This clause in the Bloomington Police Department union contract is causing concern.
According to interim-Chief Gregg Scott & City Manager Tim Gleason, nothing in the contract would prevent a co-responder model. This means crisis teams would be the first responders on the scene along with police officers. But, we don’t want co-responder models. We want these crisis teams responding without police presence, because the mere presence of a police officer is itself an escalation of any situation.
Interim-BPD Police Chief Gregg Scott (Left); City Manager Tim Gleason (Right)
We want the norm to be that individuals experiencing a mental health crisis are not considered a threat to public safety. By having crisis teams be the first responders on the scene (without police), they can determine whether an individual is only a threat to their own health (i.e., we treat this as a health care issue); or, if they do in fact present a larger threat to public safety. If it is the latter situation, then the crisis team can request police assistance to help resolve the conflict. But, treating these mental health crisis as instances requiring health care and/or social welfare is the norm we want to see in society.
Assistant Chief Wamsley, Interim-Chief Scott, and City Manager Gleason all made very clear in the way they framed the conversation that a non-co-responder model could very likely be a violation of Article 20 of the union contract. The PBPA’s membership mainly lives outside the city limits, doesn’t pay property taxes, and can’t even vote for the elected officials their bargaining with. If PBPA did file an Article 20 grievance against the City of Bloomington for implementing crisis teams without initial assistance from police, they would be sending the message that they–and not the tax paying residents of Bloomington–should be in charge of how the City spends and prioritizes its resources; and they should be in charge of how the community chooses to democratically address its own social problems.
CESSA would create an alternative response to the police for most nonviolent, noncriminal calls for service. CESSA stresses that just because an individual is only a threat to themselves this does NOT constitute a threat to public safety. Finally, CESSA is designed so that incarceration, institutionalization, or in anyway restricting a person’s freedom is the last resort in resolving a situation. CESSA is a non-co-responder model. Crisis teams under CESSA would be the first responders on the scene and have authority over the situation to best determine the needs of the individual in crisis, and to be able to determine based on their own experience how best to provide help and not harm.
The contentious debate around qualified immunity will be introduced at the McLean County Justice Committee this Tuesday, March 2nd, 2021.
Qualified immunity is a Supreme Court legal doctrine that protects individual officers from being held personally responsible if they violate a person’s rights. The bar is so high for proving an officer’s actions disqualify them from qualified immunity, that unless a previous court ruled that the exact same actions with the exact same circumstances were unconstitutional, qualified immunity will hold regardless of the underlying constitutional merits of the case.
Sheriff Sandage has said he worries if qualified immunity is abolished, no one will ever want to be an officer again. Police unions have claimed it would become open season on officers being sued for frivolous issues. Normal Police Chief Rick Bleichner opposed abolishing qualified immunity as well.
McLean County Justice Committee Chair & Board Member for District 10, Chuck Erickson
The chair of the McLean County Justice Committee Chair, Distict 10 Board Member Chuck Erickson, introduced a resolution affirming the boards unwavering & uncritical support of law enforcement in response to Governor J.B. Pritzker signing criminal justice reform legislation in late-February. Included in the resolution is support for qualified immunity.
The law HB 3653 does not get rid of qualified immunity, but it does create a commission to study the issue and bring forth an opinion. It seems some fear it is inevitable that qualified immunity will be abolished.
Now, some individuals who are far more perfidious than I, will allege that abolishing qualified immunity will have a “chilling” effect on police officers and limit their ability and/or willingness to respond to critical incidents without hesitation. These are split-second decisions after all. Mistakes happen right? Why should police have to worry about frivolous incidents?
However, the “chilling” effect simply doesn’t hold temperature. Law professors Joanna Schwartz & Seth Stoughton carefully explain why this is.
“The Supreme Court’s constitutional standards make ample allowance for officers to make reasonable mistakes. When assessing the constitutionality of a stop, the Supreme Court has said that officers must act reasonably, but, ‘[t]o be reasonable is not to be perfect, and so the Fourth Amendment allows for some mistakes on the part of government officials, giving them ‘fair leeway for enforcing the law in the community’s protection.’ For that reason, officers can constitutionally stop or frisk someone when they have ‘reasonable suspicion,’ and that that low bar is met so long as there is a ‘moderate chance’ that the officer’s suspicion is correct. An officer can get a warrant or arrest someone when they have ‘probable cause,’ which requires only a ‘fair probability’ that they are right.
In short, officers have plenty of leeway to make mistakes without violating the Constitution. For example, courts have held that officers act constitutionally when:
-officers arrest the wrong person, so long as their mistake was reasonable; -officers execute a search warrant on the wrong apartment, so long as the apartment numbers were similar; -officers pull someone over for having an air freshener attached to their rearview mirror and not having a front license plate—neither of which was illegal—so long as the officer had a reasonable but mistaken understanding of the law
Qualified immunity does not protect officers who make reasonable mistakes because reasonable mistakes do not violate the Fourth Amendment in the first place. Instead, qualified immunity shields government officials from liability when they have acted unreasonably (taking into account the deference that the Supreme Court has built into that term)—so long as there isn’t another court decision holding virtually identical facts to be unconstitutional. Insisting that officers are so afraid of the consequences for their unreasonable actions that they will refuse to do their job demeans officers”
Furthermore, McLean County already has indemnification & duty to defend clauses in their union contract. Regardless of qualified immunity, those legal mechanisms still exist to protect officers. There are legitimate reasons to indemnify and defend officers. But, is blanket indemnification truly the right way to go? If something similar to George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, or Elijah McLain occurred here, does the county really want to pay out taxpayer dollars to acts that are unreasonably unconstitutional? Perhaps a mechanism whereby in certain particularly egregious instances, the county could opt-out.
All this being said, this is simply a non-binding resolution. The county does not actually have the power to unilaterally grant their officers qualified immunity, especially if the state chooses to abolish it in the future. This resolution seems to be a performative stunt by Sheriff Jon Sandage, States’ Attorney Don Knapp, and Republican County Board members to show they support law enforcement and anyone who disagrees with this resolution does not.
The Bloomington-Normal Chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America released this statement encouraging the community to leave a public comment for the Justice Committee & contact County Board members to state their opposition to this resolution.
“The Bloomington-Normal chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America strongly oppose the judicial doctrine of qualified immunity. Qualified immunity does nothing but protect bad officers from accountability by preventing victims of police violence & their families from receiving just compensation for blatant constitutional violations. After a year of uprisings by Black Liberation activists & supporters of police accountability, it is in extremely poor taste to turn around & support gross abuses & violations for the police.
We would also like to point out this body does not have the power to enact qualified immunity protections for officers. Furthermore, McLean County already has indemnification & duty to defend clauses in both the Sheriff Deputies & Corrections officers union contract, which protect officers from frivolous litigation. Ending qualified immunity will not alter those protections.
Qualified immunity is bad policy, and it makes all police officers look bad by protecting the worst among them. It encourages officers to be reckless and creates a culture of impunity something which our own local sheriff has brazenly flaunted. The working people of this state support police transparency & accountability. Vote no on this resolution.”
Email Action: email camille.rodriguez@mcleancountyil.gov and admin@mcleancountyil.gov with “Public Comment for Justice Committee Meeting” BEFORE 4:30 PM on MONDAY March 1st. and tell the county board to “VOTE NO on resolution supporting Qualified Immunity.” Contact County Board members.
The murder of George Floyd by four Minneapolis police officers has ignited a fresh, new wave of protests in support of Black Liberation across the country. In Central Illinois, like elsewhere, those organizing the events are not from older generations like Boomers and Xers, not even from Millenials, but from the Zoomer generation just now coming of age. The combination of no school during the last quarter of the school year, nearly 2 ½ months under quarantine restrictions, the economic depression during COVID-19, and the fact the police can’t stop messing with Black Lives EVEN during a global pandemic has caused an eruption of support for the liberation of Black Lives beyond what many of us expected to see.
Even before May 30th, 2020 Zoomers were already standing on the sidewalk along Veterans Parkway with signs supporting Black Lives. But, Saturday May 30th was a catalyst here in Bloomington-Normal. 24-year old Micah Denniston, posted on Facebook she was organizing a protest at the McLean County Jail in downtown Bloomington. Denniston, a woman of the Caucasian persuasion, was affected by Floyd’s death because “I am the mother of three mixed children. They are mixed with black,” she said. “I shouldn’t have to fear for my son’s life when he grows up. God forbid, he gets pulled over and the next thing you know he’s dead on the ground by a cop because they fear him for the color of his skin or they fear my boyfriend for the color of his skin or my brother next to me for the color of his skin. It’s not right.”
Micah Denniston, 24
She only thought about 15 people would show up. Instead, over a 150 people gathered near the jail next to the US Cellular Coliseum. Micah and her friends wanted to March around the jail. More experienced activists helped facilitate the goals of these Zoomers: blocking off traffic, documenting the scene, and negotiating with law enforcement.
Because the McLean County Jail is in the heart of downtown Bloomington, inmates can be seen from the streets. For many protesters there, it was their first time experiencing their voice reaching out in protest and making a connection of solidarity with another, especially individuals being isolated from society by the state. Even from across the street on a busy day, one can clearly hear inmates banging on their windows. The effect is poignant. Realizing that you can see from the street what the state hides behind architecture and that you can transgress the state’s forced isolation of inmates is a powerful feeling. At the same time, inmates who have been kept on 23-hour a day lockdown because of the COVID-19 pandemic, received some much needed social interaction. These bridges being built through the walls of state authority are an important link activists for Black Liberation must continue to cultivate.
Another novelty found was Bloomington Police Officers, unprompted, offering to block of traffic so that protesters could take over the streets safely. For nearly thirty minutes, Black Liberation activists occupied East Street just outside the McLean County Law & Justice Center. Afterwards, the march of nearly 150 people took over the streets of downtown Bloomington in a spontaneous manner, picking and choosing its direction almost at random for nearly 3 miles as if hunting out the vestiges of white supremacy in the city. Even without a clear direction, police continued to block off traffic for the protesters. There is a clear distinction in the way police in BloNo have been reacting to BLM protests after the death of Floyd. Unlike many cities where the police are actively attacking peaceful protesters, police in McLean county are getting on one knee, saying “Black Lives Matter”, and hugging protesters in an alleged solidarity.
At the jail were many tense moments between protesters and sheriff’s deputies. There is a primal rage in the early protests after George Floyd. An absolute disgust at the injustice inherent in our policing and carceral institutions. There were about 3-4 sheriff’s deputies being confronted by protesters. The anger in the people wouldn’t allow for a satisfactory answer to congeal from the deputies, aside from ripping off their badge and joining the revolution. But, this anger is nevertheless righteous. So many people are sick of the abuse of state power by the police, the sense of helplessness when under the gaze of an officer. The three officers were between Scylla & Charybdis in front of the massive group. No answer was sufficient to calm them down, and any escalation would have put everyone in danger. Yet, those officers needed to feel that powerlessness for the protest to be effective. The entire confrontation only lasted about ten minutes and was finally diffused by a Sargent yelling “Black Lives Matter” with open arms & a smile. It was enough to distract the powder keg and relieve the mounting pressure.
I got to talk with private attorney Chris McCall, who is currently running in next years election for States Attorney. On the Democratic side, Chris McCall will take on recently appointed Peoria States Attorney Judi Hoos. This will actually be the second time the two have faced off against each other. McCall also applied for the States Attorney position left vacant by the demise of Jerry Brady in June 2019.
Shortly after her appointment, Hoos commented she had no plans to change any of the prosecution teams she will overseas, continuing a long pattern of mass incarceration & racial inequity at the Peoria States attorney that goes back before Kevin Lyons tenure as Peoria’s top prosecutor. Hoos worked for many years as a prosecutor in Peoria County.
He says he has big plans on correcting many of the errors in the criminal justice system.
“At current levels, it costs $180,000 in our county to incarcerate a child for a year,” McCall said. “The programs I am proposing to redirect would-be criminals, to offer parenting classes prior to foster care and to protect victims from further victimization would cost a faction of that cost, while making our communities safer places for all of us to live.” He says his policies will help sever the bonds of generational poverty.
“McCall said he would hire a bilingual social worker focused on redirecting juvenile and non-violent, first-time offenders. He also plans to start a once-a-month evening court for petty offenses, so people don’t have to take time off from work to attend court during the day.
Another top priority: creating an Advisory Committee on Police Shootings to make recommendations about the legal response to such events.”
I spoke with Chris McCall over the phone about his project for criminal justice in Peoria.
Zach Gittrich: You’ve heard about the decision to try 14-year old Zaveon Marks as an adult for the murder of 16-year old Zarious Fair. What are the circumstances where you would be willing to try juveniles as adults?
Chris McCall: As a candidate for States Attorney, I shouldn’t comment on specific cases. When it comes to trying juveniles as adults, there’s a couple of things that have to be kept in mind. For 16 & 17-year olds, certain extremely serious crimes are statutorily required to be tried in adult courts. However, juveniles from 13 to 15-year olds are left up to the prosecutor’s discretion. I think it is very important to take into consideration the crime itself and the circumstances surrounding it (was it a random or pre-planned offense). I would also examine the minor’s history of delinquency and consult the teachers and educators. Finally, I would make sure I consult the victim’s family.
ZG: What are some of the things you’d like to do as State’s Attorney to address racial inequities in Peoria County?
CM: First, I would hire more minorities to the SA office. There are currently very few people of color working there; and, many people of color have left the office because they have not received the same opportunities as white attorneys.
Second, I would assemble a taskforce to review all incidents of police involved shootings. Currently, when deciding to charge officers the SA office only has senior staff review these cases, and I think the current process lacks confidence among the people. Some people see this process and think it’s blue supporting blue.
ZG: Who would you appoint to this task force?
CM: I would include retired judges, senior staff, and retired, diverse police officers to advise on whether to prosecute or not. I believe this would give the community more confidence in the system.
ZG: What about appointing members from various civil rights groups?
CM: I’m open to that; however, I don’t want to be in the process of teaching the law to laypeople. So, whoever is appointed to the task force needs to have a familiarity with the law so as to get to the task at hand.
ZG: What is your position on the use of money bail for those arrested? Are you willing to ban money bail for all nonviolent offenders who are arrested?
CM: I want to work towards banning that. I am supportive of legislative efforts to ban money bond for nonviolent offenses (with the exception of stalking, harassment, and trespassing). Myself, I would likely begin by looking at nonviolent traffic offenses and misdemeanors.
ZG: What are some of the problems you’ve seen from PPD in the way they enforce the law?
CM: It seems that some officers–younger officers–are sent to some areas where they don’t have relationship. There needs to be a more diverse police force. The PPD needs to focus more on relationship building and communication with neighborhoods that may distrust them. Furthermore, anyone who is stopped in a high-crime area, I won’t prosecute just because they look “nervous”.
At the same time, police officers need to understand that as long as they do the right things, McCall will support them. The job can certainly be difficult and involves lots of split-second judgment decisions, but at the end of the day, it’s still a job they chose. I also think most officers are doing good and want to do good.
ZG: What are your thoughts on Peoria’s use of nuisance abatements as a way to remove “problem” tenants from their homes?
CM: That’s more of a city issue than a SA issue. I would have to defer to the city attorney.
ZG: Even though it is not the job of the SA would you be willing to work with school Districts to teach students about the law and the penalties that go with committing a crime? I ask because while most kids know that certain actions are crimes, they often don’t understand the full consequences and penalties that go with committing certain crimes.
CM: Yes, I would, and it’s something I already do as a private attorney. Its something I’ve been doing since 2005. I go to local schools, from grade schools to college. I talk about what happens in court, basic things that can get them in trouble, I talk about trauma, how to interact with police that is respectful but within their rights. I want to continue to do that at a greater scale. I would also send traffic prosecutors into drivers ed to discuss the penalties of driving without a license or insurance.
ZG: Back in April, a black woman was almost murdered by a racist white man who threatened to kill her. He was not charged with a Federal hate crime and was eventually put into veterans court where he received 15 months court supervision and 200 hours of community service. The victim feels she was railroaded. How would you have handled this case differently?
CM: I cant speak about this specific case. But, in general, we must support victims. Talk to victims every point of case, that is what is needed.
ZG: Do you think more should be done to hold the police accountable to the general public? What things would you support to make this happen?
CM: That’s more of a city issue. But, if an officer has a reputation of bias or unfair treatment or has a habit of turning their body camera off, the best way to punish those officers is to make it clear we wont prosecute cases involving those officers.
ZG: Is there anything else you’d like to add?
CM: The primary election is March 17th, and I would love peoples’ support. I want to focus on more intervention programs, help victims of crimes, and do more to treat victims of recent trauma. I believe all defendants should be treated the same under the law.
Ring, ring…! Doorbells abound at Peoria City Council. On July 23rd, 2019, Peoria City Council entered into a contract with Ring Security (purchased by Amazon in early 2018) to provide discounted Ring security cameras to Peoria residents. City Council shelled out $50,000 to bring the cost down. Peoria residents will receive a $50 discount from the City and another $50 off from Ring, bringing the price down from $200 to about $100. The doorbells come with a A/V recorder which uploads the recording to a digital server for storage. The recording is active when the doorbell is rung or there is movement in front of the sensor. Along for the ride is Ring’s own personal app call Neighbor. Neighbor allows you to share your security recordings with those in your neighborhood and also receive updates from both the local police and Ring.
Nor was their any critical analysis from City Council on the effects of forcing residents to engage in the Neighbors app. In order to use the Ring system, users must download the Neighbors app. The app keeps up-to-date crime reports and encourages all its users to post any and all suspicious videos. It’s in Amazon’s best interest to keep communities in continual fear of crime in order to sell more Ring products, regardless if crime is actually higher or lower in an area. This social-media app encourages residents to fear the worst about their own neighbors.
Basically, Peoria City Council unanimously approved a $50,000 subsidy to a mega-corporation that has a vested interest in, not making communities safer, but in selling as many security tools as they can. Peoria will essentially be paying for a giant ad for Amazon. Instead of that $50,000 going towards education, infrastructure, or mental health in high-crime areas, the City just assisted Amazon in it’s own marketing scheme. Stay classy Peoria.
For more Fragments on Playing in Peoria, see here.
No discussion of systemic racism would be complete without including the experiences of non-white people of color. We must also analyze how migration has changed the racial makeup of towns like Peoria while also reflecting on the close positionality of racist & xenophobic institutions and policies. Unless you trace your descent to Native Americans, African-Americans, or refugees, you are descended from immigrants and live in an immigrant nation. A major factor in the growth and strength of the U.S. is its status as an immigrant nation; immigration in this country has always been a net-positive for society. In response of anti-immigrant rhetoric that attempts to stress the issue of illegal immigration, until quite recently it was significantly easier to immigrate to America and become a citizen compared to now with our current byzantine and overly draconian system. Despite these facts, throughout American history there has also been a strong trend of xenophobia grounded in a nativist & assimilationist ideology. It has waxed and waned depending on a multiplicity of factors: economic strength, race relations, foreign policy, etc. Currently, we are seeing a particularly virulent strain of xenophobia with the election of Donald Trump and the manufacturing of a mass deportation machine over the last 3 decades from both Democrat & Republican administrations.
Anti-immigrant hate has reached a fever pitch in the U.S. (and, throughout the Western world as we witness the regrowth of fascist ideologies). Trump began his campaign from the ivory pillar of his over-mortgaged hedonism-tower literally referring to the majority of immigrants crossing the Southern border as “rapists & murderers”, even going so far as to accuse Mexico of a conspiracy to send its criminals here to weaken us. His campaign promise of a physical wall on the Southern border of the U.S. has served to fetishize the desire for fascism, the desire to other a human until their humanity is so obscured as to be unrecognizable. This desire to Otherize–a desire to inflict pain–is the only way the fascists and reactionaries can logically deny that the overcrowded, under-resourced, and painfully inhumane living conditions at immigrant concentration camps are anything but the human rights crimes most realize them to be.
An estimated 8,792 people in Peoria are foreign born, mostly from Mexico and India. Nearly 1 in 7 Illinoisans are immigrants (foreign-born), and almost half of them are naturalized U.S. citizens who are eligible to vote. Roughly 886,000 Illinois residents has one relative who is undocumented living with them. About 799,000 (90%) of those mixed-status households also include a family member who is a U.S. citizen or has lawful immigration status. According to data from the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights (ICIRR), Metropolitan Peoria has roughly 5,792 documented immigrants and approximately 3,000 undocumented immigrants; about half of the undocumented population emigrated from Latin America (mainly Mexico), and the other half from Asia. “As of 2017, 8.26% of Peoria, IL residents (9.54k people) were born outside of the United States, which is lower than the national average of 13.7%.”1 The majority of documented immigrants in Peoria hail from Mexico, India, and Germany in that order.
. . .
In 2017, I and other like-minded citizen-allies formed the immigrant justice group Peoria No Ban No Wall. We immediately began reaching out to members of the Latinx, Muslim, and other immigration communities to see what were the needs of the community and how could we as allies best help them.
Thankfully, Peoria has not seen any deportations, to the best of our knowledge. Yet, the fear of deportation and anti-immigrant or Islamophobic violence continues to be present. Trump’s policies of frequently changing immigration policies, becoming more draconian in enforcement, and going after literally everyone–undocumented or not–has resulted in a heightened sense of uncertainty about people’s statuses. Even naturalized citizens, like local activist Jimena Lopez, have experienced anxiety because of the Trump administrations threats to begin denaturalization proceedings against people who are already citizens.
Peoria No Ban No Wall partnered with the legal-aid group The Immigration Project and hosted several Know Your Rights workshops in immigrant communities. The Immigration Project is the only non-profit immigrant legal aid group in all of downstate Illinois. We provided up-to-date information on the ever-changing policies of immigration law, provided resources, and educated people on their rights when interacting with law enforcement. We even had the privilege of providing a workshop for the Methodist Mid-West Hispanic Caucus hosted at First United Methodist Church in Peoria. This potentially had the ability to educate thousands of immigrants across the midwestern United States.
Another major concern was addressing some of the trauma immigrant children were facing because of the fear their parents may be deported. “David del Pozo teaches English as a Second Language at Glen Oak Primary School. He says many students in his classroom are confronting anxiety that makes learning difficult, if not impossible. ‘They are afraid that you know some day, somebody would come to school, and they could be deported, or something could happen to them,’ Del Pozo said. ‘They could be separated from their families…’”2 District 150 superintendent Dr. Kherat stated she was aware of some students not attending school because of fears of deportations or hate crimes. Peoria No Ban No Wall launched a successful lobbying campaign with the help of ICIRR to pass a Safe Haven policy at Peoria Public School’s District 150. After nearly six months of negotiating, the District 150 School Board unanimously passed a Safe Haven resolution. This limited the kinds of information shared between the school district and immigration enforcement, and essentially barred access to schools by Immigration & Customs Enforcement. During consideration of this issue, School Board member Dr. Davison-Aviles gave a personal reason this issue was so important to him:
“For some of us, this issue is a personal issue. I remember a story… of a single woman, from Mexico, and she had two children. And she was fleeing domestic violence; exactly the sort of person the current administration would seek to prevent from coming into the United States, because of course they’re not the right kind of citizen. However, this person persevered and actually did make it here – you’d be pleased to know; I’m sorry if I get a little emotional here… because, you see, if she hadn’t made it, I wouldn’t be here; nor would there be my brothers & sisters: attorneys, vice-presidents, and a pretty damn good auto mechanic. None of us would be here. That’s all I have to say.”
Dr. Davison-Aviles, Professor of Education at Bradley University and former District 150 Board Member.
Peoria No Ban No Wall also built a relationship with Peoria Federation of Teachers Local 780. We provided them training and info on handling immigration issues in the classroom. Furthermore, we co-organized an event for May Day 2017 with the local teachers union entitled “Build Schools, Not Walls.” We had over hundred union members and immigrants there and uplifted the voices of immigrant students facing discrimination.
. . .
Unfortunately, not all of our strategies for immigration justice were successful, and it shown a spotlight on the reactionary politics that plague Peoria. Working with ICIRR, The Immigration Project, Illinois Peoples Action (IPA), Pastor Adrian Garcia of First United Methodist Church, and others, Peoria No Ban No Wall began the arduous process of lobbying Peoria City Council to pass a Welcoming Ordinance4 protecting Peoria’s immigrant residents in the Spring of 2017. Despite initial support from At-Large council person Beth Jensen and 2nd District Councilperson Chuck Grayeb, we quickly realized it would be an uphill battle. Unlike the District 150 school board, most of the council had no interest in addressing this issue, especially with spurious statements by President Trump about sanctioning “Sanctuary Cities.” One of the poverties of thought in Peoria is the ability to envision goals proactively; instead, Peoria is typically reactive and much to its detriment.
For a City Council that is constantly complaining about the population loss of Peoria (and Illinois in general) and its effect of a dwindling tax base, city council members considered the possibility of welcoming new migrants with supportive policies as anathema to its goals. Peoria has lost over 10,500 residents since 2010, more than any other downstate Illinois city, and it ranks 350th of 383 cities in the nation ranked by population growth.5 It ranks 5th in the nation for population loss of metropolitan areas. Of the population loss, 43% is domestic migration, i.e., people packing up and moving out to a different region in the U.S.6 The one group that added to Peoria’s population: international migration. From 2016-2017, the immigrant population of Peoria increased from 7.76% of the population to 8.26%.7 It’s almost common sense that making policies that protect immigrants would increase the amount of immigrants who want to live there.
But, the reactionary myopia of Peoria City Council is blind to these facts. Beth Akeson thought Welcoming policies would lead to higher crime. Alleged servant-leader Zach Oyler couldn’t comprehend why the city should even care: “I think this is a state or national concern.” Canadian immigrant Denis Cyr (who received an Einstein visa8 for his hockey prowess) couldn’t fathom the idea that poorer, less privileged immigrants might do whatever it takes to provide for their families. According to Latinx activist Cesar Vargas, conservative Jim Montelongo had no problem showing off his immigrant heritage when it came to getting elected but was no where to be found in the Latinx community after the polls closed. Mayor Ardis privately told immigration activists he personally had no problem with undocumented immigrants even saying we should let them all stay, but politically he was too cowardly to support the issue.
Studies demonstrate that crime is significantly lower in sanctuary jurisdictions. On average, there are 35.5 fewer crimes per 10,000 people in sanctuary counties. Economies are also stronger in sanctuary jurisdictions. Median household income, on average, is $4,352 higher in sanctuary jurisdictions. The percentage of people who live at or below the federal poverty line is, on average, 2.3 percent lower in sanctuary counties. Moreover, white poverty is, on average, 1.4 percent lower in sanctuary counties, and Latino poverty is, on average, 2.9 percent lower in sanctuary counties. Studies also show a 2.6% drop in households that receive SNAP benefits. Labor force participation is 2.5% higher in sanctuary counties and unemployment is 1.1% lower.9
As time progressed, other organizations like the ACLU of Peoria and Change Peoria got involved, and a loose coalition was formed for the purpose of turning Peoria into a Welcoming City. The ACLU of Peoria, under the direction of president Jeff Johnson, attempted to get a version of the Welcoming Ordinance approved by the Advisory Committee on Police-Community Relations with the help of then-Vice-President of the committee, Reverend Marcus Fogliano. Fogliano claimed that the Advisory Committee could pass legislation or recommendations that would then be placed directly onto City Council’s agenda for consideration (this turned out to be false, as the Committee has no such power10). The logic was, since the Ordinance largely focused on police interactions with immigrants, this committee’s recommendation would provide ample weight in convincing the already recalcitrant City Council.11
Reverend Marcus Fogliano, former Vice-President of the Advisory Committee for Police-Community Relations
While there was certainly some support among the unelected members of the committee, there was also opposition. The fiercest opposition came from NAACP board member12 Don Jackson. He was initially confused as to why the ordinance was even being considered by this committee. Jackson even went so far as advocating for the police to racially profile Latinx residents and ask them to prove their documentation status. For a civil rights attorney who led the local NAACP for 21 years, his comments on the Advisory Committee sounded less like Dr. King and more like Sheriff Joe Arpiao.
Donald Jackson, civil rights attorney and former president of NAACP of Peoria. Currently serving on the Advisory Committee for Police-Community Relations as the NAACP’s representative.
At a NAACP of Peoria meeting I attended, Mr. Jackson recounted how he had visited a construction site to verify they were meeting minority employment quotas. When Jackson asked the foreman about this, the foreman pointed to a Latinx man and said, “There’s your minority.” Visibly disappointed, Jackson told the meeting he didn’t check to see if the Latinx individual was “illegal or not.” (Apparently, Mr. Jackson is unaware that many Latinx people are actually citizens.)
Current At-Large Councilmember Dr. Rita Ali served on the committee as its president during this time.13 Initially supportive of the measure, Dr. Ali eventually seemed flabbergasted by the complexity of the ordinance. Many different activists offered to personally review the ordinance with her, even presenting a willingness to bring expert immigration attorneys in to explain the finer details. When the committee finally voted on whether to recommend the ordinance or not,14 it was voted down in a tie-vote. Dr. Ali abstained from voting meaning it could have passed had she voted for it. Later, during her 2019 campaign for City Council, she said she couldn’t support the bill because of certain particulars in the ordinance (though she never did reveal what these particulars were).
The hypothesis that an increase in immigrant labor depresses wages and opportunities for African-Americans is belied by the fact that population growth stimulates economies precisely because an increase in consumers generates a stronger economy:
A 2016 study conducted by scholars at Penn’s Wharton School of Business found that the increase in the labor supply resulting from immigration could actually generate more employment in industries such as home construction and food production. More people means more consumption, and, specifically, more consumption by the working poor. Existing data simply doesn’t support any definitive correlation between the stark unemployment rate of African Americans and the employment of recent immigrants. Nevertheless, those striving to push through xenophobic, racist, Islamophobic, and inhumane immigration restrictions find unusual allies among some African Americans seeking to lower the black unemployment rate.”17
Furthermore, this myth undermines the achievements and opportunities for solidarity of the many immigrants hailing from the Caribbean and Africa, over 200 of which live in the Peoria area.
This is not to say the NAACP of Peoria supports Trump’s immigration policies; they’ve spoken and been present at local rallies against child separation and inhumane immigration policies. Nor is it suggesting the entire black community shares this skepticism for increased immigration. The black community is not monolithic (no community is). The Black Justice Project in Peoria (a group of younger, more progressive black activists) has expressed support for Welcoming Policies. This is merely an attempt to analyze the problematic nature of this particular myth.
PPD currently has a policy against collaborating with ICE, but its merely a department policy not a statute enforced by law. This policy could easily change with new leadership or if different circumstances arise. While At-Large candidate Andre Allen said publicly during his campaign that he remained on the fence about Welcoming Policies, Allen made the excellent point that in his career as a college administrator at Methodist College he found that concrete written policies are better than ad-hoc or informal policies. “I’ve been bitten by not having policies that are clear and enforceable,” Allen said.
Yet, the myopic poverty of City Council is unconcerned about this. Beth Jensen even had a change of heart about her support, trotting out right-wing propaganda about the risk of “Sanctuary Cities” loosing Federal funding.18
Beth Jensen lying to constituents & spreading right-wing propaganda about Welcoming Cities.
Jensen was even given the opportunity to share immigrant testimonials from Peoria immigrants who supported the Welcoming Ordinance.19 She could have used her privilege & power to uplift these oppressed voices, but she chose against this, saying these testimonials did not show people under imminent threat of deportation. Talk about reactive and regressive thinking. The whole point of the Welcoming Ordinance was to be proactive in case the Federal government began immigration actions in Peoria. (For more on Beth Jenson’s flip-flopping, see my article).
While Peoria did pass a resolution declaring itself a Welcoming City in May of 2017, resolutions are merely statements with no force of law. As At-Large City Council candidate Peter Kobak said, “We [City of Peoria] passed a resolution, but it doesn’t really protect anyone. We don’t have an institution to protect those immigrants.” Nor are activists confident that any of the members of City Council would take appropriate action action should concerns arise. Ultimately, it was clear to some activists that the resolution was a tactical maneuver by City Hall to undermine the movement for a Welcoming Ordinance by declaring they’d solved the problem without ever creating any real policy.
. . .
In Illinois in general, there have been other struggles for the immigrant community. In February of 2019, immigrant justice activists became aware of a lobbying effort by a private prison corporation, Immigration Centers of America, to build a privately-run immigrant detention center in Dwight, IL. The overwhelming majority of privately-operated prisons are immigrant detention centers. This was of great concern to immigrant justice activists from across the state. An immigrant prison so close to other Illinois communities could possibly increase the ICE traffic in our own communities. Activists from across the state–and some from beyond–descended on Dwight, IL several times protesting against the construction of an immigrant detention center. Groups included: #NoICEDwight, Peoria No Ban No Wall, the Immigration Project, IPA, ICIRR, Connect Kankakee, Peoria and Blono Democratic Socialist of America, Deportation Watch Network, Catholic Legal Immigration Network, and many more. We held several rallies and marched through the streets of Dwight, IL with several hundred activists.
Unfortunately, the Dwight Board of Trustees approved the construction of the immigration detention center by a vote of 5-2. Disappointed but not defeated #NoICEDwight activists quickly took their fight to the State Capital in Springfield. Groups successfully lobbied the Illinois legislature to pass HB 2040, a bill aimed at banning privately-operated immigrant prisons from operating within Illinois. Governor Pritzker signed the bill into law on June 21st, 2019. This was a huge victory for immigrants across Illinois and beyond. But, the struggle isn’t over. HB 2040 didn’t outlaw local jails contracting with federal government to imprison immigrants. Pulaski County, McHenry County, and Kankakee County all house immigrants in their jails and profit off of the misery of our draconian immigration system. (You can read more about the situation in Dwight, IL here.)
. . .
Immigrant residents in Peoria have also experienced acts of discrimination and fear based on the documentation status of themselves or family members. Dr. Auria Toxqui is an assistant professor of History at Bradley University. She was born in Mexico City. She is currently a legal permanent residence who has lived in the Peoria area for the past ten years. Dr. Toxqui has had mainly positive experiences and loves her community in Peoria.
However, since the rise of Trump, she’s experienced more discriminatory behavior from private citizens. Once she was in a local grocery store with her 1-year-old daughter. She was talking with her daughter, like all parents do, while she was shopping. Because Dr. Toxqui is bi-lingual, she is raising her daughter to be bi-lingual and frequently speaks to her in Spanish. Someone randomly launched an inquisition asking if Dr. Toxqui taught her daughter English. This is not the first time this has happened to the professor, and despite being dismayed, she responded “there was no official language prescribed in the U.S. constitution” followed by a bevy of statistics showing Latinx children are more likely to be multi-lingual than white children.
Dr. Auria Toxqui, assistant professor of History at Bradley University.
But, it wasn’t until she faced a particularly glaring experience that she began to notice Peoria shifting from being “a friendly to a non-friendly city.” On the 4th of July 2017, Dr. Toxqui and her family were enjoying a baseball game at Dozer Park. While she sat with her 2-year-old daughter watching the game, a rude woman yelled “Mexican, Mexican!” while giving the professor and her daughter a middle finger. It took her several days to realize this incident was a racist attack against her.
. . .
There is still much struggle to be done to help the immigrant community in Peoria. There are thriving Latinx, Hindu, and Muslim communities growing in Peoria despite the Great Recession and thirty years of a draconian immigration policy.
In Part 4, we will look at attempts to reduce racial inequity by both government and private interests in the Peoria Area. What has been accomplished? What still needs to be done? Included: an interview with Peoria County States Attorney candidate Chris McCall on his vision for Peoria County. Plus, additional fragments.
For more Fragments on Playing in Peoria, see here.
