Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Delia Ramirez poll has her ahead of Gil Villegas 25-10, but still a lot of undecideds in four-way race
Next Post: *** UPDATED x1 *** Campaign notebook
Posted in:
* I went over this with subscribers earlier today, but here’s DPI’s partisan take…
A shocking new letter obtained by the Chicago Tribune exposes Aurora Mayor Richard Irvin’s criticisms of the SAFE-T Act to be nothing more than campaign bluster and lies — a pattern for Ken Griffin’s handpicked candidate.
Irvin’s letter from the day the SAFE-T Act was signed not only praised the bill itself, but also lauded the work that went into getting the legislation across the finish line.
“It has been a pleasure working with you at the State level and I commend you for your leadership in connection with the passage of HB 3653,” Irvin wrote in a letter on Feb. 22, 2021.
When given the opportunity to provide feedback on the legislation, Irvin lauded the bill and its passage but did not mention any of the provisions he suddenly seems to find objectionable. It shouldn’t be a surprise that Irvin did an about-face as soon as Griffin started bankrolling his campaign for governor — he continues to get caught dodging or flip flopping on key issues. See highlights from the story below:
“Irvin’s letter threatens to undermine the key positioning he has taken in his bid for the GOP nomination in June and the right to take on Pritzker in the Nov. 8 general election. It also represents the latest dichotomy in positions taken by Irvin as Aurora mayor versus Irvin the Republican candidate for governor.
“As mayor, Irvin hailed Pritzker’s leadership on COVID-19 mitigation efforts and pushed for uniform endorsement of them across municipal lines while he also backed masking requirements for local businesses. But as a candidate for governor, Irvin said he opposes coronavirus mandates and supports more local control of pandemic restrictions…”
“In seeking reelection last year as Aurora’s first Black mayor, Irvin said in a candidate questionnaire that he supported ‘Black Lives Matter strongly and passionately.’ But in his campaign announcement, on TV commercials and in the Newsmax interview, Irvin has repeatedly said, ‘all lives matter’ — a phrase associated with conservatives supporting police and attacking the Black Lives Matter movement that grew out of incidents of police violence…”
“Irvin’s campaign comments about the criminal justice package are in sharp contrast to those in his letter to Sims where he stated, ‘I commend you for your leadership in connection with the passage” of the measure.’”
* I strongly disagree with the article’s headline that Irvin “praised” the new law in his letter. The article itself contains no such claim…
But on the day Pritzker signed the package’s initial and overarching piece into law on Feb. 22 of last year, Irvin sent one of the bill’s Democratic sponsors a letter commending state Sen. Elgie Sims Jr. of Chicago on his leadership in its passage, lauding the measure’s goals and saying he thought his police department had already met or exceeded the new law’s requirements.
He also suggested to Sims some minor changes to make the new law better.
* But if you read the Irvin letter itself, you’ll see that he lauded one of the law’s goals…
It has been a pleasure working with you at the State level and I commend you for your leadership in connection with the passage of HB 3653. After reviewing the bill, I am proud to note that our police department already meets, and I believe exceeds, a number of the new requirements. Specifically, our overall training program (including new recruits), our policies regarding use of force and equipping our officers with body cameras, which we committed to doing back in June as a complement to our dash cam program. It has been my experience that having well-trained officers working hand in hand with community members is the only way to create a safe community, and I strongly support the bill’s goal to help move other departments in that direction as well.
That narrow praise was an infinity from broad, laudatory applause.
* What Irvin’s letter to the Senate sponsor showed me was that Irvin is a savvy guy. He heaped praise on the Senator probably because he wanted his city’s lobbyist (a Black woman) into the talks on a trailer bill. She was, indeed, invited into those talks and wound up being one of the only municipal lobsters who worked on the bill with the sponsors to make a few changes that Irvin and others wanted. I mean, that’s how you get things done.
“Making suggestions for changes to a bill does not indicate support,” an Irvin campaign person said on background. “Several groups asked for revisions and changes as well, and that does not constitute an endorsement of the bill.”
* With all that being said, I do have a bone to pick with Mayor Irvin. The gubernatorial candidate has repeatedly railed at the new law’s provision that allows for anonymous complaints against police officers, even though police regularly and actively seek anonymous crime tips from the public. For example…
(T)hey can go make an anonymous complaint against a police officer without any repercussion, ruining a police officers life, which makes it hard for us to recruit good people that want to be the police.
* But this is from Irvin’s letter to Sen. Sims…
Aurora has been at the forefront of increasing civilian involvement in reporting potential police misconduct. We recently created and adopted a comprehensive ordinance establishing a Civilian Review Board (CRB), which provides residents a venue to bring their concerns to the attention of the CRB without having to identify themselves. We support the removal of the affidavit requirement because it will encourage individuals to come forward who may not otherwise do so. However, we are concerned that the amendment to Section 3.8(b) in its current form may inadvertently hamper management’s ability to appropriately discipline police officers, and may not provide adequate due process to the officer. To that end, I would like to propose the following clarifying language to Sec. 3.8(b). The proposed language is underlined:
He said himself that the change he wanted to make was designed in part to make it easier to discipline police officers, while still protecting due process. Irvin’s proposed language is underlined…
It shall not be a requirement for a person filing a complaint against a sworn police officer to have the complaint supported by a sworn affidavit or any other legal documentation, unless the employer reasonably determines that the person filing the complaint may be a witness in a subsequent disciplinary proceeding against a sworn peace officer.
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Mar 23, 22 @ 10:25 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Delia Ramirez poll has her ahead of Gil Villegas 25-10, but still a lot of undecideds in four-way race
Next Post: *** UPDATED x1 *** Campaign notebook
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
He strongly supports the bill’s goal and commends the leadership of the people who passed it, and he’s proud his department already meets the standards. That’s pretty high praise, not sure what semantic needle you’re trying to thread here
Comment by SWIL_Voter Wednesday, Mar 23, 22 @ 10:37 am
===He strongly supports the bill’s goal===
That was a huge omnibus bill. He supported a single narrow goal. To suggest that means he supported the entire SAFE-T Act is disingenuous at best.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Mar 23, 22 @ 10:45 am
Anytime the Bailey campaign wants to issue a statement…
From the conservative perspective, how can someone like Irvin be trusted, someone who’s a mainstream liberal but selling out for big neoliberal bucks? From the other side, Irvin is a liberal who’s bought and paid for by big right wing bucks. Not good either way.
Comment by Grandson of Man Wednesday, Mar 23, 22 @ 10:47 am
I saw an Irvin commercial this week where he used the word “thugs.” As Zorn has noted, that is a problematic word and I doubt that it was unintentional.
https://www.chicagotribune.com/columns/eric-zorn/ct-column-thug-language-dan-roan-race-zorn-20210302-fogeavnebnc5hcgbtbt5ps7ndy-story.html
Comment by Big Dipper Wednesday, Mar 23, 22 @ 10:49 am
I don’t have a problem at all with Irvin’s willingness to work with the Governor and Senate in the past. That’s a good thing that we should be encouraging. You can’t effectively govern a city or state if you’re unwilling to compromise.
Irvin was smart enough to know that as the Mayor of Aurora he needed a cooperative and cordial relationship with the Governor and Legislature.
He should own that instead of tying himself in knots and offering word salad responses.
But unfortunately in today’s partisan politics we encourage opposition for the sake of opposition. And that’s where Irvin now finds himself. But unlike his opponents he has a record as Mayor that makes it fairly easy to see where he may have agreed or disagreed with the Governor or Legislature in the past. I personally think he’d be better off embracing his past as opposed to denying it. But clearly others are running the playbook here.
Comment by Pundent Wednesday, Mar 23, 22 @ 10:49 am
I’m going to assume that Irvin knew exactly what he was doing. He heaped praise on the sponsor, bragged about how his PD was already in compliance, and praised one of the law’s goals. He wanted to be seen as an ally of the bill.
And good for him. It’s a worthy bill. It’s just that his personal situation has changed so that now being seen as an enemy of the bill is more politically advantageous. It will probably be tough for him to get many voters to accept the nuance of not “really” being an ally of the bill but wanting to be seen as one.
Comment by Arsenal Wednesday, Mar 23, 22 @ 10:54 am
**I doubt that it was unintentional.**
Uh, you think? Of course it wasn’t unintentional.
Comment by SaulGoodman Wednesday, Mar 23, 22 @ 10:56 am
This all feels like noise. I have a hard time seeing how any of this moves the needle in the primary.
Comment by left of what Wednesday, Mar 23, 22 @ 10:57 am
Seems to me that Irvin doesn’t have a headline problem. He has a lying problem.
Voters like consistency and honesty. Ask John Kerry what a reputation for turning whatever way the wind blows will get you in politics.
Comment by Anchors Away Wednesday, Mar 23, 22 @ 11:02 am
== Ask John Kerry what a reputation for turning whatever way the wind blows will get you in politics. ==
This is the thing I see, too. After running vs. not, praising JB vs. criticizing him, for COVID mandates vs. against them, BLM vs. ALM, Tuff on Crime vs. Defense attorney…
…he’s kinda lost the benefit of the doubt.
Comment by Arsenal Wednesday, Mar 23, 22 @ 11:19 am
The Griffin Crew had Rauner, an empty vessel that could flip and flop, bob and weave, whatever snappy words you wanna use, Rauner ran on his wife saying she was a Democrat and they agreed he’d drive everyone nuts.
Irvin’s real problem isn’t necessarily his record, but this seemingly need to ignore the record or his history as an office holder.
Right now, Mayor Irvin likely wouldn’t vote for Gubernatorial Candidate Irvin. That’s kinda how this is playing out, almost like where Candidate Lightfoot wouldn’t support Mayor Lightfoot kind of rebuffing of who each are.
I’ve not been shy.
I’ve felt Mayor Irvin should get a great deal of praise for his work as mayor of Aurora. His re-election win reinforces the clear indication that the city agrees, Irvin has been a very good mayor. In many ways I’d rather dine, drink, go see a show, enjoy Aurora more than what Naperville offers me on a given night.
But, if what makes Irvin appealing to me is what Griffin’s Crew wants to either wholly ignore or rewrite, what exactly does Irvin bring to being a candidate?
Headlines like the Trib ran, other oddities towards an ignoring of record or words are probably going to be a big thing…
… if Irvin gets past the primary…
… and let’s be very honest about (alphabetically) Bailey, Rabine, Schimpf, or Sullivan… the $37.50 they seem to have collectively towards running for the nomination of a major party in the 6th largest state in America… they collectively need earned media to educate folks on things, as all will be swamped with GriffinBucks and ads while Bailey asks for $15 to fix a bus kind of money issues.
Who is Irvin?
Is he the mayor or this mystic candidate absent a record except when… convenient?
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Mar 23, 22 @ 11:36 am
I remember a sage journalist who said something like, voters don’t do nuance. This is so true and it’s constantly exploited by the politicians and their campaign staff.
Comment by Norseman Wednesday, Mar 23, 22 @ 11:37 am
==I’ve felt Mayor Irvin should get a great deal of praise for his work as mayor of Aurora.==
It’s too bad Candidate Irvin disagrees.
(I know you know this. Just couldn’t pass up a snappy one-liner.)
Comment by Arsenal Wednesday, Mar 23, 22 @ 11:42 am
I’m just going to refer to him as the new, New Coke from now on as he has changed sides on so many issues and even which party he kinda relates to.
Once a prosecutor, always a prosecutor. amirite?
Comment by Lurker Wednesday, Mar 23, 22 @ 12:44 pm
Maybe someone is playing 4d chess.
Comment by Publius Wednesday, Mar 23, 22 @ 12:56 pm
He’s guilty….of liking Elgie. It’s an easy sin to commit.
The entire letter is fair game. The headline is bogus. He’s got the dollars to do enough nuance to convince people otherwise. In the meantime, every time you attack bipartisanism, you help make it endangered and bordering on extinct.
Comment by A Guy Wednesday, Mar 23, 22 @ 1:20 pm
Take it back strategy in action
Comment by Rabid Wednesday, Mar 23, 22 @ 1:23 pm
===every time you attack bipartisanism===
Like Irvin all out praising Pritzker, I’m sure Pritzker will enjoy showing it if it comes to Irvin in the fall, lol
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Mar 23, 22 @ 1:24 pm
=Who is Irvin?=
This is starting to feel like a real Rauner reboot. In the primary Rauner ran to the right, although that did change somewhat depending on where he was in the state.
Some here have suggested that Irvin take pride in his previous bi-partisanship. That it is a good thing. This is an idea I wholeheartedly agree with. Seems he cannot run that way and win the primary though, and that is not a surprise either.
IF (obviously a BIG if) he can win the primary, will he move to the center? Will Griffin allow that? I am not sure, but that seems to be conventional wisdom in Illinois, but it also makes him look dishonest if he does it and that is already a problem for Irvin.
Comment by JS Mill Wednesday, Mar 23, 22 @ 1:24 pm
=In the meantime, every time you attack bipartisanism, you help make it endangered and bordering on extinct.=
Seems like a conversation worth having with Irvin as he seems to be backtracking on his bipartisan efforts as mayor. The governor doesn’t have a problem at all in recognizing what appears to be a fairly cordial and cooperative relationship between the two. Why does Irvin?
Comment by Pundent Wednesday, Mar 23, 22 @ 1:44 pm
The Irvin campaign should study the Mitt Romney for POTUS campaign. He had to hide from his accomplishments as governor (Obama-Romney-Care) and look at how that worked out.
Comment by levivotedforjudy Wednesday, Mar 23, 22 @ 1:57 pm
==He’s got the dollars to do enough nuance to convince people otherwise.==
Where are your hopes and your predictions registered? I’d like to get them a wedding present.
Comment by Arsenal Wednesday, Mar 23, 22 @ 4:43 pm
==In the meantime, every time you attack bipartisanism, you help make it endangered and bordering on extinct. ==
Nobody “attacked bipartisanism”, they attacked the guy who abandoned bipartisanism the second Ken Griffin offered to write him a check.
Honestly. We can all see what happened, we just have to scroll up. Why did you think you could get away with such a blatant lie?
Comment by Arsenal Wednesday, Mar 23, 22 @ 4:50 pm
=== Why did you think you could get away with such a blatant lie?===
It’s the want of it, I suppose. It’s just a partisan slant.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Mar 23, 22 @ 5:04 pm