|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Feature
|
|
News :: Prisons |
|
Jail Phone Victory! |
Current rating: 0 |
by Sandra Ahten
Email: spiritofsandra (nospam) hotmail.com (unverified!)
Phone: 217-367-6345 |
25 Feb 2005
|
|
Advocates for eliminating the practice of Champaign County accepting a kickback from the jail phone provider saw victory Thursday night as the Champaign County Board voted to completely eliminate the “compensation.” Champaign County has been accepting compensation for their phone contract since at least 1998. |
For the second month in a row, opponents of continuing the contract which provided the county $14,000 a month guaranteed “commission” spoke during the public input section of the meeting. The agenda called for a Finance Committee proposal that would extend the current contract for another two months, with no further action. Disappointed with this lack of will and action, I spoke with almost every Democrat on the Champaign County Board this week prior to the meeting. I asked them if they would support a motion to extend the contract through the end of this fiscal year “as is,” and in the mean time send the contract out for a bid without any “compensation” for next year. Based on their feed back, I thought that this motion might pass, but I knew it would be close.
The meeting was described by one observer as a “trainwreck.” They put a motion on the floor to extend the contract for two months. Then it got amended to include the provision that it would not include the “compensation.” This motion was on the floor for more than a half hour. This motion was voted on without any clarification as to when the dates for dropping the compensation would be and without any call for the contract to go out for bid. It did pass with the vote being 11 against and 13 for. It surfaced later that some thought that the proposal was to end the “compensation” with the new fiscal year and others thought it was an immediate mandate. I could go on about how eventually it all got clarified, but suffice to say it was a comical and extremely confusing round of parliamentary procedure. It was also extremely rewarding in the end in that the compensation will be dropped immediately – no compromise at all!
One interesting point in the meeting was when Deb Feinen (R) said she would vote for it, if it could be phased out over time “maybe three, five, or ten years!”
The vote to end it was split along party lines. (I need to clarify this). Steve Beckett (D) was not present.
Deb Busey, a county administrator said that the $168,000 per year was .64 of one percent of the total budget. (I need to verify this number) Jenny Putnam suggested that in the next fiscal year the money come from shaving that amount off of each budget. That proposal was met with concern in that it could be unfair to some small departments. Others suggested that part of the money could come (this year) from delaying the purchase of a $250,000 new software for payroll. Others suggested that perhaps the $50,000 for a diversity study was going to be shunned and could come from that. It was never suggested that it would come from the budget of the Sheriff and would ultimately come for medical and mental health services. This had previously been suggested when I’d spoken to some Democrats and Republicans privately.
Patricia Avery addressed the concern of where the money would come from in the budget by noting that the county can always find places to add things that they want and need to the budget – but that when it comes to poor people we had to delay it for five or ten years (as suggested by Deb Feinen). Claudia Gross said that it could be done because in fact “the budget was done on a spreadsheet it wasn’t written in stone.”
All in all it was a very good night. Thanks to everyone who signed the petition (more than 700!); everyone who spoke and showed up at the meetings; and members of CU Citizens for Peace and Justice.
We need to keep an eye on the County Board as they make their budget plans for next year.
The meeting will replay on Insight Cable UPTV Channel 6 on Saturday Feb. 26 – 8am and Sunday Feb. 27 at (4pm according to the Champaign County website) (5pm according to the UPTV schedule website).
The meeting is also replayed on the City of Champaign Access Channel (Channel 5) on the Monday following the meeting at 12:00 P.M.
Previous articles about the phone contract are here.
http://www.ucimc.org/feature/display/23335/index.php
Peace,
Sandra |
This work is in the public domain. |
Comments
|
Re: Jail Phone Victory! |
by Local Yocal
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
25 Feb 2005
|
While it's true Deb Feinen did propose the preposterous idea to "phase out" the $168,000 the County collects for free from Evercom for up to ten years in order to better absorb the loss of that money in the County's budget; credit must also be given to Feinen who realized that since the County was going to be negotiating for lower phone call rates and the County would no longer be accepting the $168,000 a year from Evercom anyway, the County might as well put the whole phone contract out for bid.
And that's the most important element to last night's bizarre proceedings...the phone contract will be put out for a competitive bidding process for the lowest phone rates (not the highest rate with the highest kickback for the County like last time) and hopefully, we'll be waving goodbye to Evercom altogether.
Someone with phone company experience might tell us how likely it is there exists a competitor who can provide the security features the County Jail needs, and still underbid the likes of the Vampire Evercom company with reasonable phone rates to inmate's families.
Particularly disturbing amongst many on the County Board is this mind-set that once a revenue stream gets factored into the general revenue budget, it cannot be removed without the world ending. Some members of the County Board were willing to ignore the ethics of accepting payola from price gouging the innocent poor families of inmates, and literally declared it their "fiscal responsiblity" to make sure this $168,000 a year stay right where it is in the County Budget. It is an alarming code of honor they have there at the Brookens Administration Building- The Almighty Budget takes precedence over fairness and how their policies affect constituents.
Another disturbing element to last night's rumblings was the trip down memory lane many County Board members did revealing they knew this phone contract was wrong two, three years ago but did it anyway. Granted, some Democrats never stood for it and were in the voting minority, but still, how could this kickback payola/ price gouging happen year after year without someone from the County Board shouting it loudly to the public? I say TO the public?
It should NOT have been Sandra Ahten's personal part-time job to first, bring this to our attention, then negotiate with County Board members on how to solve it, and then draft proposals and compromises, work the media, draft press releases, organize groups to attend meetings and whatever else only she knows in order to get this policy reversed.
Someone on the County Board should have been able to stand up long ago, and with the consistency and dedication Sandra has displayed, put this shameful practice to the fire. It is not enough to grumble briefly to the News-Gazette that "I had nothing to do with it" and wash your hands in silence, all the while you help spend the blood money that comes in. I hope the County Board learned a civics lesson from Sandra Ahten. If you really do stand for something, and you go to work, you might get things done.
Great credit is due to the citizens who showed up behind Sandra at the County's various meetings the last couple of months and voiced their concerns. Politicians need to see and hear that their decisions are being watched and people care about what they decide. The speed with which the County has backpedaled out of this Evercom contract is because people showed up and spoke out.
Now, ....where were we when this horrific rip off was announced in the News-Gazette two years ago?
If you would like to be a consistent part of the solution to issues like these, consider attending the C-U Citizens for Peace and Justice meeting this Saturday, February 26 at the Douglass Branch Library in Champaign from 1:30p.m. -3:00p.m. Aaron and Carol Ammons are working with others to keep awareness and pressure up to address many concerns about our criminal justice system. The injustices sure don't stop at high collect calls from the jailhouse. Please come this Saturday to continue organizing and educating ourselves. |
|
Re: Jail Phone Victory! |
by Local Yocal
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
25 Feb 2005
|
One other observation that bears noting: we pay in this county and both municipalities, a woeful, pathetic, paltry sum of money to County Board members and city council people. I think County Board members are paid $45 a meeting, and city council folk make something like $5,000 a year.
I don't think you can expect people working other jobs to take time out and do all the reading and researching and understanding that is necessary to effectively govern, on such a measely sum. The unelected administrators of the County Board (two of them) make boocoo buckeroos, something to the tune of $60,000 a year; the unelected city managers are also in that neighborhood if not more, and the average public works person, city staff person, police and fireman all make decent salaries to afford homes and children. Which is fine.
But thinking upon why the elected portion of our governments do not champion civil rights, do not initiate social justice, do not have the vision sometimes to advocate for someone else besides private developers; I don't think they have the time nor the inclination to do so when they can't afford to spend any time or effort on their governing duties. It's to their credit they do as much as they do.
I hate to be on such a side, but it might be worth questioning whether our elected officials don't deserve better compensation for the necessary diligence it takes to understand an issue or all the issues. The workload we place on these people is enormous, and we might attract good people who would be willing to set aside their professional endeavors to serve us instead; if the money was there to maintain their households.
Otherwise, the government can't even understand their own parliamentary procedures (as in last night's display of random discourse) much less do the readings and listen to constituent concerns.
I am wary of having a professional political class like we have now in Congress whose perks and priveledges exceed normal expectations. I wouldn't want elected officials to vote on their own salary either, but maybe this is something that could go to referendum? I am not sure how the city's would allow city voters to select such an option.
(ML- I may be out of bounds on this thread here by introducing something outside the jail phone victory topic. If you need to scoot this off the page, I understand.) |
|
Re: Jail Phone Victory! |
by Mink!
mink (nospam) tcp.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
25 Feb 2005
|
It shouldn't have been Sandra's job only to fight this fight, no. But, she did a great job at it, and when I heard the news this morning on WILL, first thing I thought was, yay Sandra.
I am happy for all the families accepting the jail phone calls. This is great news. |
|
I Heard the News Today, Oh Boy.... |
by Local Yocal
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
28 Feb 2005
|
Back to back stories on today's morning 580 FM news, (no foolin'):
"A measure at the Illinois capital takes aim at so-called 'pay to play' politics, putting new restrictions on state contract holders and campaign contributions. Elizabeth Brown explains:
The measure would ban large contract-holders from giving campaign contributions to the office-holder who awarded them the state business. It would apply to anyone with $25,000 or more in contracts. It would require more disclosure for contracts of $10,000 or more. The contribution ban would last for the current term of the office-holder or two years after the contract expires, which ever is greater.
The proposal comes on the heels of numerous scandals involving contracts-for-contributions, although State Comptroller, Dan Hines, insists it's not aimed at any specific case:
[Hines speaking:] 'It has been, unfortunately, the legacy of State Government for far too long to have this type of appearance of corruption and appearance of influence on the procurement process.'
Hines has already issued an executive order requiring this practice of his office. Several legislative leaders have come out in support of the plan, although the Governor's office is still examining it.
The plan would not affect local government contracts. Hines says State Government should be cleaned up first. I'm Elizabeth Brown."
And then:
"Illinois officials are asking vendors, who provide supplies to the state, to offer cash incentives to enhance their chances of getting hired. The State recently sent out a bid request to private vendors for a 3-year, multi-million dollar contract to provide office supplies.
The request suggests that vendors offer cash, or other incentives, to help ease the State's budget deficit.
State Senator Steve Rauschenberger [Republican Governor hopeful] calls the plan a 'legal kickback'. He says vendors who are hired to supply the State should be only asked to offer the lowest possible price.
State's spokesman, Willie Medina says the tactic is a trend in the procurement sector, and 3 other states are already seeking cash incentives."
And I'm the one diagnosed with schitzophrenia... |
|
FYI |
by Local Yocal
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
03 Mar 2005
|
MORAL HIGH GROUND COSTLY ON PHONE VOTE
A majority of the Champaign County Board last week took the moral high ground and voted to terminate the $14,000 monthly payments from the company that provides telephone service to county jail inmates.
The vote was easy to cast. Opponents of the county's contract with Texas-based Evercom Systems skillfully pressed their case with emotional arguments, and politicians love to please a crowd. But now things will be tough because someone is going to have to figure out how to fill the $168,000 annual hole the board just created in the budget of Sheriff Daniel Walsh.
Consider just this one budget reality. The sheriff's office spends roughly $40,000 a month for inmates' medical care, prescriptions and mental health services. Now Walsh will have $14,000 less each month to pay that bill.
Opponents of the Evercom contract contended that charges for collect calls inmates made to family members were excessive, and that family members were bearing a heavy financial burden as a result of accepting inmates' calls.
Evercom's charges are high, roughly $5 for a 10-minute local call plus tax, and talking for a long time could run up a big bill. but contract opponents cleverly tied the telephone charges to three recent suicides at the jail, giving the issue an emotional charge it otherwise did not have. There is no more of a proven link between the suicides and the phone system than there is between a rooster's crow and the sun coming up. But that's immaterial now.
The board's decision to immediately terminate Evercom's monthly payment means that phone rate will be going down soon. County board chairwoman Barbara Wysocki estimated it could knock $2 off the cost of a 10-minute call. But Wysocki said she has "mixed feelings" about the board's action because the county will have to "compensate for the loss of revenue immediately."
So far, Wysocki said, she hasn't given the issue "much thought" but that she will, of necessity, "be addressing that soon." That job will not be easy because the county's budget already is tight and board members need to come up with a lot of money, proof once again that fidelity to principle often comes at a high cost.
Main Editorial for Monday, February 28th's News-Gazette |
|
Re: Jail Phone Victory! |
by Twymenia Layfield
tthurmond (nospam) nwbc.edu (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
07 Mar 2005
|
|
I am very happy for the inmates and their families. Now an inmate can call home and it want cost their love ones a arm and a leg. i really hate that i lose my husband before all the changes, but i know he is able to see the changes. but i know Terrell Layfield death made a change for the inmate, but he is in a better place now and i know he looking down saying thank you sandra |
|
