Illinois House Floor Debate — February 21, 2003

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Let the record reflect Representative Stephens is excused today.”

“Point of personal privilege, Mr. Speaker.”

“I’d like to welcome to the Illinois General Assembly on this the National TRIO Day and actually here in the State of Illinois TRIO Day, which many of you know is an educational opportunity for low-income and disabled Americans. And with us today, in the gallery, for the State of Illinois TRIO Day is members of the Upward Bound UIUC, Parkland Community College, Parkland College Student Services, Illinois State University, Heartland Community College and ISU from my district, Richland Community College, Kaskaskia Student Support Services and SIU Student Support Services. How about a nice round of applause for these people up in the galleries here for TRIO Day. Stand up you guys, stand up. Thank you.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the Sponsor yield?”

“What’s the genesis of this legislation, Representative. Why are we going to require less people to have a say in what goes on a constitutional ballot that costs money?”

“Well, I mean, it’s always great to try and put everything in compliance, but maybe there was a underlying reason that they wanted ten percent. I mean, ya know, to put something on that ballot requires… it’s gonna cost people money to put things on the ballot and perhaps something isn’t a good idea. What do you think lowering it from ten to eight what are we accomplishing? Isn’t eight still a lot of people that have to sign a petition? So, what’s the difference between eight or ten, I mean, two percent, obviously. But… but if we want the input on the general public before we put an idea before the Body, even as an advisory referendum, shouldn’t we get the great majority of the citizens, as many as possible, to give their opinion whether or not it should be advisory?”

“…and I cannot remember an advisory question being on the statewide ballot. I ran one once before I got into office many years ago in a countywide and it was just about an impossible task. It can be done, but it’s just extremely onerous and if citizens wanna do something like this, they… they have whatever issue they’d like to bring before us and think that we oughta know what they’re thinking, then I think we oughta make it at least the same as what we do on the very important issues of a Constitutional Amendment.”

“Well, the advisory… I mean, this is just advisory.”

“It just advises. How many… in the last 10 years how many advisory referendum have passed in the State of Illinois?”

“Well, why… why do you… why do you think that it should be an advisory referendum? I mean, isn’t that what a county board is elected to do, is to make decisions on behalf of the people that voted them into office? How do you… how do you say, why should the Legislature, why should a village board put something on as an advisory referendum when in fact they’re elected to make those decisions?”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the Sponsor yield?”

“Representative, to run for mayor in the City of Chicago how many signatures do you have to have?”

“Do you know what the percentage… what would that percentage be? Do you…”

“All right. So, I guess I was trying to make sure that we weren’t making a advisory referendum have a lower threshold than we would have somebody running for the Mayor of Chicago, but I think you’re probably right. That threshold on a percentage basis of necessary signatures for a mayoral race in Chicago would probably be less than what you are…”

“…attempting to take it down.”

“Okay. Fine. Thank you.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Would the Sponsor yield?”

“Representative, this is the second Bill that I’ve seen in two days being considered for passage in this House that has to do with advisory referendums. Is there something out there that’s driving this conversation on advisory referendums now?”

“When you phrase an advisory referendum, how specific do you have to be in terms of that question that you’re 09300019.doc 16  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 19th Legislative Day 2/21/2003 putting out? Is it a very vague general question or is it very specific?”

“In other words, you’re saying that you can’t just purely say do you wanna fix the storm sewers in town and put that on the ballot?”

“Okay.”

“Well, that’s fairly… fairly general I would say. It doesn’t give any dollar amounts or anything else. Is there a hierarchy when you deal with advisory referendums versus other referendums that would be more specific in nature towards a bonding issue, say?”

“What I’m driving at, do they entertain the same relevance in terms of putting them on the ballot?”

“Well, would a bond issue have preference over an advisory referendum if both of them were filed and the advisory referendum was filed first?”

“Well, I’m more concerned with three advisory referendums being… filling… being put on the ballot to fill 09300019.doc 17  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 19th Legislative Day 2/21/2003 it up so that the bonding issue, which may be very time related, would not be able to be haled during that election, would be pushed off for a future election. For instance…”

“…let… let me give you an example. A simple delaying tactic of some could be used to put simple do-nothing advisory referendums on a ballot when we wanna put a bond issue to build a new school.”

“Well, my concern is we’ve now put more and more elections onto the same day so we have fewer elections during a year now than we used to have and certainly, we only have so many ballot spaces for referendums, either advisory or referendums that would have more meat to them. 09300019.doc 18  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 19th Legislative Day 2/21/2003 And my concern is, is that we don’t make it so easy to put a non… really a meaningless or a less meaningful question on the ballot and thereby knock out something that would maybe have more of an impact on a community at a local level, because it’s junked up with other things that others have just like to know.”

“Well, Representative, thank you for all your answers and I have to make the remark here that your issue here seems like it was probably one of those reform ideas that came up in our class that we had together about 35 years ago and I hope you got an ‘A’ for it, because I know I struggled to get an ‘A’.”

“Thank you.”

“A point of personal privilege.”

“I’d like acknowledge…”

“…the birthday of a nine-term State Representative who’s getting a little bit long in the tooth, I believe it’s Terry Parke’s birthday today, according to our secretary. I’d also like to point out that due to the budget crisis and not knowing the customs of the House, there’s no cake here today, but I’m sure next week he’ll have some for us. Congratulations, Terry.”

“Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I, too, rise to a point of personal privilege.”

“Thank you. Mr. Speaker, yesterday and this happens on occasion, I know you would agree with me, it’s rare, but I made a terrible mistake and I… I know it’s…”

“I’m very upset about it, but I apologize to the Body. I said that we did not have, on our side of the aisle, a staff attorney. I was perplexed by a particularly sticky legal question, but I have been corrected. In fact, just walking up the aisle is the lovely and talented, Alison Burnett, who’s one of our staff attorneys and she’s also joined by the lovely and talented Scott Nelson, first cousin to Congressman Jerry Weller, who is also one of our staff attorneys. So, I stand corrected, Mr. Speaker.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the Sponsor yield? Yes, she will. Good. Representative, is this similar to the prison industries program?” Davis, M.: “I’m not sure. You say the prison industries? What they are…”

“And this is a quota Bill. It creates a quota?” Davis, M.: “It doesn’t create a quota, it merely asks that ten percent of those working on the construction of new prisons will be apprentice trainees. And Representative Parke, this is to help get some people skilled and qualified to work in those unions.”

“I still think it’s a quota Bill. It says here that it’s a quota. Now, does that mean if they meet… they do 9.99 that they are out of compliance with your legislation?” Davis, M.: “I don’t understand what you mean.” 09300019.doc 22  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 19th Legislative Day 2/21/2003

“You said that you want ten percent… at least ten percent of the persons involved in the construction of a correctional facility to hold apprentice or training level positions, so if they do 9.99, what happens?” Davis, M.: “Well, I believe in the legislation there is room for allowing when this cannot occur. So, a 9.99 I’m sure would be one of those situations in which every effort was made, but could not be completed.”

“Well, I have a question, in your legislation do you have fines? Do you fine the contractor or the subcontractor for not doing this?” Davis, M.: “There are… I don’t see any amount, it says the board can adopt rules. That will be up the board… the Capital Development Board to adopt rules that will provide or impose sanctions against contractors who do not meet this minimum.”

“Now… well, then they could fine people, they could fine ‘em for not…” Davis, M.: “Well, it’s up to their…”

“And who is… who is the ten percent? Is apprentice any apprentice or is there a pool of apprentices? Where are you gonna get your apprentices from?” Davis, M.: “People who apply?”

“People who apply.”

“No, I’m not. Thank you. Yeah, well they come from the union and so these are apprentices. Now, in a training level position, what is a training level position?” 09300019.doc 23  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 19th Legislative Day 2/21/2003 Davis, M.: “I am not a construction worker, nor a contractor, so I don’t…”

“Well, you’re sponsoring this legislation.” Davis, M.: “Well, a training level position is a position in which a person is receiving training. A training level position is a position in which a person is learning to do something.”

“So, you were gonna…” Davis, M.: “A training level position is a position in which instructions are being given for a person to obtain knowledge in order to perform a function.”

“Will… will an apprentice make less money than a journeyman?” Davis, M.: “I’m sure they will, Representative…”

“Could a…” Davis, M.: “…because a journeyman is a skilled…”

“Could a subtractor…” Davis, M.: “…a journeyman is a skilled laborer who has received the required certification from his or her union that makes he or she a journeyman.”

“All right. Well, then can a subcontractor hire only apprentices and put a team of apprentices on a job without worrying about a journeyman?” Davis, M.: “Absolutely not, Representative, surely you would not want that to happen, nor would I.”

“Well, hey, but there are certainly… there are people that sometimes skirt the intent of law to save money. Oh, yeah.” 09300019.doc 24  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 19th Legislative Day 2/21/2003 Davis, M.: “Well, I don’t…”

“Yeah, yeah, Representative, it does happen.” Davis, M.: “Not with this legislation, Representative. This legislation…”

“Oh, this legislation is different than any other legislation. Is that because you’re the Sponsor?” Davis, M.: “That’s probably so, Sir.”

“Oh, I see. Representative Monique Davis only sponsors Bills that will not be any kind of problems with it. I like that.” Davis, M.: “Well, you know we served on the Labor Committee together…”

“Yes, we did.” Davis, M.: “…so, Representative Parke, you know that the legislation that I sponsor in reference to labor is certainly the kind of legislation that even you would like to support.”

“Well, I have begged to differ with over the years on that issue, so I’m not so sure I agree with that statement. But I’m just trying to find out with… I don’t like the idea of quotas and telling somebody that they have to have something and then can fine them. So, I just don’t think that I want a bunch of apprentices or a majority of apprentices, because there’s no stipulation in here that says you can’t do that. Working on a major correction facility which might eventually not be as quality of work as if you had exclusively journeymen working on it or under the supervision of journeymen. I highly respect the union 09300019.doc 25  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 19th Legislative Day 2/21/2003 journeymen who have worked years and years to get that designation and now we’re gonna tell people that are building prisons that you must hire a small amount, ten percent of people or better, that are not as skilled as a journeyman. So, I have a problem with your concept. And so, to the Bill, Mr. Speaker. I’m gonna rise in opposition to this legislation. I don’t think we should be telling somebody building a prison who they can put on the jobsite, I think that ought to be something that’s negotiated through a collective bargaining agreement, that’s done between the… the people who hire contractors and subcontractors. There’s nothing wrong with recommending it. But the Capital Development Board then can fine a contractor or subcontractor because that’s what they agree to do, I don’t think that’s right. I think that still reserves in the free market system under the collective bargaining programs that, for the most part, we have… especially… well, exclusively if it’s a… if it’s a public contract, that you have to have collective bargaining. I don’t think this is necessary and I rise in opposition to this.”

“Thank you very much, Mr. Sponsor and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I rise in opposition to the Bill. 09300019.doc 27  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 19th Legislative Day 2/21/2003 The Sponsor is well-intentioned, but having grown up in a construction-related business and trying to follow up on the previous Representative on your side of the aisle, who has just spoke, this Bill is, regardless of the speaker’s… the Sponsor’s intent, this Bill is an absolute mandate, an absolute mandate. Now, Ladies and Gentlemen, any public building project in the State of Illinois is subject to the Prevailing Wage Act and since it’s subject to the Prevailing Wage Act, most contractors who bid on large state construction projects like a prison are in fact union contractors. If this Bill, in its current form, were to become law, this is a very soft way of absolutely forbidding a nonunion contractor. While he or she can still bid on the contract there is no way, if this Bill becomes law, that a nonunion contractor could fulfill the obligations of the contract, because a nonunion contractor cannot have an apprentice or a training position, those are certified by the labor union and there’s no way, generally speaking, no way, generally speaking, for a nonunion contractor to have an apprentice or a trainee on his or her payroll. So, it’s a very soft way and I don’t think it’s the intention of the Sponsor, but it is a soft way of eliminating nonunion bidders who are willing to pay prevailing wage on state contracts. Furthermore, what’s very, very unclear in this Bill and I think has a law of unintended consequences, if a union contractor bids on a construction project, say to build a new prison, and there are a number of subcontractors and so that the electrical 09300019.doc 28  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 19th Legislative Day 2/21/2003 contractor who gets the bid, a union electrical contractor decides that for the first 60 days of work on that project he only needs two workers on the job. Now, what if, in fact, those two workers are journeymen electricians and I… and I’m using the word journeymen, it could mean either man or woman, as I interpret this law one of those two workers on that job had better be a trainee or an apprentice, otherwise the spirit of the law is not being followed. The electrical union contractor would more or les… more likely tell you that until I have to move ten or twelve of my electricians on the jobsite there’s no way I can have two working and guarantee you that one of those would be a trainee or an apprentice. The Bill is also extremely unclear if the general contractor, the one doing the concrete, the actual block and building work, if the general contractor starts out on the first day of the contract with the required ten percent apprenticeable or trainees on his or her payroll, but after a month of say cold weather or rainy weather the trainee or the apprentice who’s new to this business finds that he or she doesn’t like to work outside in cold weather or rainy weather or that the work is a little more difficult or a little more physical than they thought, so they quit. Now, the general contractor falls below the ten percent threshold level. He immediately will go to the union hall and try to find an apprentice or a certified trainee, but he may not be able to do so. My question is and it’s completely unclear, I interpret it that the CDB could show up on the jobsite and 09300019.doc 29  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 19th Legislative Day 2/21/2003 say whoa, wait a minute, you are not meeting the requirements or ten percent apprenticeable or trainee positions, construction must halt until you do. Now, I don’t think that’s the con… I don’t think that’s the intention, but the law, as it is, appears before us now does not make that clear and if you are shut down because you failed to meet that ten percent trainee or apprenticeable position, then many union workers are laid off the job. And in a time when the unemployment rate is of critical importance to working men and women in this state, that is not what we should be about, that is not what we should do. Even though I feel very comfortable that the Sponsor does not have that intent, there is no language in this Bill that prevents that from happening. This is a Bill that needs a little more work and a little more thought and if it can be done in the proper manner, I might be willing to support such an effort, but I cannot in good conscience support the Bill in its current form. And I would urge you to vote ‘no’ or ‘present’.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Would the Sponsor yield?”

“Representative, I’m somewhat confused by the language of the Bill. I’m looking at it right now and according to the Bill itself, that you’re presenting today, it indicates that the board will adopt rules requiring all bidders to certify that at least 10 percent of the persons involved in 09300019.doc 30  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 19th Legislative Day 2/21/2003 the construction of the correctional facility will hold apprenticeship or training level positions. And your Bill, I think, is flawed in that it doesn’t re… doesn’t look at each of the different types of jobs. As we all know, when you construct a major facility like that, you’re gonna have… you’re gonna have steel workers, you’re gonna have electricians, you’re gonna have plumbers, you’re gonna have just a number of different trade… trades involved in this. And is that ten percent of each of those trades or just ten percent of all of the trades combined? Would that mean that if you had a hundred workers there that you could have 10 electrician apprentices and no apprentices in the other journeys or…” Davis, M.: “Rep…”

“…what is your intention?” Davis, M.: “Representative, it does not specify that each different discipline must have ten percent. The Bill is very simple, which might make mean… that’s why it’s hard to understand. The Bill… the Bill merely says that the Capital Development Board, who develops rules for contracts, will develop rules that require those seeking to build prisons will have at least, at least, ten percent of its workers who are apprentices or apprenticeship trainers. Now, if Representative there who mentioned you’ve got two workers and the both workers have to be journeymen common sense would say to the board you cannot have ten percent apprentices on this particular job. Now, we’re not developing the rules in this Body, the rules are being 09300019.doc 31  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 19th Legislative Day 2/21/2003 developed by the Capital Development Board. And let me tell you why it’s needed. It’s needed because the prisons are filled with African-American males mostly, many Latinos, but those are not the people who ever get a chance to participate in the building of these facilities. Now, when we’re building prisons and we exclude all of the kind of people who will occupy these prisons, then we need new legislation. Now, the reason I put this Bill in and I have not heard from one union, listen to me good now, I have not received one letter of oppo… opposition. I have not received one phone call and neither have you in opposition to this Bill. People of color have a right to learn to become members of the building trade and this Bill says 10 percent of those who will be working on these massive projects, building prisons in the State of Illinois, will have to make sure that at least 10 percent are apprentices or trainees.”

“Well…” Davis, M.: “Why and how could you object to that?”

“Representative, I… I am even more confused now than I was when I stood up to ask the question originally. We went from apprentices to minority hiring, which this Bill doesn’t do a thing to address.” Davis, M.: “Well, we will not say that in the Bill, because it’s not… you can’t do it.”

“Well, if that’s what you’re driving at though, Representative, your Bill doesn’t accomplish what you’re trying to do. All it does…” 09300019.doc 32  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 19th Legislative Day 2/21/2003 Davis, M.: “What the Bill will do…”

“If I could just finish. If I could. And I’m trying to say this in a positive manner to you. Your Bill just says apprentices, it doesn’t say what race or anything else, is there a quota for this race or that race, it just says apprentices. And it doesn’t direct as to whether they’re apprentices in the steelworkers union… or steelworkers journey or if they’re apprentices in electricians’ trade or the plumbers’ trade or anything else. It just says 10 percent will be apprentices.” Davis, M.: “If we did that, Representative, we would be developing a quota. We’re not doing that because we’re not developing a quota. We’re saying to the Capital Development Board, as you issue these contracts to people it is your responsibility, Capital Development Board, because you are issuing the contract to the bidder, as you issue the contract wherever possible they should be required to have ten percent on these massive projects. These are massive projects, of ten percent apprentices or apprentice trainers. I have received no opposition from any union in reference to this legislation.”

“The Bill that I have in front of me is very clear that the board will further adopt rules imposing monetary sanctions for each day of construction that a contractor fails to meet the ten percent minimum. Now, that is a very clear statement that there are penalties involved if they do not comply once they’re… once they receive the bid and they’re on the job. If they fall out of… out of 09300019.doc 33  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 19th Legislative Day 2/21/2003 compliance, that is there looking them in the face. It doesn’t address the minority issue that you were indicating in part of your previous answer. I… I personally think it needs to be rewritten to address the very concerns you want it to address…” Davis, M.: “The Federal Government…”

“…because there’s no guarantee…?” Davis, M.: “No, no.” Meyer: …there is no guarantee that the…” Davis, M.: “The Federal Government doesn’t allow…”

“There is no guarantee that the Capital Development Board will write any of that into the rules that… that they will write based on the wording of the Bill as it is right now.”

“Representative, I do not object whatsoever to training our workers, nor training youth into… to become journeymen some day at all. As a matter of fact, if we don’t train our younger adults, those entering the workforce, we’re gonna end up doing a big disservice to this country by having an untrained labor force, which…” Davis, M.: “That’s correct.”

“…none of us what to do.” Davis, M.: “You’re absolutely right.” 09300019.doc 35  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 19th Legislative Day 2/21/2003

“My concern is and quite honestly I would agree with you, this Bill has been in the hopper since January and quite frankly, I was not aware of it until it came up today. I don’t happen to sit on the committee that it was heard in, but in just listening to the debate and looking at the language of the Bill I just don’t think it accomplishes what you want to do. And thank you very much.” Davis, M.: “Thank you.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the Sponsor yield?”

“Representative, this is going to be under the auspices of the State Police?” Davis, M.: “Yes.”

“And what is the cost to the taxpayers to develop this program?” Davis, M.: “What is the cost of not having the program?”

“I asked you first.” Davis, M.: “Ya know, I really don’t know what the cost is. Oh, we do have a fiscal note here. We have a fiscal note and 09300019.doc 38  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 19th Legislative Day 2/21/2003 it states that approximately $50 thousand will be needed for the training, but they are already trained, Representative Parke. Ya know, I’m not sure if you’re aware of this, but in Chicago we had two cases in which police responded to like…”

“Representative, I just wanted to know how much it cost.” Davis, M.: “…the fourth call for domestic violence and as the police sat outside the victim’s home the victim was shot in the head by her estranged husband.”

“Well, that’s unconscionable, there’s no reason for that to happen…” Davis, M.: “What is the cost of that?”

“…but that’s not what I’m talking about. I am talking about this Bill. And I would like to you explain to the Body why the Illinois Coalition Against Domestic Violence is opposed to your Bill.” Davis, M.: “They are not opposed, in fact, she came to my committee and sat with me.”

“Well, it says here according to our notes that they’re…” Davis, M.: “Well…”

“…opposed. So, that changed, when did it change?” Davis, M.: “That… it certainly has changed, because she came and sat int… sat in the committee with me.”

“Do you know what their problem was that you worked with them and helped solve?” 09300019.doc 39  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 19th Legislative Day 2/21/2003 Davis, M.: “We did work with them, but I really don’t remember what their problem was. I just…”

“You don’t remember? But jus… but they just came to you?” Davis, M.: “You know what, it had something to do with reporting, they wanted more reporting and record keeping, so that they could establish approximately how many calls are coming in that involved weapons and how many are coming in that don’t involve weapons. They wanted more recordkeeping, so we… we worked it out.”

“Representative, well, again, I would like to know more about what happened to change that because according to our records it was not… it was not changed. And I’m not saying it wasn’t, but according to our records it’s not. Is there any way that you might consider pulling this from the record until we get to find out what kind of arrangement was made with the coalition? I mean, if there was something that domestic violence people found to be a problem, we’d like to know what change was made or what commitments were made for that, because I think the Body oughta know that. Not only that, but the Illinois Sheriff Association is opposed to this, the Illinois Enforcement Standards and Training Board is opposed to this. Why are so many people opposed to this? And if you don’t have the answers, why don’t you pull this from the record and…” Davis, M.: “Representative, wh…”

“…let’s share it with us next week.” 09300019.doc 40  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 19th Legislative Day 2/21/2003 Davis, M.: “…when you say all of these people are opposed to this, the only person that I’ve talked to who had some concerns was the Illinois Domestic Violence Coalition and her concern was with the reporting that she felt was needed.”

“The Pol… well, the Police Training Board has come out and that is something that they said in committee, according to our staff, that they were aware of this problem. So, Representative, there’s a lot of unanswered questions, you don’t seem to have the answers. Could you wait until next week? I’m sure the Chair will allow you that. But I… I’d sure like to know what… what their problems are with it and if you don’t know why, then I think the Body oughta hear why they have a problem with it.” Davis, M.: “Well, to my knowledge, Representative, they had removed their opposition…”

“Well, Ma’am…” Davis, M.: “…she sat in committee with me…”

“…they have not told us.” Davis, M.: “…but I have absolutely no problem of holding it ‘til next week.”

“Thank you for the courtesy.” Davis, M.: “And we ask, Mr. Speaker, to take it out of the record.”

“Thank you very…” 09300019.doc 41  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 19th Legislative Day 2/21/2003

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. House Bill 210 is an attempt to make life a little easier for our teachers. They have to complete 120 hours of CPDUs every five years. This Bill simply says that if they’ve completed those 120 units by July 1, 2002, then we… they cannot be mandated to do more than that. There has been some Acts with the Corey H. case which have tried to impose an extra 20 percent increase on these teachers. We have a huge teacher shortage in this state and several issues and this is a… a Bill that was supported by all the teachers’ organizations and the School Management Alliance. I’ll take any questions.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. House Bill 273 is a initiative of the Illinois Association of Waste Water Agencies, initially. It benefits all local governments and local taxpayers. It simply allows expansion for eligible investments for local government. In other words, for local governments to be able to invest any surplus funds only in other avenues outside of the State of Illinois to try and find the best rates for their investment dollar on these tax dollars. It’s important to note that all of these investments are government securities, government bonds, not stocks and not even corporate bonds. It simply is expanding their ability to search and invest for the best rate. And I’d be happy to answer any questions.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the Sponsor yield?”

“Representative, does this apply not only to municipal governments, but does it apply to park districts and school districts?” 09300019.doc 43  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 19th Legislative Day 2/21/2003

“What… what the legislation clarifies is that units of local government, units of local government only.”

“And why don’t they have the ability to do that now, Representative?”

“The way that the present law is, is not written to allow them to expand and search out other areas that they can invest in as far as other states and the bonds that may be of the best interest rate. That’s what the change is specifically to do to the law. It’s not presently written in that fashion to allow them this expanded ability to invest.”

“Does this take away any fiduciary responsibility on behalf of the… the entity that has the responsibility of doing the investments? Does it disallow them or take some of their responsibility away? So, that what if a board wants to invest in South American stocks, is there a certain percentage they can invest in? Is there a certain limit on risky investments? Is there a criteria in protecting the taxpayers’ money is what I’m interested in?”

“The change that it does make in that area is it allows the local government to approve such a purchase by resolution instead of by ordinance and that’s the only change to it, Representative.”

“What is… what does it mean by resolution that the board just simply says, all in favor of this action say ‘aye’ and the… whoever has the responsibility of investments then can go out and do what they want?” 09300019.doc 44  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 19th Legislative Day 2/21/2003

“Whatever form that unit of local government drafts up in the way of a Resolution most of those… most Resolutions, at least my experience with most Resolutions, is that it is a document, a legal document that is prepared by that unit of local government and citing specifically what it is that their intent is in the ordinance.”

“Well, I understand what you’re trying to do, but I… we’ve discussed this concept, maybe not this direct concept, but the concepts before on the Floor of the House and this… the concern that we had is how much money can be invested and what might be considered a risky investment, somebody thinks that they have the knowledge to make investments on behalf of that taxing body and in fact invest in bad stocks and all of the sudden those people are going to lose a lot of taxpayer money because we’ve given up something by virtue of that. And I know that’s not your intent, but do you think that could happen with this?”

“No, I do not. The Act still requires that every bond be rated with the four highest general classifications. So, I don’t perceive that and that’s certainly not my intent, Representative.”

“I know that, but as… do you think…”

“And we’re only talking…”

“…is there…”

“Representative, we’re only talking surplus funds here.”

“Well, it’s still taxpayer money and I’m…”

“I understand that.”

“…sure you would agree with that.” 09300019.doc 45  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 19th Legislative Day 2/21/2003

“I unders… I certainly agree with that, but…”

“I just wanna…”

“…we’re talking surplus.”

“I wanna make sure we’re protecting it. Is there a limit on like the types of investment, is it only ‘Triple A’ or ‘Double A’ or is there a limit on what kind of bonds that can be invested in?”

“Well, the limit would be that the requirements that is presently there that the bond rating, the fi… the four highest general classifications still exist. So, that is…”

“So, it is…”

“…presently in the statute and still remains in the statute.”

“So, it is… it is limited by quality investments only?”

“Yes, it is, that is not changing, yes.”

“All right. Well, that makes me more comfortable that in there, there is a… an exclusion that says that you can only invest in the four highest levels of investment then I feel more comfortable, but not to have that there and allow somebody to invest simply because they perceive themselves to be good investors bothers me. So, I guess you’ve answered my question, I don’t have a problem now.”

“Thank you very much, Representative.”

“Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I simply ask for a ‘yes’ vote on House Bill 09300019.doc 46  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 19th Legislative Day 2/21/2003 273, allowing the local governments to look to invest their surplus funds in other markets. Thank you very much.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My light inadvertently did not come on on that Bill and I wanted to vote ‘yes’ on it.”

“Thank you.”

“Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I rise in strong support of the Bill, in fact, would like to added as a cosponsor. This… 09300019.doc 48  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 19th Legislative Day 2/21/2003 this stops a… a practice, particularly in the transporting of railroad workers that has long been an item swept under the rug. That may be too strong a term, but no body paid attention to it. And we were transporting railroad workers from wherever their particular shift ended back to the yard or what have you in taxi cabs that the taxi cab company literally threw away three or four years prior, a ten passenger van that had been ruled unacceptable for use by a community college or a charitable organization. And these companies show up and transport railroad workers back to the yard or their new station in vehicles that sometimes, in my district since we… we are a switching area, had no heater, had no defroster, sometimes the windows were broken out, they… they absolutely should not have even been allowed on the road and there was no law to prevent these unsafe vehicles from transporting sometimes nine or ten workers. It’s long over due. The Sponsor should be commended for getting it to this point. And I rise in strong support.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. House Bill 307 deals with what we call youth courts, some places they’re called teen courts or peer jury’s. They represent an alternative approach to juvenile justice that holds first time nonviolent juvenile offenders accountable through a sentence that is imposed by their own peers. Currently, within the State of Illinois there are 90 youth courts in our state. This is… this legislation passed unanimously out of Judicial Committee, it’s very cost effective, it’s permissive, it was a unanimous vote in the committee. It allows county board to establish up to a five dollar fee on court cases. We have a very successful juvenile court system in my home community and I know of many around the state. I say it’s very cost effective because it lowers costs other places in the system. The rate of return for youths that participate in teen court or youth court is averaging in the state 10 to 12 percent compared to 60 to 80 percent return if they go through the traditional court system. So, it’s a way to help our youth and as our director says to help very good youth who have some made bad decisions get their life straightened out. 09300019.doc 50  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 19th Legislative Day 2/21/2003 It’s much cheaper for a county to use a youth court than to go through the traditional system. Be happy to entertain any questions.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I just stand in support of this Bill, because I think that we have had this in our county for several years and it’s been extremely successful in lowering the recidivism rate, especially of youth and the teens respect the juries. And it has been extremely successful in the other courts throughout the state that have really popped up all over. Six years ago, I think there were only five in this state, I think there’s ninety now. And it was even mentioned in the committee hearing right before this with Juvenile Justice with several of the people saying how good this was with first time offenders to discourage them. Thank you.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the Sponsor yield?”

“Representative, I don’t have a problem with the concept here, but I do question where the money is gonna come from. All those tickets that if they have it for speeding or reckless driving or whatever or you gonna put this five dollars on the ticket and then that requires them to be printed differently? Or is it gonna come from the municipal governments, are they just gonna take five dollars out of pocket and do that? Or how many other 09300019.doc 51  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 19th Legislative Day 2/21/2003 surcharges are put on it already, do you know? Because that’s… I had a Bill like this a couple of years ago for domestic violence and they said that you get so much money being taken off of it that they don’t know how to collect it and therefore it sometimes gets… the fines get to be so big that people might have problems paying ‘em.”

“Representative, you asked several questions. To being with, this is local control, it’s permissive, it’s a local county board. This has to be… if a county board adopts this it has to be put into a separate fund specifically for the operation and administration of a teen court or peer court or peer jury, they’re called by different names, so it’s put into that specific fund. The fee is only paid if there’s a conviction on some other cour… on the court cases that the county board has established. So, it’s only in a case of a conviction, it’s put into a specific fund and then there’s a… a… five percent is retained as fee income for the Office of the Circuit Clerk.”

“So, they will collect it, but… and so it comes from the person that’s convicted of whatever the crime is or whatever they’ve done.”

“Right, other crimes in the court system.”

“All right.”

“But… but…”

“And so it doesn’t come out of the municipal budget at all it’s… it’s a fine passed on.”

“Right, it should…” 09300019.doc 52  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 19th Legislative Day 2/21/2003

“Do you know…”

“…it should just be by people convicted, that’s the intent, that’s the way it’s written, people convicted would be ordered to pay that and it’s up to five dollars depending on what the county board decides they need to run their teen court.”

“Okay. Thank you, Representative.”

“Representative, this is… the up to five dollars would be on other court cases, whatever the county board determines. This is not… in our county there may be some… there’s some local discretion, but this is actually not going through the criminal justice system, this gives our youth a chance to not have a criminal record. This… when they’re… if they’re stopped and arrested normally it’s the police that inform when… inform that this is an alternative to a formal criminal charge. The people… the person that acts as judge in my home county has to be a practicing attorney, the jury are their own peers, their own…” Davis, M.: “This is limited to your county?”

“No, no, there are 90 of these around the state.” Davis, M.: “Well, I have to ask the question again, what happens if the youth… I taught at a juvenile detention 09300019.doc 53  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 19th Legislative Day 2/21/2003 center and sometimes when those children were going to court a parent may not show up because he or she didn’t have car fair to get there. So, my question is, if a youth does not have the up to five dollars what happens?”

“Representative, this wouldn’t apply to the youth going through the program, they’re not paying this fee, it’s the other users of the court system. The net effect is gonna save youth money.” Davis, M.: “These are young people who have committed an offence, who have been convicted. Is that correct? They’re convicted.”

“No, this… they’re sent to the teen court and the teens might find them innocent.” Davis, M.: “But they each have to pay a five dollar fee.”

“No, not the teems going through this. It’s five dollars a court fee that your county board may, may impose on other court cases to fund the teen courts.” Davis, M.: “I’m… I’m sorry. Are you saying the county will pay the five dollars?”

“No, the county board…” Davis, M.: “No.”

“…may impose this fee and in effect them it becomes people convicted of crimes in the court system would pay the up to five dollars, county board may chose for less than that.” Davis, M.: “So, they don’t have to. Is that correct?”

“The county?” Davis, M.: “The board does not have to assess that fee?” 09300019.doc 54  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 19th Legislative Day 2/21/2003

“Oh, abso…” Davis, M.: “But I’m still concerned…”

“Right, it’s a local decision.” Davis, M.: “I’m still concerned with what happens if the person does not have it. Now, you may not be concerned, but I’m concerned about if the person doesn’t have the five dollar fee.”

“Repre…” Davis, M.: “What happens?”

“Representative, the you the would not pay the five dollars. Is that your question?” Davis, M.: “Who will pay it?”

“People convicted of other crimes in the court system?” Davis, M.: “Okay. So, people who are going through the county court systems that have a juvenile system, juvenile peer court, they will pay the fine.”

“If your county board ops to do this.” Davis, M.: “So, we’re increasing fees, we’re increasing… we’re going to present a fee to people who have this particular process in their county. Is that correct?”

“We’re… it’s local control, we’re giving a county board the authority to have this fee that will lower their cost within the court system, Representative, actually lower their cost by keeping youth out of the criminal justice system. And as I indicated, the success rate, the recidivism rate for teen court is only 10 to 12 percent, compare that to 60 to 80. So, we’re saving, we’re saving 09300019.doc 55  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 19th Legislative Day 2/21/2003 the taxpayers money, we’re helping some good youth who made bad decisions have an alternative, we’re helping them avoid a criminal record. I would prefer that these good kids who made bad decisions have a choice and quite honestly, knowing your approach, I bet you do too.” Davis, M.: “I certainly do, Representative, but I’m also very concerned when we know who goes through our court system. Thank you.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the Sponsor yield?”

“Okay. Just to clarify, this is not mandatory on the county’s at all, it’s totally up to the county if they want to initiate this?”

“That is correct.”

“And your legislation doesn’t say that they have to do a five dollar fee, but it says…”

“Up to.”

“…up to five dollars?”

“Up to. Right.”

“So, they wouldn’t even have to do a five dollar fee?”

“That is correct.”

“And the fee doesn’t have anything to do with juveniles, it’s not on the juveniles it’s from other misdemeanors, felonies, vehicle code…”

“Right.”

“…violations?”

“Right.”

“And also… and then this is deposited into a special fund to save to run these programs?”

“Right, special fund to support the youth court or teen court and then five percent goes to the Circuit Clerks Office for collecting the fee.”

“Thank you. To the Bill. This is a very…”

“…good Bill. We have an excellent peer mediation program, not in our county, but in some of the high schools in our area, it’s working very well to keep kids on the right path and avoid court and avoid juvenile detention. I commend the Sponsor for bringing this Bill.”

“Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I rise in strong support of the Bill. I appreciate Reverend… Reverend… I appreciate Representative Giles calm, reasoned and rational arguments in favor of the Bill. For those of us lucky enough to have a peer court in our county’s, it is, as the Representative stated, an excellent way to try and divert juveniles from the criminal justice system into a court of their peers, young men and women that they go to school with, run largely by volunteers. And it has had a tremendous success rate in detouring many a juvenile from having to end up in the criminal justice system. And these peer courts have a very difficult time being financed. Last week in my district, the Vermilion County Peer Court held a benefit art auction to try and raise money to keep this thing going. Some are financed by contributions from United Way and contributions from interested citizens. I commend the Sponsor, Representative Moffitt, it has absolutely nothing to do with putting a fine or requiring a fiscal or financial contribution by any of the young men or women who avail themselves of the peer court, it’s a, as 09300019.doc 59  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 19th Legislative Day 2/21/2003 Representative Lindner said, a voluntary addition to traffic fines or other fines that may be levied by the county circuit court if the county board says that they are willing to do that and then the proceeds will further support a system that, I think, are in now ninety some counties in the State of Illinois. It is a wonderful system, run largely by volunteers and had has a phenomenal success rate of trying to show juveniles how to avoid actions that will lead them to become ensnared in the criminal justice system. It’s an excellent Bill. I congratulate you, Representative, and it should receive all ‘aye’ votes.”

“Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I… actually I’ve been listening to debate and I believe very strongly in what you’re trying to do and we’ve done it my area, but I… since I’m from norther… north of I-80 and I now you’re from south of I-80 I just have one question. What’s a youth? I was listening to the debate and I wasn’t sure what a youth is?”

“Okay. Thank you very much.”

“Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I appreciate the comments that have been made and the discussion that we’ve had. What you have here today is a choice, do you wanna see continued recidivism rate of 60 to 80 percent or do you wanna go to a… more like a 10 to 12 percent if you vote for this? Do you wanna give good youth a second chance to avoid a criminal record? That’s what we’re deciding here and we’re empowering our local government. I’d ask an ‘aye’ vote.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This Bill would preclude a child sex offender as defined in Section 11-9.3 of the Criminal Code from serving… from filing papers or serving on a school board. If there’s any questions I’ll be glad to answer them.”

“Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker and Members of the House. House Bill 345 improves the statewide implementation of the National Amber Alert System, which is our statewide system regarding kidnapping and prevention of abduction for children. This requires various state agencies to coordinate training and public awareness programs. We implemented the Amber Alert System in Illinois a year ago in 2002 and what this would do would just simply coordinate the program more and promote the 09300019.doc 63  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 19th Legislative Day 2/21/2003 awareness between local law enforcement officials, school officials. And it would provide a state coordinator by the State Police, which would have no compensation. I’d be glad to answer any questions.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. House Bill 354 addresses the financial identity theft. In the particular statute presently there are four categories of felonies and the only category that is not a felony is if the amount of loss is $300 or less. What we’re attempting to do with this piece of legislation is close that loophole, therefore closing out the ability to be able to plea-bargain down to this, $300 or less, whatever the item is or the particular aspect of identity theft is what they can do to one’s credit rating, what they 09300019.doc 64  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 19th Legislative Day 2/21/2003 can do to one’s entire life still has the opportunity to be plea bargained down to a misdemeanor. And so, I wanna close that loophole in the statute and make it a felony as the other four provisions in the statute now provide for. I’d be happy to answer any questions of my colleagues in the House.”

“Mr. Speaker, on Bill 345 I would like to have voted ‘yes’.”

“Mr… Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the Sponsor yield?”

“I… I am in support of this legislation, but I just wanna know, did any of the law enforcements or the retail merchants come out in supporting this legislation? Do you know if it’s…”

“In committee, Representative, it was supported by the State Police, the Illinois Chief’s Association, the Illinois Sheriff’s Association, the Illinois State’s Attorneys Association and I don’t recall what other ones, but a fair amount of law enforcement was certainly in support.”

“And they… and they believe that this will go a long way to help close any loophole in Illinois Law to protect citizens on identity theft? That’s what they were… they…” 09300019.doc 65  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 19th Legislative Day 2/21/2003

“That’s correct. This is an initiative from a constituent of mine who virtually has had her entire credit rating and life wrecked and it was plea bargained down to a misdemeanor in our court system.”

“Okay. Thank you. I like this Bill.”

“Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I simply ask for an ‘aye’ vote on what’s becoming, unfortunately, an increasing crime throughout our society and this will help at least close one of the loopholes in our present statute.”

“Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. This is another piece of legislation that deals in the area of domestic violence. The particular piece of legislation was in the last Session, we had some wording that was changed to make the law enforcement aspect of who does the reporting more clear. And it simply talks about in a domestic violence situation the court enters most often a 72-hour no contact order, a cooling off period. What this simply would do, when that order is issued is have the unit… local law enforcement unit responsible for receiving the order, enter it into the LEED system, the Law Enforcement Emergency Data System, so officers responding at a scene can actually verify who should be on the presence and who should not be on the location when they arrive. I’d be happy to answer any questions from any Members of the House.”