League of Women's Voters to discuss recent SCOTUS decision on Social Media Censorship
CHICAGO - Does the First Amendment allow U.S. government officials to intervene and prevent the spread of misinformation and disinformation on social media?
Jill Wine-Banks, a distinguished attorney and MSNBC Legal Analyst known for her prominence in political and legal discourse, is scheduled to speak about the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent action on social media censorship. This virtual event will take place on Tuesday, August 20, at 7 p.m. via Zoom. The program is free and is presented by the League of Women Voters of Illinois’ Mis/Disinformation Task Force.
The U.S. Supreme Court recently had an opportunity to rule on this question. Instead, they declined to issue decisions in two cases, punting them back to officials in Texas and Florida.
Among her many accomplishments, Wine-Banks was named General Counsel of the U.S. Army by President Carter, where she supervised what was, in essence, the world's largest law firm.
She started her legal career as the first woman to serve as an organized crime prosecutor at the U.S. Department of Justice in Washington, D.C. Four years later, she was selected to be one of the three Assistant Watergate Special Prosecutors in the obstruction of justice trial against President Nixon's top aides. Nixon was named an unindicted co-conspirator in that case, but the evidence presented led to Nixon’s resignation.
In 2014, she was named by the Secretary of Defense to the Judicial Proceedings Panel’s Subcommittee on Sexual Assault in the military, where she served until 2017. She was also the first woman to serve as Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of the American Bar Association.
Those who wish to join the online talk can register for the event here.
To tackle the concerning increase in misinformation and disinformation, particularly its impact on our elections, the League of Women Voters of Illinois established the Mis/Disinformation Task Force in January 2024. The goal of the task force is to educate the public about misinformation and disinformation. For more information, please visit lwvil.org/misdis-info.
Commentary |
State-Level marijuana legalization has been a stunning success
Contrary to some critics’ claims, legalization states have not experienced any spike in either psychosis or mental illnesses.
by Paul Armentano
It’s been over a decade since Colorado and Washington became the first two states to legalize marijuana for adults. With the benefit of hindsight, it’s fair to ask: Has this policy been successful?
Absolutely. A policy of legalization, regulation, and education is preferable to a policy of criminalization, stigmatization, and incarceration.
Let’s be clear. Legalization didn’t create or normalize the marijuana market in the United States. The market was already here.
Illustration by Gordon Johnson/Pixabay
By contrast, under regulation, cannabis products in many states are now available from licensed manufacturers at retail stores.
Cannabis is cultivated, and products are manufactured, in accordance with good manufacturing practices. Products are lab tested and labeled accordingly. And sales are taxed, with revenues being reinvested in the community. Since 2014, retail sales of adult-use cannabis products have generated more than $15 billion in tax revenue.
Most importantly, millions of Americans — many of them young adults — are no longer being arrested for possessing a substance that is objectively safer than either tobacco or alcohol.
According to data compiled by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the annual number of marijuana-related arrests in the United States fell from 750,000 in 2012 to 227,000 in 2022, the last year for which data is available.
In short, these state-level policy changes have resulted in countless Americans being spared criminal records — and the lost opportunities that accompany them — in the past decade.
Teen use of cannabis has not grown with legalization. A CDC report says use has actually dropped among high school students.
Photo: Dimitri Bong/Unsplash
And contrary to opponents’ fears, cannabis use by teens has not risen in parallel with legalization.
According to data provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the percentage of high schoolers who use marijuana actually fell 30 percent over the past decade. Compliance check data from California, Colorado, Nevada, and other legal marijuana states show that licensed marijuana retailers do not sell products to underage patrons.
Also contrary to some critics’ claims, legalization states have not experienced any spike in either psychosis or mental illnesses.
According to findings published last year in the Journal of the American Medical Association, rates of psychosis-related health care claims are no higher in jurisdictions where cannabis is legal than in those where it’s not. Stanford University researchers similarly reported last year that residents of states where cannabis is legal exhibit no higher levels of psychosis than those in non-legal states.
Legalization is also successfully disrupting the illicit marketplace. According to a 2023 survey, 52 percent of consumers residing in legal states said that they primarily sourced their cannabis products from brick-and-mortar establishments. By contrast, only 6 percent of respondents said that they primarily purchased cannabis from a “dealer.”
Many consumers in non-legal states also reported that they frequently traveled to neighboring legal states to purchase cannabis products rather than buying from illicit dealers in their own state.
Twelve years into states’ marijuana legalization experiment, public support for making marijuana legal nationwide has never been higher. To date, 24 states have legalized the adult-use market.
None of these states have ever repealed their legalization laws. That’s because these policies are working largely as voters and politicians intended — and because they’re preferable to cannabis criminalization.
After a century of failed policies and “canna-bigotry,” the verdict is in. Legalization is a success, and the end of cannabis prohibition can’t come soon enough.
Paul Armentano is the Deputy Director for NORML, the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws. This op-ed was adapted from an earlier version published at The Hill and distributed for syndication by OtherWords.org.
Commentary |
Cash bail is unfair and violates the right to due process
Photo: Sasun Bughdaryan/Unsplash
Election years are a scary time for people of color in the U.S. They are marked by race-based voter suppression efforts, a rise in racist political rhetoric, and even a surge in racist hate crimes.
by Sonali Kolhatkar
Many Americans haven’t heard of cash bail. But the idea is central to an election year battle over racism, policing, and mass incarceration.
When arrested on suspicion of committing a crime, everyone in the United States has the right to due process and to defend themselves in court. But in a cash bail system, when judges set bail amounts, those who cannot pay the full amount remain jailed indefinitely — a clear violation of their due process rights — while the rich can pay their way out of jail.
A 2022 report by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights examined the impact of cash bail and found that between 1970 and 2015, the number of people jailed before trial increased by a whopping 433 percent.
There are currently about half a million such people stuck in jails across the nation who haven’t been tried or convicted of any crimes. The report also found “stark disparities with regards to race,” with Black and brown men most often subject to higher bail amounts.
Thankfully, many states and cities are moving to reform this unfair practice.
But in this election year, Republicans are rolling back these efforts — most recently in Georgia.
The state recently passed a bill expanding cash bail for 30 new crimes, some of which appear to be aimed at protesters, such as unlawful assembly. Further, it criminalizes charitable bail funds — and even individuals — that bail out people who can’t afford to bail out themselves.
Marlon Kautz, who runs the Atlanta Solidarity Fund, called cash bail “a loophole” in the criminal justice system, allowing courts to indefinitely jail people without charges if they cannot pay exorbitant bail amounts.
“Police, prosecutors, and politicians want a bail system that allows them to punish their political enemies, poor people, and people of color without trial,” said Kautz, whose fund has bailed out people protesting a massive new police training facility opponents call “Cop City.” Kautz was one of three people affiliated with the fund to be arrested on apparently politicized charges last year.
Reversing progress on bail reform is a new flashpoint in the GOP’s culture wars. “It could be a sign that Republicans intend to bash their Democratic opponents as soft on crime,” the Associated Press reported. Alongside Georgia, Republicans in Indiana, Missouri, and Wisconsin have introduced numerous bills expanding the use of cash bail.
Expanding the racist criminal justice system is a cynical GOP election-era ploy, one that has little to do with public safety.
“It is exceedingly rare for someone who’s released pretrial to be arrested and accused of a new offense that involves violence against another person,” said Sharlyn Grace, an official at the Cook County Public Defender’s office in Illinois. “Fears about public safety are in many ways greatly overblown and misplaced.”
“National studies contradict” the claim, the AP adds, that people are any less likely to show up for a court date if they’re released without bail.
Election years are a scary time for people of color in the U.S. They are marked by race-based voter suppression efforts, a rise in racist political rhetoric, and even a surge in racist hate crimes. The expansion of cash bail laws is yet another attack on Black and brown communities — one that must be exposed and confronted.
We shouldn’t let reform efforts fall victim to election year politics.
Sonali Kolhatkar is the host of “Rising Up With Sonali,” a television and radio show on Free Speech TV and Pacifica stations. This commentary was produced by the Economy for All project at the Independent Media Institute and adapted for syndication by OtherWords.org.
300 new Illinois laws set to begin on January 1
by Terri DeeIllinois News Connection
CHICAGO - At the stroke of midnight on New Year's Eve, Illinoisans will see more than 300 new laws take effect - with changes that impact the state's healthcare, public safety and employment sectors.
Photo: Tim Zänkert/Unsplash
"We take the legislation, which is often difficult to read and somewhat opaque, and we translate that into a plain language explanation," said Ross, "and in some cases, into some tools that people can use to assert their rights and to understand their rights." Under a new Telehealth Services law, Illinois mental-health and substance-use patients will continue to receive telehealth coverage for treatment. And a patient's medical care cannot be delayed while a hospital staffer verifies their payment method or insurance status. Ross said hospitals will also be required to screen uninsured or underinsured patients for public financial assistance eligibility before their bill is sent to collections. Another new law on the books has stirred up concerns about immigrants applying for jobs in public safety. It allows a person who is not a citizen - but is legally authorized to work in the U.S. - to apply to become an Illinois police officer. Ross said low numbers on police forces are due to veteran officers retiring and a lack of new applicants - and claimed policing overall needs to change. "One of the problems that we have, in our society generally," said Ross, "is that law enforcement has been focused on communities of color, and is often not made up of people who are of color." Applicants who are non-citizens and possess a green card that allows them to live and work in the U.S. must be authorized under federal law to obtain, carry, purchase or otherwise possess a firearm.
Some things to keep in mind when you need a law firm
StatePoint Media - Let’s face it, no person or business gets a thrill out of hiring a law firm. Fortunately, peer-reviewed rankings have simplified the process.
Best Lawyers, which has been tracking trends and innovations in the legal industry for more than four decades, serves as a trusted resource for identifying what it takes to be a preeminent law firm in the United States. Their recently released 14th annual rankings of Best Law Firms, found at bestlawfirms.com, provides keen insight, not only into the most successful law firms, but also the key factors to keep an eye out for when going through the reliably trying task of retaining counsel.
Here is some of Best Lawyers’ advice:
1. Does the firm use the latest technology?
Right now, even the legal profession is abuzz about generative Artificial Intelligence (gen AI) tools. With its ability to parse information more quickly, gen AI offers the immediate potential to automate routine tasks such as research; summarizing long, complex content; and writing first drafts of simple documents such as NDAs. All of which can save both time and money.
And smart firms are closely watching regulations and any risks that this new technology may bring, all while using it for the benefit of the firm and its clients.
2. What do other legal experts think about the way they do business?
There are better options available than just word of mouth when choosing legal representation. After all, hiring a law firm isn’t like choosing which novel to download next. Through Best Laywers’ research process, a firm’s performance is assessed by its peers, ultimately helping consumers make better-informed decisions.
Why is this important? At its heart, a robust peer-review process like Best Lawyers’ asks legal professionals to answer this key question: “If you had a legal issue and could not represent yourself, what firm would you hire?” This peer-review method is critical, and offers a straightforward way to help identify the most trusted firms.
3. Does the law firm embrace diversity?
Today’s leading law firms know that to be successful, the makeup of their staff should represent the communities they serve. Inclusion is a necessary element of well-rounded representation because a team with different backgrounds and experiences will bring diverse points of view to solving clients’ unique and complex challenges.
Fortunately, in recent years there has been an uptick in law firm diversity. In 2023, 21.6% of attorneys were members of traditionally underrepresented ethnic groups, according to an American Lawyer survey. That’s up more than 20% from the same survey just three years prior.
As a consumer, consider asking a law firm about its diversity track record. In fact, the best law firms will not only expect the question but welcome it.
Best Lawyers, which has been tracking trends and innovations in the legal industry for more than four decades, serves as a trusted resource for identifying what it takes to be a preeminent law firm in the United States. Their recently released 14th annual rankings of Best Law Firms, found at bestlawfirms.com, provides keen insight, not only into the most successful law firms, but also the key factors to keep an eye out for when going through the reliably trying task of retaining counsel.
Here is some of Best Lawyers’ advice:
1. Does the firm use the latest technology?
Right now, even the legal profession is abuzz about generative Artificial Intelligence (gen AI) tools. With its ability to parse information more quickly, gen AI offers the immediate potential to automate routine tasks such as research; summarizing long, complex content; and writing first drafts of simple documents such as NDAs. All of which can save both time and money.
And smart firms are closely watching regulations and any risks that this new technology may bring, all while using it for the benefit of the firm and its clients.
2. What do other legal experts think about the way they do business?
There are better options available than just word of mouth when choosing legal representation. After all, hiring a law firm isn’t like choosing which novel to download next. Through Best Laywers’ research process, a firm’s performance is assessed by its peers, ultimately helping consumers make better-informed decisions.
Why is this important? At its heart, a robust peer-review process like Best Lawyers’ asks legal professionals to answer this key question: “If you had a legal issue and could not represent yourself, what firm would you hire?” This peer-review method is critical, and offers a straightforward way to help identify the most trusted firms.
3. Does the law firm embrace diversity?
Today’s leading law firms know that to be successful, the makeup of their staff should represent the communities they serve. Inclusion is a necessary element of well-rounded representation because a team with different backgrounds and experiences will bring diverse points of view to solving clients’ unique and complex challenges.
Fortunately, in recent years there has been an uptick in law firm diversity. In 2023, 21.6% of attorneys were members of traditionally underrepresented ethnic groups, according to an American Lawyer survey. That’s up more than 20% from the same survey just three years prior.
As a consumer, consider asking a law firm about its diversity track record. In fact, the best law firms will not only expect the question but welcome it.
National Labor Relations Board issues new rule that is hailed a win for workers
by Brett PevetoIllinois News Connection
CHICAGO - The National Labor Relations Board recently issued a rule change that may have wide-ranging impacts for workers and businesses. The update to the joint employer rule would require parent companies to negotiate collective bargaining agreements with employees even when using a staffing agency or subcontractor. It also means franchisors and franchisees can both be held liable for unfair labor practices. This replaces a Trump-era rule change that made it easier for companies to avoid a finding of joint-employer status. Brian Petruska - general counsel with the mid-Atlantic regional organizing coalition of the Laborer's International Union of North America - said the rule change is a win for workers. "It means that the employees' right to organize still is meaningful," said Petruska, "even in this modern world we live in with layers and layers of LLCs and corporations who are now defining the workspace." The rule change now faces legal challenges including from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which filed suit against the board in federal court. In a statement on its website, the Chamber says the rule change will "create chaos and more legal confusion that will harm both employers and workers." The NLRB rule establishes that two or more entities may be considered joint employers of a group of employees when more than one entity possesses the authority to control employees' essential terms and conditions of employment. The board says this change is more in line with established common-law agency principles. Petruska said he sees opposition to the updated rule coming from a number of industries including restaurants, construction and hotels. He also said the franchise business model will no longer insulate the parent company from labor issues. "Now," said Petruska, "the fact that they have that control may cause them to be embroiled in local labor disputes that the franchisees are having with their employees." The new rule will go into effect next February.
Protect yourself and family from holiday season scams
Jonathan Hammond /Pixabay
Statepoint Media - In today’s hyper-connected digital universe, cyber criminals have more information than ever before, with the ability to reach you through unsecure public Wi-Fi, your email inbox, via text message, and more.
According to a Scam and Robocall Report from T-Mobile, Americans lost an estimated $39.5 billion to phone scams in 2022. Lucky for you, there are several ways to protect and safeguard your personal information to help prevent scammers from scammin’ this holiday season.
1. Avoid Public USB Ports: Traveling by plane this holiday season? The FCC warns that cyber criminals can download malware to public USB charging ports to gain access to your information. Prevent this by using an AC power outlet instead.
2. Beware of Charity Scams: It’s the season of giving, but the FCC warns many cyber criminals take advantage by creating fake charities staged as real nonprofit organizations to gain access to your payment information. Woof. To prevent this, don’t click on suspicious email or text links and verify the organization is registered at the National Association of State Charity Officials or Better Business Bureau’s Wise Giving Alliance before donating this holiday season.
3. Screen Your Calls: Scammers are continuously upping their game, with total robocall attempts up 75% from 2021 to 2022. Detecting whether an incoming call is a potential scam isn’t always easy, but T-Mobile’s Scam Shield app makes it simple. Free to all T-Mobile customers, Scam Shield enhances your scam-blocking protections so you can say goodbye to scam calls. In 2022 alone, Scam Shield identified or blocked 41.5 billion scam calls in the T-Mobile network. That’s a whopping 1,317 calls identified or blocked every second. With Scam Shield, when the network detects a potential scam call, it is flagged and displayed as “Scam Likely” on your device. Customers who want even more protection can download the Scam Shield app or dial #662# from their T-Mobile smartphone to enable Scam Block, which automatically blocks any calls that match the database of scam calls. Take that, tricksters. To learn more, visit t-mobile.com/scamshield.
4. Shop Smarter Online: According to Statista, 57% of holiday shoppers plan to use their smartphone to make holiday purchases this year, and scammers are onto them, ramping up activity during the two weeks before Christmas. To minimize any cyber Grinches trying to steal your personal info, monitor your financial accounts regularly for suspicious charges and sign up for your bank or credit card company’s text or email notifications to stay on top of fraudulent activity.
5. Use Secure Tools: Safeguard your online accounts with Multi-Factor Authentication, which requires users to enter two different kinds of information to log in, like a password and one-time PIN code. It’s like having a digital bouncer to make sure only you get into your accounts. Another protection is a password manager, giving you the ability to securely store passwords across multiple platforms and websites. The tool also provides an autofill password function and a new password generator.
To learn more about the industry’s top fraud trends and how to stay protected from scammers year-round, check out T-Mobile’s Scam Shield Report found at t-mobile.com/news.
While cyber threats are on the rise, you can sleigh scams by staying vigilant and incorporating these best practices into your life this holiday season.
More Sentinel articles
• • • •
Young people should trust their gut when it comes to stomach pain
For years, colon cancer was believed by many to be an "old person’s disease." However, a study revealed that young patients ages 20 to 29 have recently seen the highest spike in rates of diagnosed colon cancer cases.Read more ...
Traveling with your pet? 6 things you will want to remember
Pet parents increasingly want to take their furry family members with them wherever they can. This has led to an uptick in pet travel, whether around town, on business, or across the country. In response to this demand, more hotels are taking steps to accommodate four-legged guests.Read more ...
• • • •
Navigating solar leases for farmers and ranchers, a guide to working with developers
Leasing valuable farmland to solar energy firms can generate a reliable revenue stream. Landowners should carefully consider the current and future impact of long-term land leases.
Photo: American Public Power Association/Unsplash
by Cari RinckerAttorney at Law
Agreements between solar developers and landowners come in many shapes and forms. In broad strokes, there are two main approaches. On the one hand, a developer may present a farmer or rancher with an option agreement, which will give the developer a period of time to assess the viability of a solar project on the land, and the unilateral right to exercise an option to enter into a solar lease agreement if and when the developer determines that the project will be profitable. The lease agreement should be fully negotiated at the time that the option agreement is executed. Alternatively, the developer may skip the option agreement and instead present the farmer or rancher with a lease agreement to be executed at the onset. Such a lease agreement usually commences with a development phase wherein the developer assesses the viability of the project. The developer is then granted the right to unilaterally terminate the lease at the conclusion of the development phase. Regardless of whether there is a separate option agreement or a development phase incorporated into the lease, solar leases generally are structured pursuant to the same format: There is a construction period which may last roughly one year, followed by an operation period which may last decades, a renewal period which may extend the lease even longer, and ultimately, a cleanup period. As discussed further below, each distinct phase comes with specific rights, obligations, and compensation structures. 2. The Length of the Lease
To understand the extent to which a lease will tie up their land, a farmer or rancher should be sure to calculate the total timeframe of the encumbrance, from the beginning of the option or development phase, to the end of the cleanup period. It is not uncommon for the life of a solar lease agreement to span more than half a century. For this reason, multi-generational family farms and ranches should carefully consider potential uses or plans for their land over the course of the near- and not-so-near-future. Such considerations may include the needs of future generations. The farmer or rancher should further keep in mind that such lease agreements typically run with the land, which means that they will bind any subsequent sale or estate succession of the land. Given the length of the agreement, agriculture producers should also carefully assess the impact of a solar lease on their property, including a thorough evaluation of the potential environmental impact, the effect on overall farming or ranching productivity and economies of scale, and their eligibility for government programs. 3. Due Diligence on the Developer
If a farmer or rancher plans to enter a long-term relationship with a solar developer, they should perform due diligence on the developer to ensure that the developer is legitimate and has a good record with other landowners in the area. Due diligence may include: (i) checking the developer’s online presence, including reviews and BBB complaints, (ii) confirming the developer is a registered entity with the secretary of state for the state that they claim to be organized under, and (iii) paneling neighbors and the community to see if anyone else has negative experiences with the developer.
Braeson Holland/PEXELS
Before executing an option or lease agreement, a farmer or rancher must confirm that he or she has the legal authority to enter into such an agreement. In the first instance, the landowner will likely have to warrant in the agreement that he or she is the fee simple owner of the farm or ranch. If there are multiple parties with an interest in the land, all co-owners must approve and be a party to the lease. If the land is owned by a business entity or trust, then the governing documents of such entity or trust must be reviewed to confirm that they permit the execution of such a lease. Finally, if the property is subject to mortgages, pre-existing leases, easements, or other encumbrances on the property, those may need to be addressed before proceeding with a solar lease. 5. Compensation under the Lease
A farmer or rancher should carefully review the compensation he or she will receive under the option and/or lease agreement(s). At both the option/development phase and the construction phase, the landowner may receive either lump-sum payments or periodic per-acre payments. It is advisable to avoid lump-sum arrangements if the timeframe of either phase is highly variable. Construction phase payments should be higher than option or development phase payments. The compensation received during the operation phase should be significantly higher than the earlier phases. It is most often structured as an annual or semi-annual payment tied to the number of acres subject to the lease. If receiving per acre payments, the farmer or rancher must clarify whether all acres will receive the same compensation level, or whether certain unused acres will be compensated at a lower rate (or not at all). Given the length of the operation phase, any lease should also include an escalation factor (typically between 1.5 and 3%) by which payments should rise on an annual basis to compensate for inflationary risk. The farmer or rancher is also encouraged to negotiate other forms of compensation or reimbursement in the lease. For example, a landowner may ask for the reimbursement of professional expenses, such as attorneys’ fees, incurred in reviewing the lease. The farmer or rancher should confirm that the developer will be responsible for any tax increase caused by transforming farmland into a solar energy facility. They may also wish to explore whether the developer will compensate the landowner for any loss of eligibility for government farming programs. Finally, the farmer or rancher should ensure that the lease clearly delineates a compensation structure for damages incurred to crops and the underlying drainage system on or adjacent to the property. 6. The Rights and Obligations of Each Party
The option and lease agreements should clearly lay out the rights granted to the solar developer on the landowner’s land. The farmer or rancher must pay careful attention to how the lease will affect their rights on the land subject to the lease and ensure that any rights or easements granted are carefully tailored for reasonableness. They should also understand whether the lease will interfere with rights on adjacent land owned by them.
Photo: Tornike Jibladze/Pixabay
It is common for leases to have asymmetrical termination provisions, meaning that a developer can often terminate the lease at any time and for any reason, while a landowner can only do so in the event of a breach of a monetary obligation. A farmer or rancher may nevertheless seek to ensure that they may still request damages or specific performance of certain provisions of the lease where they are not permitted to terminate the lease. A lease should contain robust cleanup obligations for the developer, including cleanup of any debris post-construction, as well as restoring the property to its original condition at the end of the lease agreement. Local or state regulations may be of use in this regard. For example, in Illinois, the Department of Agriculture requires that any developer with a solar lease agreement with a landowner must also enter into an Agricultural Impact Mitigation Agreement with the Bureau of Land and Water Resources, which contains standardized construction and cleanup obligations for the project. 8. Disputes
On a final note, farmers and ranchers should always plan for the worst-case scenario. This involves ensuring that any dispute arrangements or requirements contained in the lease favor the landowner. In particular, a farmer or rancher should request that any waiver of a right to a jury trial be removed from a lease. Moreover, if a lease contains provisions waiving any right to appeal an arbitration or other dispute award, that language should also be struck from the agreement. In closing, solar lease agreements are binding contracts of long duration, with potentially significant consequences for the landowner and his or her heirs or assigns. Given the variable and complexities addressed in this article, it is advisable that the landowner hire an attorney to help ensure that the solar lease agreement is carefully tailored to the unique concerns and needs of a farmer or rancher. Whether an attorney is employed, or whether the landowner takes it upon him- or herself to review the agreement, the reviewing party should ensure that they have adequately considered each of the issues discussed herein.
About the author
Cari Rincker is the owner of Rincker Law, PLLC, a national general practice law firm concentrating in food and agriculture law with offices in New York and Illinois. She has her boots planted firmly in agriculture – she presently own a small farm in Shelbyville, Illinois, and enjoys judging livestock shows around the country.
Viewpoint | Fining kids by the Illinois criminal justice system needs to end
These costs have nothing to do with creating accountability or achieving victim restitution.
by Officer Dave Franco (Ret.)
Chicago Police Department
Chicago Police Department
As a committed member of Illinois’ law enforcement community interested in public safety and justice, I support the passage of SB1463 and its companion bill in the house, HB3120, and I hope other Illinoians will join me. Imposing harsh punishments on juveniles is an unfair and outdated practice that was never based on evidence and must be left behind.
In Illinois, “fine and fees” refer to administrative fees and financial penalties imposed by courts. The Juvenile Court Act of 1987 and other Illinois statutes set up a series of costs specifically for children and their families. But these costs have nothing to do with creating accountability or achieving victim restitution. The reality is a system that creates bigger barriers to youth rehabilitation.
These kids are likely still in school; they are unlikely to have jobs, and if they do, they have limited working hours and income. The system does not take into account their individual circumstances, and is, instead, designed for them to fail.
The new legislation is designed to streamline and simplify the juvenile justice process while reducing the cost for those involved by eliminating fines and fees in cases against minors. Right now, fines and fees can range from less than $50 to almost $1000 and add up quickly. These costs are higher in some counties than others. This legislation would address that problem and make justice equal across the state without undermining a judge’s ability to set victim restitution and order other non-financial conditions that focus on accountability and rehabilitation.
A 2016 study showed that financial penalties imposed on youth increased their risk of reoffending rather than acting as a deterrent. Unpaid debts have lifelong consequences that can impact job prospects, educational opportunities, and much more. Imposing debt on minors sets them up for continued failure and makes it increasingly difficult to change their circumstances without returning to criminal activity.
Passing this legislation won’t be a ‘get out of jail free’ card for youth and it won’t allow them to escape accountability for their actions. Instead, it will create space for new systems that are proven to increase public safety and improve outcomes for justice-involved youth. There are better options for rehabilitation and better ways for Illinois to spend money on the criminal justice system. In 2021, a study from the National Bureau of Economic Research showed that restorative justice programs for juvenile offenders reduced the probability of rearrest by 44%, while another study found that community-based interventions were not only more effective, but less costly to states. Better justice practices are possible, we owe it to young people to give them a better chance at success.
Not only are the policies bad for recidivism rates, but they are bad fiscal policy as well. The longer someone has criminal justice debt, the less likely it is to be collected. Comparing Illinois counties to counties in other states where juvenile court debt collection is relatively high, the courts there only collect about 4% of debt that is more than six months old; after three years, the debt is completely uncollectible. Illinois counties can’t rely on debt they may never collect to pay for the cost of the justice system. Even if they do collect, the actual revenue still won’t be enough to cover the resources used to administer the system: most small counties in Illinois take in less than $5,000 in juvenile justice costs every year. Juvenile fines and fees generate almost no revenue and the cost of collecting is often higher.
If passed, SB1463 will be applied automatically and retroactively, meaning that existing debts will be canceled and no new ones will be imposed on juveniles and their families. This will not be a loss of revenue for Illinois counties, instead it will be a way for those counties to better use its resources that would have been spent on debt collection.
Illinois must join the over 20 other states that have eliminated or reformed juvenile fines and fees. The system of fines and fees is causing youth offenders to fail and we as Illinoians are failing them by not working for change. This legislation, SB1463/HB3120, is a critical step for public safety and for creating better systems of justice for Illinois’ juvenile offenders.
Officer David Franco (Ret.) served with the Chicago Police Department for three decades since the early 1980's, focused on issues ranging from terrorist threats to abandoned property and everything in-between. He is currently an adjunct professor of Criminal Justice at Wright College in Chicago. He holds a BA from Northeastern Illinois University and a MPA from the Illinois Institute of Technology.
Guest Commentary | The Trump-Daniels saga, will it never end?
by Glenn Mollette, Guest Commentator
An ongoing saga continues to surround Former President Donald Trump and porn star Stormy Daniels. Will it never end? Trump may or may not be indicted by the time you read this but who knows? Who isn’t tired of hearing about an alleged sexual encounter between these two.
Former President Trump has denied the encounter ever occurred but Daniels has said it did occur. Who is telling the truth? Who should we believe? Is there proof of this alleged “affair” or sexual encounter?
Does anyone have a video of the Trump and Daniels encounter? Apparently, Daniels is big on videos for money participating in encounters that most of us really do not want to see. I’m sure some people do since pornography an international addictive problem that destroys more lives than we will ever know. Even if it existed, we certainly do not want to see any such “encounter” between Daniels and Trump. Even. So, how do you prove such an event took place. We are back again to “he said, she said.”
President Trump has had his feet to the fire because he is alleged to have paid $130,000 to Daniels to keep quiet about the “encounter.” The problem is unclear. Is he alleged to have paid the money out of campaign funds raised for his Presidential bid in 2016? Or, is this about being an amount of money beyond the legal campaign donation cap and how could it ever be considered a campaign donation? Does any of it make sense? As much money as Trump has, would he not have just paid her out of his petty cash fund? If Daniels and Trump had a dispute then how is it illegal to have settled a dispute? People do it every day.
Trump made millions just from his reality television show The Apprentice on NBC. I always figured this is one reason NBC hates Trump so much. He made them a lot of money and the show was still making major money when he quit to run for President. Money and greed color everything.
Why don’t they just produce the check written to Daniels? Michael Cohen, Trump’s former attorney who served time in prison, allegedly gave the money to Daniels and was reimbursed by Trump. Did he write a check from his personal account? How did Trump reimburse Cohen? Did he go to the bank and get a cashier’s check? Just go back and do an audit. How credible is Cohen? Does Cohen know for sure which account the money came from?
Back in 1974 Jerry Springer, (Yes, the TV reality show star) resigned from the Cincinnati City council because he had written two checks to two different prostitutes in Northern, Kentucky. The controversy took over his life but he was later reelected to the city council and even later served as mayor. In one of his commercials, that I remember seeing, he said, “I made a mistake. I paid a prostitute with a check.” He actually wrote two checks. One was for $50 and the other was for $25. He would go on to serve as Cincinnati’s mayor from 1977-1978. But wait, he admitted to it and he didn’t pay it from campaign or government funds.
Looks like if Trump could get in trouble for paying for an “encounter,” then Daniels would be in trouble for prostitution. But wait, she didn’t collect money for an alleged encounter with Trump, but she got money to be quiet about the encounter with Trump. Is this not blackmail? Are there not any consequences for blackmail? Apparently, there is more money to be made from being quiet about “encounters” than actually selling oneself for an “encounter”. She did reportedly receive a handsome book royalty check to talk about her life that attorney Michael Avenatti stole. He is now serving time in prison for defrauding clients and tax evasion.
There is probably more that will be said about this alleged “encounter”. This proves it doesn’t work to pay porn stars hush money, because, they take the money and still tell everybody.
-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
An ongoing saga continues to surround Former President Donald Trump and porn star Stormy Daniels. Will it never end? Trump may or may not be indicted by the time you read this but who knows? Who isn’t tired of hearing about an alleged sexual encounter between these two.
Former President Trump has denied the encounter ever occurred but Daniels has said it did occur. Who is telling the truth? Who should we believe? Is there proof of this alleged “affair” or sexual encounter?
Does anyone have a video of the Trump and Daniels encounter? Apparently, Daniels is big on videos for money participating in encounters that most of us really do not want to see. I’m sure some people do since pornography an international addictive problem that destroys more lives than we will ever know. Even if it existed, we certainly do not want to see any such “encounter” between Daniels and Trump. Even. So, how do you prove such an event took place. We are back again to “he said, she said.”
President Trump has had his feet to the fire because he is alleged to have paid $130,000 to Daniels to keep quiet about the “encounter.” The problem is unclear. Is he alleged to have paid the money out of campaign funds raised for his Presidential bid in 2016? Or, is this about being an amount of money beyond the legal campaign donation cap and how could it ever be considered a campaign donation? Does any of it make sense? As much money as Trump has, would he not have just paid her out of his petty cash fund? If Daniels and Trump had a dispute then how is it illegal to have settled a dispute? People do it every day.
Trump made millions just from his reality television show The Apprentice on NBC. I always figured this is one reason NBC hates Trump so much. He made them a lot of money and the show was still making major money when he quit to run for President. Money and greed color everything.
Why don’t they just produce the check written to Daniels? Michael Cohen, Trump’s former attorney who served time in prison, allegedly gave the money to Daniels and was reimbursed by Trump. Did he write a check from his personal account? How did Trump reimburse Cohen? Did he go to the bank and get a cashier’s check? Just go back and do an audit. How credible is Cohen? Does Cohen know for sure which account the money came from?
Back in 1974 Jerry Springer, (Yes, the TV reality show star) resigned from the Cincinnati City council because he had written two checks to two different prostitutes in Northern, Kentucky. The controversy took over his life but he was later reelected to the city council and even later served as mayor. In one of his commercials, that I remember seeing, he said, “I made a mistake. I paid a prostitute with a check.” He actually wrote two checks. One was for $50 and the other was for $25. He would go on to serve as Cincinnati’s mayor from 1977-1978. But wait, he admitted to it and he didn’t pay it from campaign or government funds.
Looks like if Trump could get in trouble for paying for an “encounter,” then Daniels would be in trouble for prostitution. But wait, she didn’t collect money for an alleged encounter with Trump, but she got money to be quiet about the encounter with Trump. Is this not blackmail? Are there not any consequences for blackmail? Apparently, there is more money to be made from being quiet about “encounters” than actually selling oneself for an “encounter”. She did reportedly receive a handsome book royalty check to talk about her life that attorney Michael Avenatti stole. He is now serving time in prison for defrauding clients and tax evasion.
There is probably more that will be said about this alleged “encounter”. This proves it doesn’t work to pay porn stars hush money, because, they take the money and still tell everybody.
Dr. Glenn Mollette is a syndicated American columnist and author of Grandpa's Store, American Issues, and ten other books. He is read in all 50 states. The views expressed are those of the author and are not necessarily representative of any other group or organization.
This article is the sole opinions of the author and does not necessarily reflect the views of The Sentinel. We welcome comments and views from our readers. Submit your letters to the editor or commentary on a current event 24/7 to editor@oursentinel.com.
Illinois Supreme Court put Safe-T Act on hold until March
by Patrick Andriesen
Illinois Policy
The high court’s temporary order was made after a Kankakee County judge ruled against the pretrial release portion of the act for 65 Illinois counties Dec. 28 on the grounds it violated the Crime Victims’ Bill of Rights and separation of powers sections of the Illinois Constitution.
The justices ordered the stay to "maintain consistent pretrial procedures throughout Illinois" counties while they consider the state’s appeal to the Kankakee County ruling.
No hearing date has been set but justices announced plans for an "expedited process" to review the appeal on the merits. All other provisions of the criminal justice reform bill went into effect as anticipated Jan. 1. The act phases in police body cameras by 2025, regulates police training and discipline, among other things.
In his ruling, Circuit Judge Thomas Cunnington sided with 65 of Illinois’ 102 state’s attorneys, citing the importance of the separation of powers between the legislative and judicial branches. Cunnington said, "The appropriateness of bail rests with the authority of the court and may not be determined by legislative fiat."
But Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul disagreed. He appealed the lower court decision on behalf of the state, arguing "a judge’s discretion with regards to pretrial detention is expanded" under the new reform.
Despite the disagreement, legal experts on both sides lauded the Illinois Supreme Court for moving to pause the reforms and prevent unequal enforcement of the new law across Illinois.
"We are very pleased with the Illinois Supreme Court’s decision," wrote the DuPage and Kane County state’s attorneys in a joint statement. "The equal administration of justice is paramount to the successful and fair administration of our criminal justice system."
Patrick covers Criminal Justice the Illinois Policy Institute. In this role, he focuses on creating and analyzing content to support our published research and experts in the media. Illinois Policy Institute, a nonpartisan research organization that promotes responsible government and free market principles. This story was originally published on January 2, 2023.
Illinois contractors and builders oppose HB 5412, it will harm small businesses
SPRINGFIELD -- Opponents say a proposed amendment by House Leader Marcus Evans (D-Chicago) that passed the House Labor Committee back on February 16th is terrible for female and minority-owned businesses, as well as union and non-union construction firms in Illinois.
As written, the amendment to HB 5412 would require general contractors to pay the wages of a subcontractors’ employees, even if the prime contractor has already paid the subcontractor in full. However, those opposed to the bill say the measure would do the exact opposite.
"Opponents feel it would do nothing to prevent Wage Theft, but only encourage it by allowing rogue subcontractors to get off the hook by not paying their workers," states a press release from Black Contractors Owners & Executives/Hispanic American Construction Industry Association this week. According to the release, payment for wages will become "the responsibility onto the prime contractor, while allowing these bad apples to move onto the next job and underbid legitimate contractors since they have no payroll costs."
The Federation of Women Contractors, an advocacy organization that protects the interests of women-owned construction firms said that should HB5412 passes, it would be damaging to her members and result in many of them going out of business.
"For our members who are small businesses, any increase in cost has a catastrophic impact on the financial health of their companies and their ability to compete in the marketplace," said Jaemie Neely, Executive Director for the association. "We oppose HB5412 because it would not prevent or deter unethical subcontractors from stealing wages from their employees but rather the bill would expose general contractors to a risk of having to pay twice for wages and we think our alternative amendment is a much better solution."
Fourteen other professional organizations, from the building industry to mechanical contractors, are fighting the proposal that has the backing of the Mid-America Carpenters Regional Council.
The Associated Builders & Contractors, Black Contractors Owners & Executives, Chicago Chamber of Commerce, Chicago & Downstate Roofing Contractors Association, Chicago Area General Contractors, Hispanic American Construction Industry Association, Home Builders Association of IL, IL Chamber of Commerce, IL Chemical Industry Council, IL Construction Industry Council, IL Manufacturers Association, Il Mechanical & Specialty Contractors Association, IL Road & Transportation Builders Association, and the Women’s Construction Owners & Executives are against HB 5412.
Jacqueline Gomez, Executive Director of Hispanic American Construction Industry Association said HB 5412 would lock out future entrepreneurs from the construction industry and increase the costs for clients. "Punishing good companies for a few bad apples is a bad idea."
The committee asked the sponsor for additional revisions before HB 5412 goes in front of the house for a final vote.
As written, the amendment to HB 5412 would require general contractors to pay the wages of a subcontractors’ employees, even if the prime contractor has already paid the subcontractor in full. However, those opposed to the bill say the measure would do the exact opposite.
"Opponents feel it would do nothing to prevent Wage Theft, but only encourage it by allowing rogue subcontractors to get off the hook by not paying their workers," states a press release from Black Contractors Owners & Executives/Hispanic American Construction Industry Association this week. According to the release, payment for wages will become "the responsibility onto the prime contractor, while allowing these bad apples to move onto the next job and underbid legitimate contractors since they have no payroll costs."
The Federation of Women Contractors, an advocacy organization that protects the interests of women-owned construction firms said that should HB5412 passes, it would be damaging to her members and result in many of them going out of business.
"For our members who are small businesses, any increase in cost has a catastrophic impact on the financial health of their companies and their ability to compete in the marketplace," said Jaemie Neely, Executive Director for the association. "We oppose HB5412 because it would not prevent or deter unethical subcontractors from stealing wages from their employees but rather the bill would expose general contractors to a risk of having to pay twice for wages and we think our alternative amendment is a much better solution."
Fourteen other professional organizations, from the building industry to mechanical contractors, are fighting the proposal that has the backing of the Mid-America Carpenters Regional Council.
The Associated Builders & Contractors, Black Contractors Owners & Executives, Chicago Chamber of Commerce, Chicago & Downstate Roofing Contractors Association, Chicago Area General Contractors, Hispanic American Construction Industry Association, Home Builders Association of IL, IL Chamber of Commerce, IL Chemical Industry Council, IL Construction Industry Council, IL Manufacturers Association, Il Mechanical & Specialty Contractors Association, IL Road & Transportation Builders Association, and the Women’s Construction Owners & Executives are against HB 5412.
Jacqueline Gomez, Executive Director of Hispanic American Construction Industry Association said HB 5412 would lock out future entrepreneurs from the construction industry and increase the costs for clients. "Punishing good companies for a few bad apples is a bad idea."
The committee asked the sponsor for additional revisions before HB 5412 goes in front of the house for a final vote.
How rape affects memory, and why police need to know about that brain science
By Sammy Caiola, Capital Public Radio
Annie Walker woke up one morning in 2019 with little recollection of the night before. She had bruises on her arms, legs, wrist and lower abdomen.
"But I literally had no idea what had happened," she said. "And, for days, I was trying to put the pieces together."
She knew she had gone to a Sacramento, California, bar and restaurant with a group of people, and she remembered drinking there and being left alone with the man she’d later identify as her rapist. But not much else.
Memories she couldn't summon that first morning gradually came into focus over days and weeks, she said. The emerging details included what the man had been wearing, and the way he shoved her against the bar. One week after the attack, she reported the crime to the Sacramento County Sheriff's Department.
Then, in the days after making the report, another wave of memories surfaced — she recalled, vividly, that the man had raped her and had a weapon.
"I knew that there was a gun at my neck, at my back," she said. "It was just clear."
The detectives gave her a hard time, she said, when she called to report that she had remembered that her attacker had a gun. The Sacramento detectives assigned to Walker's case didn’t seem to understand why she couldn’t remember all the details right away.
Walker’s alleged perpetrator was never arrested.
"I felt like I was just extremely cross-examined on the phone. Like, 'Why didn’t you remember a gun? That's, like, a really important thing.'"
Sexual assault survivors say interactions with law enforcement can be so intense, and so unsympathetic, that they add secondary trauma. Reporting a rape can be especially traumatic when officers cast doubt on victims’ stories.
But it doesn't have to be, say scientists and scholars of criminal justice. If police gain a deeper understanding of what’s going on in the brain during and after a rape, they can change the way they approach rape cases and avoid making survivors feel blamed or disbelieved.
Scientists who study trauma and memory say it's common for sexual assault survivors — as well as survivors of other serious traumas — to be unable to recall an attack fully. They might remember certain facts but not others, or struggle to recall events in the correct sequence.
When law enforcement officers aren't aware of the neuroscience of trauma, or have no training to deal with it, there’s a tendency to dismiss or disbelieve victims who experience memory gaps, according to scholars and advocates for sexual assault survivors.
"There’s a real danger when investigators are asking people for information that was never encoded or has been lost," said Harvard University psychologist Jim Hopper. "They can stress out the victim, leave them feeling misunderstood, incompetent, not wanting to further engage with the investigation."
Walker's alleged perpetrator was never arrested. And she's still frustrated with the way detectives put pressure on her to remember details during the investigation.
The Brain in Survival Mode
When confronted with a crisis, the brain often activates its "fight, flight or freeze" response. In these scenarios, the brain’s "defense circuitry" takes over, explained Hopper. The prefrontal cortex, which is responsible for logical decision-making, is no longer in control and, instead, the areas of the brain responsible for scanning for danger take charge.
"And that's what people are running on" when trauma happens, Hopper said.
Some people respond by mentally "dissociating," or disconnecting from their physical selves. That survival response affects the ability to absorb what’s happening around them, Hopper said.
Studies on memory and recall during a traumatic event describe two types of details: central and peripheral. Central details are those that capture our attention and evoke emotions in the moment, such as a location. Peripheral details are those that a survivor might not have been paying attention to during the crisis, such as something the perpetrator said or whether other people were present. Central details tend to be stored more reliably and for longer than peripheral details.
Every day in courtrooms around the country, [defense attorneys] attack and question the credibility of victims
Sometimes survivors are unable to answer what might seem like a simple question if it involves a peripheral detail like the color of the attacker’s shirt. And Hopper said that can make officers suspicious.
Hopper, who gives legal testimony in sexual assault cases, said victims are often held to unfair standards, even compared with other trauma survivors.
"Every day in courtrooms around the country, [defense attorneys] attack and question the credibility of victims of sexual assault for having the same kind of memories that soldiers have for their combat experiences," he said.
Victim advocates and criminal justice scholars say it’s important for detectives to be open to anything a survivor might say, whenever they say it — even if those details were not available in an initial report — because the information survivors provide later can be helpful for solving the crime.
Maintaining an Open Mind
Nicole Monroe, a police detective in Elk Grove, a suburb of Sacramento, said she and some of her colleagues have gotten additional education on brain science, and it has changed the way they approach sexual assault cases.
Monroe tells victims she works with that more memories will continue to surface in the days, weeks and even months to come.
"Smells will come back. Sights will come back. When you think of these things, give me a call and let me know, so that it can be added,” Monroe said. "Because little things like that are going to make a difference."
Traditionally, law enforcement officers are trained to conduct an interrogation that may involve drawing out specific details, usually in chronological order.
"The expectation is someone is supposed to come in, sit down, they’re supposed to be ready to talk, they’re supposed to know what to talk about," said Carrie Hull, a former detective with the Ashland Police Department in southern Oregon. "They're going to tell you what happened to them from the beginning, through the middle, and then the end. That is a very traditional understanding."
Hull is now a consultant for police departments, and part of her work involves advocating for the adoption of a technique known as Forensic Experiential Trauma Interviewing, or FETI. The training can help law enforcement learn how to ask questions differently: with empathy, patience and an informed understanding of how a traumatized brain makes memories and recalls them. Training in the technique is available through an online course, but it’s not a mandatory requirement for most police departments.
People who take Hull's course learn specific strategies for helping someone resurface a relevant memory that he or she may not have had access to when they first walked into the interview room. Hull said FETI discourages counterproductive practices such as paraphrasing, changing the victim’s words, interrupting or giving advice.
Hull said the overarching goal of trauma interviewing is to first "collect the dots, then connect the dots." In other words, simply interview the victim about what happened. The sharper, more aggressive investigative tactics can wait.
There isn’t research proving that law enforcement departments who take this training solve more rape cases. But victim advocates and scholars said it's a best practice that could make working with police a more positive experience for victims and, eventually, help bring more perpetrators to justice.
"If I had my way, every one of them would be doing this," said Dave Thomas, a program officer with the International Association of Chiefs of Police.
Annie Walker is still struggling to recover from her sexual assault, but it's complicated because she’s also healing from the way law enforcement handled her case. She said both police officers and survivors need more education on the way trauma affects memory.
She said if survivors knew what to expect in terms of memory issues, it wouldn’t be so frustrating. "They need to feel like the way that things are happening in their mind is normal. Normal for them."
This story is from a partnership that includes CapRadio, NPR and KHN.
KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation.
House bill in the works to keep teens out of adult court
(SPRINGFIELD, IL) - A bill pending in the Illinois House of Representatives would bring misdemeanor cases against older teenagers to juvenile court rather than adult court. House Bill 111 would allow emerging adults to be considered "delinquent minors" and adjudicated in the juvenile system up to their 19th birthday. Lael Chester, director of the Emerging Adult Justice Project at the Columbia University Justice Lab, said 18 is an arbitrary age to start bringing teens into adult court.
Photo by Niu Niu/Unsplash
New bill in committee would grant 'police powers' to General Assembly members
by Patrick Andriesen, Communications Intern
Illinois Policy
survey tool
Patrick is a communications intern with the Illinois Policy Institute. In this role, he focuses on creating and analyzing content to support our published research and experts in the media. Illinois Policy Institute, a nonpartisan research organization that promotes responsible government and free market principles. This story was originally published on March 9, 2021.
One step back, Champaign County joins the rest of the state in Coronavirus resurgence mitigation
On Friday, Governor JB Pritzker and the Illinois Department of Public Health (IDPH) announced resurgence mitigations would go into effect in Region 6 - which includes Champaign, Clark, Clay, Coles, Crawford, Cumberland, Dewitt, Douglas, Edgar, Effingham, Fayette, Ford, Iroquois, Jasper, Lawrence, Macon, Moultrie, Piatt, Richland, Shelby and Vermillion counties - starting 12:01 a.m. on Monday, November 2.
The 21-county region recorded a 7-day rolling average test positivity rate of 8 percent or above for three consecutive days, which exceeds the thresholds set for establishing mitigation measures under the state’s Restore Illinois Resurgence Plan.
In order to get back to Phase 4 and back to having indoor dining, the region will need a positivity rate of less than 6.5 percent for three straight days. If that rate stays above 8 percent for 14 days, then the region will face even more restrictions.
While Champaign county, if you ignore the University of Illinois' testing efforts, boast a 7-day positivity of 5.7, six counties are flaunting double-digit numbers. Coles county is currently at 11, Effingham 11.2, Macon 13.7, Douglas 14.9, Shelby 15.9 and Cumberland 26.1.
The resurgence mitigation restrictions target bars and restaurant in order to control the spread of the coronavirus. Governor Pritzker has said there are dozens of studies and articles on outbreaks in bars and restaurants to justify reducing the services they provide.
Mitigation measures taking effect November 2 in Region 6 include:
Bars
• No indoor service
• All outside bar service closes at 11:00
p.m.
• All bar patrons should be seated at tables outside
• No
ordering, seating, or congregating at bar (bar stools should be
removed)
• Tables should be 6 feet apart
• No
standing or congregating indoors or outdoors while waiting for a table or
exiting
• No dancing or standing indoors
• Reservations
required for each party
• No seating of multiple parties at one
table
Restaurants
• No indoor dining or bar service
• All outdoor dining closes
at 11:00 p.m.
• Outside dining tables should be 6 feet apart
• No
standing or congregating indoors or outdoors while waiting for a table or
exiting
• Reservations required for each party
• No
seating of multiple parties at one table
Meetings, Social Events, Gatherings
• Limit to lesser of 25 guests or 25 percent of overall room capacity
• No
party buses
• Gaming and Casinos close at 11:00 p.m., are limited to
25 percent capacity, and follow mitigations for bars and restaurants, if
applicable
Two area restaurants, Buford's Pub in Sadorus and Apple Dumplin', just outside the Urbana city limits, informed customers via Facebook that they intend remain open despite the restrictions from the state. Both business saw overwhelming support in both comments and "Likes".
Jeff Buckler, owner of Buford’s Pub told The News-Gazette it wasn’t an easy (decision) to make.
"Let me put it that way. We went through the last one; it was supposed to last two weeks and lasted what, 120 days?" he said. "I’m fighting for every small business out there. I’m just tired of being told what to do when they’re using the bars and restaurants as scapegoats. What about the Walmarts and Targets?"
On a Facebook, a post by Buford's Pub's said, "Its not just about my business its about all small business stand up against a dictator. Bars and (sic) are getting the brunt of this and combined we are less then (sic) 9% of the whole issue."
Meanwhile two days earlier, bars and restaurants in Region 9 received similar news.
A Crystal Lake attorney on Thursday filed a 78-page lawsuit on behalf of 37 McHenry County restaurants, hoping to bring the state’s mitigation plans to a halt and allow owners to continue offering indoor service.
A day later, McHenry County Judge Thomas Meyer denied the application for a temporary restraining order. The Northwest Herald reported he made his decision based on new facts and that mitigation order was not an extension the governor's executive order from last March.
"It was a difficult and unpleasant order to enter," Meyer said in the article. "But I do believe that there is a basis for the new executive order and that is how we end up where we are."
Buckler and Jim Flanigan, owner of the Apple Dumplin', have retained attorney Tom DeVore, who made headlines this summer when he represented state Representative Darren Bailey effort to null the state's mitigation order in a lawsuit and won. It was through DeVore's efforts a Clay County judge declared the Governor’s continuing use of emergency powers as an overstep of his constitutional authority.
The ruling, depending on who you speak with, is only applicable in south central Illinois county where the daily testing positivity is at 14.9 as of the time of this story and pushing a 7-day rolling average of 9.7. An appeal filed by the governor is still pending on the Clay County case.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)