Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

* UPDATED x1 * Quinn cuts no-layoff deal with AFSCME after endorsement and heavily redacts Lottery bids

Posted in:

Illinois

* I was hoping to run this story in tomorrow’s subscriber edition, but he who hesitates loses. Kudos to Greg Hinz…

Just days after being endorsed by the state’s largest employee union, the Quinn Administration has reached a deal not to lay off any of the union’s members or close any facilities in which they work until at least mid-2012.

Under a tentative pact that the state says it expects to sign later this week, some 50,000 state workers who are members of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees would have their jobs protected until June 30, 2012 — a third of the way into the term of the next governor. […]

In exchange for the job protections, AFSCME agreed to identify at least $50 million in spending cuts that could come in the form of unpaid furlough days, less overtime and — potentially — partial deferral of 8.25% in salary hikes union members are scheduled to receive in the year beginning Jan. 1. […]

“This seems like a very uneven bargain,” said Laurence Msall, president of the Civic Federation. “While we haven’t seen the details, we are very concerned.”

It’s not an “uneven bargain” since Quinn got the union’s endorsement. Just sayin’.

Perhaps my tinfoil hat needs an adjustment, but it sure looks like one of those not-so-rare Illinois coinky-dinks that AFSCME endorsed Quinn and then two days later got a no-layoff agreement.

Countdown to a Bill Brady press release blasting Quinn for cutting a “backroom deal” begins in five, four, three…

However, keep in mind that the deal has a “goal” of finding a total of $100 million in cuts. On the other hand, the governor won’t ask the union to reopen its contract to discuss health insurance costs.

*** UPDATE *** It took a bit longer than I expected, but here’s the Bill Brady response…

“Unemployment is at double-digit levels and the state cannot pay its bills. The Quinn Administration should not agree to anything that limits Illinois’ flexibility to manage this catastrophe. Instead, Governor Pat Quinn should embrace every cost-cutting measure possible, work with union leaders to freeze salaries, and avoid eleventh hour election-year agreements that lock in more pay hikes and job security guarantees in an arrangement that reminds voters of the pay-to-play politics that I seek to end.”

[ *** End Of Update *** ]

* And here’s another one that I was looking at Friday and was hoping to get to today…

The state decided last week that a contract to privately manage the Illinois Lottery should go to a consortium of companies that already contract with the state to provide lottery equipment and advertising.

Then the state posted online a number of documents related to the selection in order to show that it was being open about how the winning bid was selected and why. Unfortunately, large parts of the documents from the winning bidder were redacted at the request of the bidder.

Way to go about building confidence in this decision.

View the redactions in all their glory by clicking here and exploring a bit.

* Campaign and budget roundup…

* Quinn, Brady both vague on Ill. budget crisis

* SJ-R: Quinn, Brady need to clue us in on budget

* Brady and Quinn differ sharply over social issues

* Word on the Street: Brady is under Quinn’s skin

* Can Cohen be a spoiler in the governor’s race?

* Video: Scott Lee Cohen 540-2

* Plummer’s young and inexperienced — but he says that’s a good thing

* Video: Rep. David Miller

* Debates, budgets and unhappy Illinois voters

* Quinn’s promise to pay up doesn’t cover ‘every bill’: When Quinn says “every bill,” he’s talking about bills the state received in fiscal 2010, which ended June 30, aides explained. So the governor is promising that bills the state got in the first half of the year will be paid before the second half of the year ends. While the state is paying off those bills, new ones are piling up in their place. Quinn isn’t making any promises about those.

posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 12:23 pm

Comments

It’s going to make a heck of a TV ad.

Comment by OneMan Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 12:27 pm
I keep thinking Quinn’s hit rock bottom. Always wrong.

Comment by Skeeter Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 12:32 pm
Why is it that when I read a story about Quinn making another deal, I get the image of Nero playing a fiddle?

Comment by Ghost of John Brown Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 12:39 pm
Here is a question, do the folks running against the other Dems who were endorsed try to use a broader brush with the (Quinn cuts a deal for all) and try to get Alexi on the record pro/con about the deal?

Comment by OneMan Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 12:45 pm
Brady’s chance of winning just jumped to 100 percent. The unions can look forward to one hard fall when this deal expires.

Comment by Vole Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 12:48 pm
“Under a tentative pact that the state says it expects to sign later this week, some 50,000 state workers who are members of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees would have their jobs protected until June 30, 2012 — a third of the way into the term of the next governor. […]”

Let’s say a new Governor comes in, oh, say, in January of 2011. Would that new Governor be bound by this “agreement?”

Comment by phocion Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 12:51 pm
GJB… that was an insult to Nero.

Comment by Wondering... Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 12:55 pm
Yeah. At least Nero could play the fiddle.

Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 12:57 pm
Does Quinn even think before he does this stuff or does he just spin a big wheel in office and see which what way can I screw my campaign today square the arrow lands on?

Comment by RMW Stanford Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 12:59 pm
Of course it’s not a coincidence. It’s politics as usual. Not sure this is going to be a deal breaker for voters on the fence. After all, talk of layoffs makes everybody nervous, not just those very fortunate state of Illinois employees, who get to keep their jobs whether their services are needed or not. I’d be more concerned about the ads about those monster raises coming up in January than about the no-layoff guarantees.

I believe Quinn also agreed not to introduce any more proposals to raise the price of retiree health care on retired state employees until the current contract expires. I guess retiree premiums will continue to be free. Given that the number of uninsured Americans has risen to 50 million per recent reports, this type of perk may become less popular. Another ad perhaps. After all, these are early retirees. They chose to leave. And many are pulling down a pension and a salary in their early retirement.

Anyway, Quinn may be doing Governor Brady a favor.
Quite a few of those Blago hires he would be expected to let go have probably wiggled their way into the union ranks, with more on the way if senior public service administrators get into the bargaining unit (midlevel administrators already are). Brady can legitimately blame the Democrats for an inability to get trim state government ranks and devote his attention to other matters, of which there will be many. Contracts, for example, plenty of places to cut there.

Comment by cassandra Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 1:00 pm
L&M of the 13th were scheduled long ago, Cassandra. Really not the ‘huge conspiracy’ theme you’re trying to spin out. But than, what else is (not) new?

Comment by Cindy Lou Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 1:08 pm
Quinn has lost this election because he stopped being Pat Quinn just when that was exactly what the state needed. Perhaps the burdens we face are too heavy for him, and he has lost his sense of self-indentity. Brady will be a big mistake. A new governor will be elected in four years, and it will be neither Brady or Quinn. The question really is who can we suffer along with for four years, Quinn or Brady.

Comment by Niles Township Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 1:08 pm
Rich,

Did you see the 3rd picture in the Daily Herald article of Plummer … It’s “scary-funny”!

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 1:09 pm
Cindy Lou, you really think the two are totally unrelated.

That Quinn just decided to give an employment guarantee with virtually nothing in exchange during really tough budget times because he is just a nice guy?

That’s almost as believable as the timing we used to see with big donations to Rod and folks getting named to boards.

Comment by OneMan Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 1:14 pm
Rich Miller said,

“Perhaps my tinfoil hat needs an adjustment…”

http://zapatopi.net/afdb/

Comment by Cincinnatus Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 1:16 pm
Come up with savings or out some (a large number) some of you go…you really call that a kiss and hug session, one man?

Comment by Cindy Lou Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 1:18 pm
“This seems like a very uneven bargain,” said Laurence Msall, president of the Civic Federation. “While we haven’t seen the details, we are very concerned.”

They have to identify $50 million in savings (or about $1,000 per current member). Doesn’t mean they have to be implemented…

Also

8.25% in salary hikes union members are scheduled to receive in the year beginning Jan. 1.

You know anyone in the private sector getting 8.25% raises?

Comment by OneMan Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 1:22 pm
Rich, I think the tin foil hat may need adjustment. Yet again, instead of playing hardball with one of the state’s larger expenses, personnel, a deal is being cut to limit the losses a union takes while the rest of us pay, whether we’re taxpayers or non-union staff. Just because it happens in Illinois does not make it a good deal nor does it make it right.

Comment by Anon Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 1:32 pm
Here’s a scary thought to those who think that Quinn keeps screwing up his campaign, maybe he really believes in all these wacky things he’s doing…

Comment by Cincinnatus Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 1:35 pm
Cindy Lou, THey are talking potential savings vs. layoffs. For simplicity’s sake, let’s say 50,000 workers average $50,000/each, that is $2.5B, so if there would be a 10% lay-off, very realistic with the budget problems the state is having, that would save $250M. THese dollars will be saved year after year. Quinn is going to give this away for $50M in one-time cuts that may or may not be implemented. This is so transparent, as an earlier poster said he keeps reaching new bottoms.

Comment by Jim Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 1:41 pm
Cinci: Maybe it is just that Pat gains his greatest sense of identity from his affiliations with state employees. May be nothing wacky at all. But when you are trying to get elected it would seem to make sense that you would try to gain more identity from the public. Quinn may just lack good sense (which I admit can land you in wacky territory). OK. Goofy, wacky, whatever.

Comment by Vole Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 1:43 pm
I think Pat is missing the theme this year that people are a little annoyed at government.

Rightly or wrongly they are annoyed with government and this is not playing to that.

Comment by OneMan Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 1:45 pm
Healthcare would by far be the easiest place to cut. I understand AFSCME’s reluctance, but in some instances, cutting a union member’s pay would be more damaging than increasing a union member’s insurance premiums and/or co-pays. My wife is a state employee and I would be more kosher paying $20 for a doctor’s visit or $30 for a name brand prescription than a furlough day each month. That’s just my POV.

But yeah, this isn’t any different than Pee-Wee Herman singing “Connect the dots, la la la”…

Comment by Team Sleep Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 1:46 pm
AFSCME may not be getting the deal they think they are. If dollars are not available to fund all the promises in a union contract, the executive can still proceed with layoffs. The contract doesn’t change the financial reality and the union can’t go into court to get a tax increase.

Comment by Chicago Dem Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 1:49 pm
But Pat always does the right thing.

I know because he says it a lot.

Comment by Corduroy Bob Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 1:58 pm
If that prop for the corporate elite (Msall) say this no-layoff deal may be bad, then I know it must be good!

Comment by fedup dem Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 2:06 pm
Team sleep, I’m paying roughly $500 increase a year in my insurance/medical needs than I was July 1st 2008. Between the newly added deducts and the decrease of what prescriptions are covered and/or ‘new’ co-pays for them. And I’m in an HMO. Did the actual premium go up much? No. But my out of pocket sure did. And yes…I use the $10 90 day big box store thing for everything I can.

Comment by Cindy Lou Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 2:07 pm
City Lou….

Same is true of many folks in the private sector.

Comment by OneMan Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 2:14 pm
How nice…the unions get a good raise and don’t have to worry about their jobs. What’ll happen to the merit comp employees? Screwed again.

Comment by Anonymous Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 2:22 pm
One man, you seem to be stuck on ‘private sector’. Are you seriously expecting me to believe that all private sector employees have not gotten raises? All have had the shaft? That is not realistic. I can compare what I make and what I have recieved or not recieved to many different people working many different jobs in many different places all across the state.

So, should I scream ‘but but but’ very time I hear a private sector employee get something I did not? Surely even you know somebody in ‘the private sector’ that has gotten a raise, a promotion, blah blah.

What I said was my cost have gone up. Where the heck did I say ‘but nobody else’s has’? IF my neighbor loses his job tomorrow…should I run and ask for a few more furloughs days myself?

Comment by Cindy Lou Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 2:24 pm
In the meeting with the Afscme stewards the administration promise was delivered by David Vaught who was also the administration person meeting with Afscme the previous weekend trying to get the endorsement.

Rich,

These verifiable facts. There were lots of witnesses in both rooms.

I know. It’s just a coincidence.

Comment by Milan Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 2:25 pm
I guess schools and human services are in for another year of not getting paid for services delivered on behalf of the state of Illinois.

Comment by Aldyth Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 2:32 pm
Cindy Lou,

I think you will find these results to be valid nationwide:

http://www.istockanalyst.com/article/viewiStockNews/articleid/4282797

Short answer is that the public sector raises have been less than those in the public sector for at least the past few years.

I am paying over $14k out of my own pocket for my and my wife’s healthcare. I wonder if your expense compares…

Comment by Cincinnatus Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 2:36 pm
*private sector less than public sector

Comment by Cincinnatus Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 2:38 pm
It’s not a realistic question, Cinci, without stating whether you are self employed, gross earnings in salary and medical issues ect. We could play all day comparing person to person, case to case.

Comment by Cindy Lou Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 2:47 pm
It is well established that the recent recession has taken a much smaller toll on the public workforce than it has on the private workforce.
For one thing, the feds have poured billions into the states to preserve public jobs. And union contracts give governments limited flexibility in managing the size of government workforces.

The problem with Quinn and his Illinois Democratic supporters is that they want to continue this inequity by imposing higher income taxes on the middle class, most of whom are private sector workers who are trying hard to catch up what they lost in recent years–if they have jobs, that is. Even though at the national level, there appears to be almost universal agreement, yes, even among Democrats, that at least middle class tax cuts should not expire. The fight is over tax cuts for the wealthy. Not here in Illinois, though. Our Pat has not talked much about his much-desired income tax hikes in recent weeks, other than trying to convince us that all the money would go to “education.” But why is he so obsessed with getting more money from the middle class when his pals at the national level are not. He just doesn’t get real middle class economic life, apparently. We really can’t afford it. Especially since the recovery seems to depend heavily on our ability to start
consuming again.

Comment by cassandra Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 3:05 pm
Cindy Lou,

It doesn’t matter what one does. Comparison is simple. My healthcare cost me $14k. What does yours cost you?

Comment by Cincinnatus Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 3:08 pm
At this point, Quinn has nothing to lose by making the promise. Paying for it would be a nice problem to have down the road; at least you’d still be in the big chair.

Comment by wordslinger Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 3:16 pm
Can anyone spell Quid Pro Quo- this is only a few steps away from what Blago got indicted for but of course it is “just politics”

Comment by sue Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 3:17 pm
If I were involved in Brady’s campaign, I would put out a commercial saying that Afsmee better back Quinn because if I’m elected that’s the 1st place I’ll start cutting, ect. I’ll bet demonizing this union would get votes.

Comment by Phineas J. Whoopee Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 3:19 pm
Word: “At this point, Quinn has nothing to lose by making the promise.”

Quinn may now know he is going to lose the election. This may be one reason he made this promise to what he considers to be his real constituency, the state’s union employees.

Comment by Vole Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 3:26 pm
Cindy Lou,
Yes, not everyone in the private sector went without raises.

But do you really think that giving AFSCME members who work for the state an 8.5% raise (much higher than the rate of inflation I might add) with the states current economic and budget situation is a good move from anyone’s perspective besides those getting the raise.

Do you think it will make it easier for Quinn to push for a income tax increase in the unlikely event he wins?

Do you think it will play with union members around the state who have had to make real concessions?

Do you think it will play with parents who had large sums of money cut from what the state pays schools for transportation for last year that the state mandated?

Do you think it will play with all of the folks who provide services to the state and have been waiting months for their payments?

You may think it isn’t fair and it may not be. It is however reality at this point and ignoring it is going to be a huge mistake.

Comment by OneMan Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 3:58 pm
“It doesn’t matter what one does… my healthcare cost me $14K.”

Well, I think it might make some difference if you are self-employed and thereby CHOOSING to pass up the opportunity to obtain employer-provided health insurance, as opposed to someone who pays that much because they either 1) lost their job completely through no fault of their own, or 2) because their private sector employer cut back on or dropped health insurance because it was too costly.

Comment by Secret Square Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 4:17 pm
Interesting that Brady starts out by saying that unemployment is too high and then asks for more people to be laid off.

I think we can safely say that Bill Brady is for higher unemployment.

Comment by late to the party Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 4:17 pm
Last week the Chicago Teachers Union House of Delagates voted not to endorse Governor Quinn.

Comment by Rod Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 4:22 pm
Cincy -

Have you ever thought that you pay 14k a year for health insurance because the CEOs and other employees are making too much money? Last year, the CEO of BC/BS of Illinois received a $15.3 million bonus on her way out the door. Do you think that affects the constantly rising ‘price’ of insurance?

You are worried about these people getting contractually negotiated 8.25% raises when income taxes (prices) have not been increased for over a decade.

Instead, you want these employees to lose their jobs so you don’t have to give 1% in income tax, and you brag about how high your health insurance costs are like it’s some badge of honor to get screwed by the insurance industry. Have you written/blogged/complained to them about excessive compensation instead of complaining about people who make 30-40k a year?

Maybe if they decreased CEO’s compensation, and thereby the price of the good they sell, we can all afford 1% (or more) to pay for teachers and other state employees who drive our economy a lot more than AETNA’s $24 m CEO.

Comment by late to the party Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 4:42 pm
Well, one man, there are lots of people getting more than 8.5% raises….they make over $250K a year, drive Porsches, have condo’s in Fla., are crying that they need their Bush tax cut extended and are donating big money to Americans for Prosperity and other groups that are funding the TeaBaggers.

Comment by D.P. Gumby Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 4:45 pm
Cindy, there are three of us. Our costs haven’t gone up that much, and we too are in an HMO. A $50 deductible for each of our meds - and only our meds - is a pittance compared to even some Medicare Part D deductibles. Even $500 isn’t that much. The cost for my dad to insure my brother alone is $300 a month! And he has his own deductible! That is ridiculous. But what option does an unemployed, soon-to-be 25 year old grad student have?

To stay relevant to the topic, though, my guess is that AFSCME gets taken to court by the prospective Brady administration.

Comment by Team Sleep Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 4:46 pm
Pat Quinn is the gift that keeps on giving. Just wait until the pre-election report where it shows that AFSCME ponied up a million bucks or whatever…think of that commercial.

Comment by 4 percent Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 4:47 pm
The 8.25% increase for AFSCME workers includes the 2% they had already deferred. As a former private employee I can be honest enough to say that when times were GOOD they were very very good to the private sector employee. I was able to enjoy investing in stock options, benefitted from stock splitting. Those were the glory days. Not once, when I was reaping those private sector benefits did I think about public service employees who did not have it as good as I did. Well the shoe is now on the other foot, life is not so good for the private sector employee. What truly makes me laugh is the complaints of the “Illinois Tax Payer” and how “they” aren’t going to take this anymore in regards to the union. As far as I can tell, the “union” employees are ILLINOIS TAX PAYERS as well. The comparisons on health care cost are a joke. I worked for Southwest Airlines years ago. I paid $5.00 a month for FAMILY COVERAGE (including dental), I ENJOYED a 6% match in my savings plan, I LOVED the STOCK OPTIONS and I flew for free. I no longer work there, I no longer have those benefits; however I do not feel the need to harp and complain about individuals that may have it better than me.

Comment by walk in my shoes Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 4:48 pm
Will the AFSCME no-layoff agreement until 6/30/12 mean that bargaining unit members in other state employee unions (SEIU, IFT, Teamsters, FOP, etc.) will get the shaft on their parent units’ budgets (i.e. will we see the personnel budgets slashed for offices, such as the constitutional officers, that are non-AFSCME union members)?

Comment by Leatherneck Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 4:50 pm
Kind of a weak press releaseby Brady that took way too long. Whose running the room there?

Comment by Niles Township Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 4:56 pm
== You are worried about these people getting contractually negotiated 8.25% raises when income taxes (prices) have not been increased for over a decade. ==

Well if the rest of us got raises like that we would be paying more in taxes.

Long term your argument is unsustainable, because you would have to keep increasing taxes to pay the raises that have a higher average rate than the income growth of the citizens of the state.

I pay more in taxes than I did 10 years ago, my income is higher so I pay more income taxes, my deduction for interest has gone down as I pay off more and more of my mortgage, I pay significantly more in real estate taxes and more in sales taxes.

So spare me this revenues have been flat for the last 10 years fallacy.

I would even be glad to pay a higher income tax rate, if (and this is a big if) I felt the state would use it wisely. But the last 8 years of stupid budget tricks and foolish spending have demonstrated that the current crew in Springfield is not up to the job.

Quinn has done nothing to show me any different, if he was smart he would have vetoed the budget and made some folks make some hard calls. But he didn’t.

Comment by OneMan Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 5:00 pm
There’s more to happen that what the general public knows here. Ya’ll need to take a
“wait and see’ attitude before you crucify all the AFSCME employees in the state. They aren’t necessarily going to get such a great deal out of all of this.
And, no layoffs for another year, helps to cut down on the amazingly large percentage of overtime that AFSCME members have been putting in for over 8 years now. Some of you might think that OT is a most wonderful thing, but you need to toss in the marriages lost, families torn apart and damage to individuals’ health and mental status. These things can not be changed.

None of you will ever find the amount needed to close this budget gap. Not without losing lives of fellow Illinoisans, not without jeopardizing education, infrastucture, or the future of our state.

But really, just sit back and wait. Because things aren’t done between the state and AFSCME. The members aren’t the lucky ones here.

Comment by Wickedred Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 5:11 pm
==I pay more in taxes than I did 10 years ago, my income is higher so I pay more income taxes, my deduction for interest has gone down as I pay off more and more of my mortgage, I pay significantly more in real estate taxes and more in sales taxes.==

I laugh when people make statements like this, as if the fact that a higher income means you are paying more in taxes. Fact - you are NOT paying more in taxes because the tax rate has not changed. Sure, individual factors change that affect the dollar amount but without a rate change you are still only paying that 3% income tax.

It is also a fact that over the last several years revenues have been near stagnant.

I’m not trying to justify anything one way or the other but it irritates me when arguments that are simply silly are made.

Comment by Demoralized Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 5:30 pm
Cassy, you sound so bitter…did you not get a state job or what? I pay dearly everyday and in my paycheck to work for the State. I have 2 years to retirement and I doubt I make it since I was on the last layoff list. Yes, Blago hacks are currently holding their “union” jobs while temp assigned to their “hack Jobs”. One employee holds two jobs and some got laid off. Thank god I was recalled. Doing 3 jobs and not being able to get them all done, letting services slide is not self rewarding….morale is low and will sink lower if we can not make “sensible” cuts or increase taxes. If you increase taxes, the loonies will just spend more on pork and their friends. I see no way out and hate to lose my home before I can retire. 1000s are in the same boat as I…got an oar Cassy?

Comment by NRA associate Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 6:03 pm
How is this any different than what Sorich did? He allows them to keep the jobs in exchange for the political endorsement. Pat? Pat? Are you there Pat? Or is Quinn a fellow Notre Dame Fan, if you know what I mean. You know Pat, just like Mayor Daley.

Comment by Stash Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 6:22 pm
Almost like PQ is trying to poison the next Blago Jury (i.e. “see, this is normal Illinois politics”). This now two instances (other being the Teamsters/McPier veto). I would love to hear wiretaps of this deal being done.

Comment by Park Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 6:48 pm
This deal, an extension of the one Quinn struck with AFSCME
in February, agrees not to close any more state facilities for the developmentally disabled through June 30, 2012. AFSCME Executive Director Henry Bayer called these “unprecedented protections” for union workers then and today’s deal just two days after AFSCME’s endorsement, “strictly coincidental.”

Illinois spends 42% of its Illinois Department of Human Services, Division of Developmental Disabilities (DHS/DDD) budget on institutions, ranking 48th in the country. The average state spends only 24%, so Illinois is spending 175% above the national average. The only states worse than Illinois are Kentucky, Texas and Mississippi.

Illinois continues to favor the delivery of services in comparatively costly institutional settings staffed with protected union workers with secure union contracts. The average cost per resident in a State Operated Developmental Center is $165,000 per year.

The loud and angry message from the disability community is, “The state’s budget for human services should not be used to provide full employment for AFSCME members”.

Illinois must do better for our citizens with intellectual and developmental disabilities. We need leadership to get Illinois out of the facility-based SERVICES business and into the inclusive community support and OUTCOMES business.

Illinois needs a Governor with a commitment away from expensive facility-based care. We do not need or want a Governor who continues to put his political gain above the needs of our most vulnerable citizens.

Comment by Pam Harris (Josh's Mom) Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 7:54 pm
Well put, walk in my shoes.

As a union state employee, not in Afscme, I know usually most of the other unions follow a lot of whatever Afscme does contractually. But also knowing a lot of Afscme folks (and those in other unions too), I can say that just because the union endorses them, doesn’t mean all the rank and file will go along.

We have negotiated contracts that have been reopened because of the state’s financial crisis, I sure wouldn’t have much faith in an “agreement” to hold of any layoffs, etc until 2012.

This just looks like more of the usual Springfield wheeling and dealing.

Comment by Concerned Voter Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 8:10 pm
Pam Harris–but, there aren’t very many people with developmental disabilities in state-operated facilities, are there?

Comment by steve schnorf Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 8:52 pm
-Steve S
Twelve states have NO state-operated I/DD institutions, including our neighbor to the east, Indiana. Ten additional states, including Minnesota and Michigan, combine to have less than one thousand people living in state-operated facility as they move to join the list of states with NO state-operated I/DD institutions.

Sadly, Illinois ranks three on the list of ten states with the largest state-operated census right behind Texas and New Jersey. In 2009, we had 2,308 individuals in our State Operated Developmental Centers.

California, a state with three times our population only had 2,194 residents in its institutions; and, Pennsylvania, a state with a similar population to Illinois was tenth on the list with 1,298 institutional residents.

Comment by Pam Harris (Josh's Mom) Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 8:55 pm
Pam H; I was simply stating a fact. It’s too bad we are third, but after all, we are the 5th or 6th largest state. The dollar argument isn’t the right argument to use on this issue. If half the DD residents of state operated facilities could be moved to community based placements tomorrow (they can’t), and if the expenditures per resident went down $100,000 annually (be hard to hit)then the savings would be around $100,000,000. Nothing to sneeze at, but there’s federal match in there,you have to add back the cost per resident of residents remaining in state ops will go up, etc. Money isn’t the best or right argument here.

Comment by steve schnorf Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 9:13 pm
Ironically, Pam Harris led the charge keep the union out of DD home care, which would have played a significant role in shifting the balance of power towards home and community based services.

Comment by dave Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 9:37 pm
I know this is Illinois, but this is one of the most disgraceful and inhumane decisions that I have seen in the name of politics. My guess is that when Senator Brady is elected Governor, he has to live with all of these constraints and people with disabilities as the hostages in a political-economic game.

It is shameful and in violation, again, of Olmstead and other moral and ethical human decisions. Lastly, it perpetuates mythology regarding the image of individuals with disabilities, prevents capacity building and growth of community services and is poor stewardship of the state’s finite resources.

Comment by Pam Harris (Josh's Mom) Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 10:07 pm
Pam Harris - I am very tired of the dishonest budget arguments used against state operated developmental centers. You say the state spends 42% of its DD money on “institutions” - but most of that goes to private facilities like Miseracordia. Only 17% of the state’s DD budget goes to state centers. Look it up.

You mention that several states don’t have state centers for DD. True. Do those states spend less than Illinois? No, they all spend more.

The fact is, Illinois’ DD system does not have enough money and that would still be true even if every state center were closed. The Blueprint for Redesign, commissioned by the Illinois Commission on DD, states very clearly: 1) that closing state facilities will not generate significant savings, and 2) that the only way to get a good service delivery system is to devote more money.

DD advocates’ obsession with state centers is totally self-defeating. The real issue is inadequate funding for the system as a whole, not state centers. Instead of denying the families of state center residents the right to their choice of residential program, focus on the lack of revenue that is driving the real crisis.

Comment by phoebe Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 10:11 pm
I send more to the state, I send more in property taxes I send more to the feds that I did 10 years ago.

How dare I think I pay more in taxes.

It would appear that the definition of more is not a greater amount. How silly of me.

Comment by OneMan Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 10:25 pm
“I would even be glad to pay a higher income tax rate, if (and this is a big if) I felt the state would use it wisely.”

That is the whole problem in a nutshell. Or at least that’s what I think. It isn’t that Illinois residents as a whole are just so hopelessly selfish that they would rather have thousands of people lose their jobs, go hungry, lose their homes, etc. rather than pay a small percentage more in taxes. The REAL problem is that NO ONE BELIEVES that the money will be spent wisely — that any tax increase will simply be wasted and the problems will not be solved. I suppose the only way that the trust of the voters will be regained to the point that they would be willing to accept even a small tax increase, will be to make serious cuts first, and make them stick.

Comment by Bookworm Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 10:28 pm
Pam H; are you saying that the existence and size of the state operated facilities is disgraceful and inhumane, or are you saying that about the no lay-off agreement?

BTW, which facility would you close first? Second? Could you really pay for and build the necessary infrastructure necessary to close a facility before mid 2012? Which facility?

Comment by steve schnorf Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 11:08 pm
The agreement to not close any state-operated facilities through June 30, 2012 in return for political support is disgraceful and inhumane.
And I guess Governor Quinn’s deal with AFSCME makes your next 4 questions moot.

Comment by Pam Harris (Josh's Mom) Monday, Sep 20, 10 @ 11:18 pm
I think the argument that Pam and others like her are trying to make is that because Illinois is, apparently, so heavily “invested” in institutional care (whether public or private) of the developmentally disabled — because a high percentage of state funds and state employment goes in that direction — that means home-based or community-based care, which they prefer, is getting the short end of the stick. The reason for the opposition to unionizing home care workers is because it would have (at least in their view) forced people who care for their own relatives or friends at home on a paid basis to either stop doing so, or join a union whose political goals and aims they might not agree with.

Comment by Bookworm Tuesday, Sep 21, 10 @ 6:29 am
We are a throw away society; why does everyone seem to think that we solve all problems in private and public sector by laying off people?

Illinois ranks at the bottom in employment of workers; what services would you like to see cut that don’t cut some one’s access to services?

Would you be the first one to cut the services of government that you use or some relative or friend uses?

It is always easy to talk about someone else’s needs as excesses, but not equate our own with that as well.

So think clearly when you make these comments.

Comment by Caro Thursday, Sep 23, 10 @ 10:02 am