does not allow us to address whether Public Act 102-1116 (eff. Jan. 10, 2023) (Act) infringes upon any rights granted by the United States Constitution, specifically the second amendment. This significant point was expressly stated to the circuit court by counsel for the plaintiffs during the hearing on the emergency motion for a temporary restraining order (TRO) when he stated, “We are not making second amendment constitutional arguments here because those are for a different day and a different court ***.” Because no issues related to the second amendment of the United States Constitution are before us, as they were not pleaded and were notably disclaimed by counsel for the plaintiffs, I believe our ruling on the grant of the TRO should in no way be interpreted as instruction or guidance as to any issues that may in the future be raised under the second amendment of the United States Constitution. […]

Turning to count IV, as noted by the majority, in this count the plaintiffs present an equal protection claim, based not upon the process by which the Act was passed, but upon the group created by the enumerated exemptions found in the Act. However, I believe the majority has failed to adequately address a crucial threshold matter relating to count IV. As the Illinois Supreme Court has stated, “it is axiomatic that an equal protection claim requires a showing that the individual raising it is similarly situated to the comparison group.” People v. Masterson, 2011 IL 110072, ¶ 25. If a party fails to show that he is similarly situated to the comparison group, his equal protection challenge fails. Id. The plaintiffs’ complaint failed to allege how each, or even any, of the plaintiffs are similarly situated to the exempted group set forth in the Act. The plaintiffs’ complaint and arguments point to a hypothetical Navy SEAL, but failed to allege this scenario was applicable to the plaintiffs. As set forth above, “to be considered ‘well-pleaded,’ a party’s factual allegations must be supported by allegations of specific facts.” Allegations that are “cursory,” or “inexplicably lacking in specifics,” are not sufficient to support the granting of a TRO. This is true because “the standard for injunctive relief is far too high for a court to rely solely on the moving party’s innuendo.” … Therefore, because the plaintiffs have failed to allege facts demonstrating that they are similarly situated to the exempt group complained of, their equal protection challenge fails, and the circuit court’s granting of the TRO must be reversed in its entirety.

I also cannot agree with the majority that if we were to further analyze count IV, strict scrutiny would apply. … As a factual matter, Ali involved a claim under, inter alia, both the second amendment to the United States Constitution and the Illinois constitutional provisions regarding the right to bear arms. Accordingly, it is not surprising that the court would mention “a fundamental right protected by the second amendment.” At no point did the court state that Kalodimos was no longer good law, or in any other way imply that the right to bear arms is now a fundamental right under the Illinois Constitution. Thus, I cannot attribute to Ali the significance the plaintiffs desire.

Accordingly, in light of the only extant precedent on this question, the only way this court could find that a fair question existed that the plaintiffs had a likelihood of success on the merits of this claim under a strict scrutiny equal protection analysis would be to find that Kalodimos has been overruled by a case or cases other than Ali. There is no evidence to support such a conclusion, and as explained above with regard to the other counts before us in this appeal, the circuit and appellate courts of the State of Illinois are required to apply binding precedent from the Illinois Supreme Court to the facts of the cases before the circuit and appellate courts. […]

Put another way, only the Illinois Supreme Court could rule that in a case such as this one—where the plaintiffs pointedly do not invoke the protections of the second amendment to the United States Constitution, and in fact pointedly disclaimed, in the circuit court, “making second amendment constitutional arguments [in this case]”—the development of federal precedent related to the second amendment to the United States Constitution nevertheless has rendered untenable the Illinois Supreme Court’s previous holding that the right to bear arms under our state constitution is not a fundamental right. […]

(I)n this case the plaintiffs have stated emphatically that they are not proceeding under the United States Constitution, and thus have clearly and unequivocally chosen not to avail themselves of the level of protection offered by the second amendment. That leaves only the protection offered by the Illinois Constitution, which pursuant to Kalodimos does not afford to the plaintiffs a fundamental right and does not entitle them to strict scrutiny analysis of their count IV equal protection claim.

  50 Comments      


*** UPDATED x1 *** DuPage County sheriff lashes out at media, posts defensive and misleading letter on Facebook

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2023 - Posted by Rich Miller

*** UPDATE *** It appears the sheriff broke an agreement. From DuPage County Board Chair Deb Conroy…

I’ll just stick by our statement yesterday. We had a productive conversation, and the sheriff assured me he would uphold all state and local laws. During our meeting, we agreed to release a joint statement and say nothing further.

So, as far as I’m concerned, there’s nothing more to say. We move forward, focusing on keeping our residents and community safe.

[ *** End Of Update *** ]

* Background is here if you need it. Letter posted by DuPage County Sheriff James Mendrick on Facebook

Do not listen to the media. I was not threatened to be censured or anything else during this meeting.

Um, the public threats of censure clearly came well before the meeting. Sheriff Mendrick knew what he’d gotten himself into and what consequences he faced. As far as I can tell, no media outlet reported that any such threats were made during the meeting. Maybe he just saw something on Facebook.

* Back to the letter

The meeting that I had with States Attorney Bob Berlin and County Board Chair Debra Conroy yesterday was the first day three tiers of government came together in discussion on this topic.

We ALL agreed that our police should not be going to the homes of our law. abiding residents to harass them over gun registration. They get the issues. We will not be sending deputies out proactively to take your lawfully owned guns. Please remove that stressor from your lives.

Sheriff, it was you and others like you who freaked people out by claiming that law enforcement would be going door to door.

* Returning to the letter

What we will be doing is enhancing penalties for those that use guns illegally in the commission of crimes. Those that commit gun crimes in DuPage will find out how seriously we take gun offenses. If you are not using a gun to conduct criminality, you have nothing to fear from us. If your use of a gun is to harm someone within DuPage County, we are united to make sure you endure every possible penalty that we can bestow upon you for your crimes.

We have reached a time where we must protect our citizens from illegal gun use and at the same time allow law-abiding citizens the ability to defend themselves. The media will make up their own version of this interaction to create conflict, but the truth is that we all agree on the difference between lawful citizens and criminals.

So, if a Naperville police officer arrests a gun store owner for selling banned assault weapons, the sheriff will now allow that person to be incarcerated in his county jail?

  38 Comments      


It’s just a bill

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2023 - Posted by Rich Miller

* Politico

We asked about a State Journal Register story that says there are nearly 1,700 bills being introduced from both chambers that apply to income tax credits for eligible taxpayers, state agencies and departments.

That’s not even close to what the story says

As of Friday, there were 1,690 bills introduced from both chambers - 156 in the state Senate and 1,534 in the House. A common thread in the bills was income tax credits applying to a wide spectrum of eligible taxpayers, state agencies. and departments.

The SJ-R story looked at only a sampling of all the bills. Of those 1,690 bills, Speaker Welch has introduced 940 shells. Deputy Majority Leader Mary Flowers introduced another 76 bills, as did Rep. La Shawn Ford.

* Campaign press release, but it ain’t a bad idea…

Kam Buckner filed legislation to ensure that the head of CPS is a Superintendent and not a CEO, ensuring that schools prioritize students, are not run like businesses, and that there are strict education, certification, and work experience requirements for this role.

CPS had a superintendent until 1995 when the legislature changed Illinois’ law and appointed Paul Vallas to run Chicago’s school district. The change has allowed people like Paul Vallas to ignore the needs of children, their families, and communities and instead make decisions driven by financial outcomes and self interest.

“Our school district has been traumatized by school closures and poor decision making,” Buckner said. “By having a CEO lead our schools we have allowed people without the proper job qualifications to run our district as a business and see our children as data points and not the future of our great City. Legislation I have proposed will change that by reinstating the Superintendent role in CPS and eliminating the title of CEO.”

There have been ten CEOs of Chicago’s public schools since Paul Vallas first took office in 1995.

“As CEO Paul Vallas was driven to create a balanced budget for CPS and it resulted in neighborhood school closures for our children,” said Buckner. “He didn’t put our kids first then and he certainly won’t as Mayor of Chicago.”

Paul Vallas has been an opportunist collecting titles instead of prioritizing Chicago’s youth and education. Chicago State University’s board of Trustees created a job specifically for Vallas to help them turn things around but Vallas was terminated by the Trustees after they realized they had been a pawn in his attempt to advance his bonafides among black voters during his first Mayoral run.

“I sat on the board of Trustees that fired Vallas,” Buckner said. “It was clear then and it’s even clearer now that he puts himself first and it is that same self interested attitude that is allowing him to accept donations from people who used our schools to increase their personal profits. We simply cannot have people like this running our schools or our City.”

Paul Vallas has accepted campaign contributions from Deborah Quazzo, a former CPS employee who violated ethical school standards by pitching her businesses to school principals in an effort to secure CPS contracts and she benefitted from a kickback scheme under CEO Barbara Byrd-Bennett.

As state Representative, Kam Buckner has sponsored 100s of bills to help improve public safety, education, housing, and transportation in Chicago including legislation on needs based school funding, which set a minimum teacher salary and an elected Chicago school board.

The bill is here.

* Meanwhile

A proposed amendment to the Sports Wagering Act in Illinois filed by Rep. Robert Rita would introduce exchange trade wagering.

House Bill 1405 seeks to extend the current sports betting regulations in the Prairie State to include betting exchanges, defined in the bill as “the buying and selling of betting contracts at any time prior to the conclusion of an event based on a describable zero to 100 scale of probability”.

Under the bill’s terms, two betting exchange licenses would be up for grabs if it were to pass, with licensees liable to a $500,000 licensing fee. 

Any licensee would be allowed to offer betting exchange services for a period of four years initially and may renew for a $100,000 fee as long as the operator remains compliant with regulations. 

* This is a Republican-sponsored bill, so keep that in mind

Illinois lawmakers on Monday introduced workers compensation bills that would affect compensability on cumulative trauma and work travel.

H.B. 1543 would determine that an injury arose out of and in the course of employment only if the accident “significantly caused or contributed to both the resulting condition and disability.”

The bill doesn’t define “significantly caused,” so it’s not clear how that would compare to other causation standards such as major contributing cause, proximate cause and predominant cause.

Case law says only that workers must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the work incident or duties were a causative factor in an injury. That bill would limit coverage for cumulative trauma, prohibiting coverage for “ordinary, gradual deterioration or progressive degeneration of the body caused by aging or normal activities of living.”

* Same sponsor for this one

The Illinois Workers’ Compensation Commission would be required to establish a new medical fee schedule and implement a closed drug formulary, under legislation introduced Monday.

H.B. 1548 would render all current medical fee schedules inoperative after Aug. 31, 2024, and establish new reimbursement rates based on Medicare percentages. The bill would also require annual updates to the fee schedule starting Sept. 1, 2025, that would be equal to exactly half the increase in the Consumer Price Index.

H.B. 1546 would require the commission to adopt an evidence-based drug formulary by Sept. 1. The bill does not direct the commission toward any current formulary.

* Stand Up America…

State Legislatures are Back. Here’s How They Can Protect and Strengthen Democracy.

State legislatures are back and beginning to set priorities for the 2023 session. As lawmakers gather it’s critical that they prioritize protecting and strengthening democracy – especially with a divided Congress in Washington.

Legislators and voters in New York and Michigan are coming off of big wins in 2022 – having passed sweeping democracy legislation and ballot initiatives – that will now need to be implemented. Meanwhile, the Illinois and New Mexico legislatures will take up fights that fell short last year like voting rights restoration and a democracy package to create a permanent absentee voter list, restore voting rights, implement automatic voter registration, and more.

Here are a few ways states are prioritizing protecting democracy in 2023:

    • Minnesota: Minnesota lawmakers recently introduced a comprehensive pro-democracy package – the “Democracy for The People Act” – that includes automatic voter registration, restoring the right to vote for Minnesotans on probation or parole, and modernizing the state’s campaign finance system. Legislators also launched a democracy caucus in the Minnesota state house. Recently, lawmakers and voting rights advocates from We Choose Us MN held a press conference to announce a legislative agenda to make the North Star State a national leader in democracy.

    • New Mexico: Last session, New Mexico voting rights advocates nearly passed a sweeping legislative package to strengthen democracy and secure citizens’ access to the ballot. Last week, legislators introduced a revamped version in the statehouse. The bill includes a permanent absentee voter list, rights restoration for people on parole/probation, automatic voter registration, an Election Day holiday, and more. New Mexico lawmakers and advocates hosted a press conference on their plans for the session.

    • Oregon: For the past few years, Oregon advocates have worked diligently to pass legislation to allow currently incarcerated citizens in the state the opportunity to vote to support their communities and families. Last year, the legislation was held up in the Joint Committee on Ways & Means, but with Sen. Elizabeth Steiner and Rep. Tawna Sanchez at the helm of the committee this year, hopes of passage are much greater. A coalition, led by formerly incarcerated individuals, continues to fight to pass the legislation, SB 579, this session.

    • Illinois: Illinois voting rights advocates have been working to pass voting rights restoration for people with felony convictions for years. Last year, SB 828, legislation to restore voting rights for currently incarcerated Illinoisans, came just a few votes shy of passing the House on the final day of session. This session, advocates are bringing back the bill, HB 989, and making sure it is prioritized by lawmakers.

Stand Up America’s members are not new to fighting for legislation to shore up democracy at the state level. In fact, last year, Stand Up America’s members drove more than 1,800 calls and 15,000 emails to legislators and sent over 650,000 texts in support of state-level measures that would strengthen democracy in Arizona, Michigan, New Mexico, Illinois, Oregon, New York, and beyond. This year, they will again work in their state houses to pass legislation to state level protections for their democracy.

* And…


I wonder if the upholstered furniture lobby has a position on that one. /s

…Adding… Press release…

Today, U.S. Congressman Sean Casten (IL-06) introduced a package of legislation to increase the size of the House and Senate, as well as restore the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction to better align with Article III of the US Constitution.

The package, named “A Common Sense Vision for American Democracy” would:
Establish 12 at-large senators to be elected through a nationwide system of ranked choice voting
Add approximately 138 additional Members of the House (if it had been implemented after the 2020 census)
Change the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and create a 13-judge multi-circuit panel to hear cases where the United States or a federal agency is a party

This is the first attempt by a sitting Member of Congress to enact this type of reform. There have been no attempts in Congress to expand the Senate or reinstate the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. The last time the House was expanded was in 1911. After an inability to settle disputes over reapportionment after the 1920 Census, the size of the House was arbitrarily locked in place at 435 in 1929.

An overview of A Common Sense Vision for American Democracy can found below, including bill text and section-by-sections of the legislation.

“The fundamental promise of our democracy is to fulfill the will of the people,” said Rep. Sean Casten. “In recent years, we have failed to meet that promise. There is a growing list of issues – from climate action to gun control to healthcare to voting rights – where the federal government has consistently ignored the priorities of the majority of Americans. This failure not only breeds cynicism but ultimately risks the very survival of our government. We must act against the counter-majoritarian institutions of our political system and seek to reestablish the government as a stalwart for the people.

“The Equal Voices Act will increase the size of the House to be in line with the growing population of the United States. Not only will this bill create smaller districts to allow Members to be more responsive to the needs of their constituents, it will also rebalance inflated representation between districts, and allow for greater diversity that is more representative of our great nation. On top of that, it will grow and equalize the Electoral College, better aligning outcomes with the national popular vote.

“The Senate was purposefully constructed to not reflect the will of the majority. However, a government that doesn’t represent the people cannot sustain the support of the people. This amendment establishes 12 at-large senators to be elected through a nationwide system of ranked choice voting. By creating this bloc of senators, comprising roughly 10% of the body, who are directly responsible to public will, the Senate will be forced to move their agenda towards the will of the majority.

“There are currently incentives to control the composition of the Supreme Court to affect the resolution of disputes in a way that furthers specific policy objectives and politics. These incentives have distorted the actual and perceived fairness and independence of the Court, and this must be remedied. The Constitution gives Congress the power to address the structural concerns of the Supreme Court, and we must do so. It’s time for Congress to restore the Court’s jurisdiction to align with Article III of the Constitution and eliminate the current elements that allow the Court to be gamed for political advantages”

  19 Comments      


Tony Sanders named new state superintendent of education

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2023 - Posted by Rich Miller

* I’ve been following this person for a while on Twitter, etc. and he seems to be pretty darned good at what he does. Press release…

The Illinois State Board of Education (ISBE) today named School District U-46 Superintendent Dr. Tony Sanders the new state superintendent of education after a nationwide search. He will assume his duties in late February. ISBE Deputy Education Officer Krish Mohip will serve as interim state superintendent of education during the transition. Dr. Carmen I. Ayala’s term as state superintendent of education concludes Jan. 31. She announced her retirement after 40 years of service and leadership in Illinois public schools.

“Dr. Tony Sanders is an extraordinary choice for State Superintendent of Education,” said Governor JB Pritzker. “Dr. Sanders’ breadth of experience as superintendent of School District U-46 and his entire background have prepared him to take on this role. His focus on innovation, social emotional development, and academic excellence make him an extraordinary pick. I can think of no better person to lead the Illinois State Board of Education as we continue to invest in, support, and elevate our students and educators.”

“Dr. Tony Sanders has distinguished himself as a visionary leader and passionate advocate for students and educators,” said ISBE Board Chair Dr. Steven Isoye. “As the superintendent of one of Illinois’ largest school districts, he intimately understands the strengths, the policy history, and the challenges of our public schools. At U-46, he has championed equity, expanded opportunities for students, and brought innovative new programs to the district. The Board looks forward to his leadership; we are confident he will build on our record-high graduation rates and college and career readiness to continue leading Illinois’ schools in a positive direction.

“We are also very grateful to have Krish Mohip serve as interim state superintendent. Krish has a wealth of education leadership experience and will provide important guidance and oversight for the agency during this transition.”

Dr. Sanders expanded the district’s offerings during his tenure in U-46, which is headquartered in Elgin and is the second-largest school district in Illinois. He added full-day kindergarten for all students and implemented a developmentally appropriate play-based instructional program. Dr. Sanders grew the district’s dual language program and created a new alternative high school, the DREAM Academy, to reduce expulsions and better serve students in need of trauma-informed care. He also invested in a grow-your-own educator initiative to provide educational support professionals the ability to return to school to earn their teaching credentials. The initiative has supported more than 60 U-46 employees in receiving full tuition reimbursement as they work toward their teacher licensure. Dr. Sanders improved the district’s financial standing, while overseeing a $660 million operating budget.

Dr. Sanders also has advocated at the state and federal levels as a member and past chair of the Large Countywide and Suburban District Consortium. He supported the effort to reform Illinois’ school funding formula and enact Evidence-Based Funding and to pass the Every Student Succeeds Act.

Prior to becoming the U-46 superintendent in 2014, Dr. Sanders served as the district’s chief of communications and accountability and then chief of staff. He also previously served as the chief communications officer for St. Louis Public Schools and in communications and governmental relations roles within Illinois government, including at ISBE. Dr. Sanders received his bachelor’s degree from the University of Illinois Springfield, his Master of Business Administration from New York Institute of Technology, his Chief School Business Official Endorsement from Northern Illinois University, an Honorary Doctor of Laws from Judson University, and his Doctor of Education from Aurora University.

…Adding… IFT…

The Illinois Federation of Teachers (IFT) President Dan Montgomery issued the following statement on the appointment of Dr. Anthony “Tony” Sanders as the 31st State Superintendent of Education for the Illinois State Board of Education (ISBE).

“We congratulate Dr. Tony Sanders on his appointment as State Superintendent of Education and are thrilled to partner with him to achieve policies that center and engage our students and teachers, especially our Black and Brown students who are still recovering from the pandemic. As an Illinois superintendent with a strong education background, Dr. Sanders thoroughly understands the challenges facing our students, teachers, and staff. His steady leadership during the pandemic ensured that Elgin students and school staff were safe and healthy.

“During Dr. Sanders’ tenure leading Elgin District U-46, he was a strong advocate for equitable policies for Black and Brown students. His visionary leadership helped improve district assessment data collection to better the student and teacher experience. We support furthering that effort at the state level and call on him to convene assessment experts, including practitioners, to develop an assessment theory of action.

“We appreciate Dr. Sanders past advocacy for the Evidence Based Funding Formula and hope in his new role, he helps to move our state closer to achieving equitable funding and eliminating disparities in districts statewide.

“We thank Dr. Carmen Ayala for her service and strong leadership during the pandemic, and we are eager to work with Dr. Sanders to continue the equity work that Dr. Ayala started on behalf of our students and teachers.”

  20 Comments      


« NEWER POSTS PREVIOUS POSTS »
* Not as great as it sounds, but whatevs
* SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today's edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
* Morning briefing
* Open thread
* Live coverage
* Yesterday's stories

Support CapitolFax.com
Visit our advertisers...

...............

...............

...............

...............

...............

...............


Loading


Main Menu
Home
Illinois
YouTube
Pundit rankings
Obama
Subscriber Content
Durbin
Burris
Blagojevich Trial
Advertising
Updated Posts
Polls

Archives
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004

Blog*Spot Archives
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005

Syndication

RSS Feed 2.0
Comments RSS 2.0




Hosted by MCS SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax Advertise Here Mobile Version Contact Rich Miller