Tuition waivers cause trouble, even when state legislators follow the rules

It’s that time of year. The 177 members of the Illinois General Assembly have used their long-time legislative perk that allows them to grant full-tuition waivers to would-be students however they see fit.

SANDOVAL: A staffer's gaffe?



It is a perk that has been in place since 1905, and there are some legislators who will engage in self-righteous rhetoric about how all they’re doing is enabling young people to attend a university.

IT IS OUR legislators, hard at work, while doing something that will benefit our society for decades into the future. Education, they’ll say, is the key to improving our future.

If you think I’m laying it on a little bit thick, it is because I see the potential for so many things to go wrong when you create a program for which there are no rules – other than whatever ones the legislators themselves want to impose on themselves.

Even when we have legislators trying to do “the right thing,” things can go wrong.

The Chicago Sun-Times gave us a report this week of the latest gaffe related to the tuition waiver perk. The perpetrator, so to speak, is state Sen. Martin Sandoval, D-Cicero.

NOW IN ALL fairness, Sandoval didn’t give a tuition waiver to the kid of a prominent campaign contributor, or grant his waiver to someone as a favor done for another legislator – who would now owe Sandoval something in return.

The blatant horror stories were not repeated. Although the fact that the words “organized crime” are being bandied about will make it sound worse.

For it seems that one of the eight people to whom Sandoval is giving a full-tuition waiver to for the 2011-12 academic year is Michael A. Giorango – who wants to use the waiver to attend Illinois State University in Normal.

GIORANGO: Will son have to pay tuition?



The “problem” is that Giorango’s father, also named Michael Giorango, is more commonly known to mob buffs as “Jaws.” The father currently is doing prison time for charges related to bookmaking, prostitution and failure to file income tax returns.

WHICH MEANS EVERYBODY, particularly those who get off on mob stories, will want to presume that Sandoval is somehow connected to organized crime. That there just had to be some direct connection between the two men. What, we’re going to wonder, did the Outfit do for Sandoval that he repaid them by giving a mob boss’ kid a free year of college?

Not that there’s any proof of truth to anything in that last paragraph.

In fact, the Sun-Times has Sandoval saying he never med Giorango’s kid, has no desire to meet him, and that it was one of his legislative staffers (who has since lost his job) who got confused and inadvertently approved the younger Giorango for the tuition waiver.

That latter part does have a certain ring of truth to it.

FOR MANY LEGISLATORS in recent years attempt to distance themselves from the horror stories involving political conflicts of interest of the past.

They create special committees that actually review the applicants and attempt to pick the people who have the best academic credentials. In many cases, the only time the legislator has any contact with the students is at some sort of reception at which they all get their picture taken together.

In short, the legislator takes all the credit for letting somebody go to college without having to pay tuition. But if something goes wrong, he gets deniability.

So maybe Sandoval is telling the truth that he had no prior contact with Giorango, the younger. I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt on that point.

BUT HE DOES deserve some derision for the fact that he tried to weasel out of the incident by trying to rescind the tuition waiver – once he found out who Giorango actually was.

I’d respect the senator from Cicero if he had just stuck by his committee’s decision. One can legitimately argue that the younger Giorango has no criminal record, hasn’t done anything wrong, and should have the chance to get ahead in life.

If he actually had the academic credentials to qualify for a legislative waiver, then so be it. Although the Sun-Times reported that Giorango’s application for a tuition waiver did not include a transcript or any kind of essay to show off his skills. So who’s to say why someone, somewhere along the process thought he was worthy of the perk.

Which is quite a perk. Each year, every single senator and representative in Illinois is entitled to give one full, four-year tuition waiver to a University of Illinois student and another to a student at any other state university in Illinois.

BUT MANY LEGISLATORS prefer to split the waivers up into four, one-year waivers to the University of Illinois and four more to other state universities. Why only get credit for sending two kids to college when you can get credit for sending eight kids?

Which means the waivers, despite all the high-minded rhetoric about enabling young people to go to college, are really about boosting the egos of the individual legislators.

So excuse me for getting a chuckle at Sandoval’s expense. If he had just paid a little closer attention to what was being done in his name, he’d be getting all the glory this week.

  -30-

Cop's coffee behavior not a surprise

The first real job I ever had involved working at a Subway Sandwich store in suburban Calumet City that remained open until 2 a.m. every day. I was hired to work the late night shift and often dealt with the on-duty police officers who patrolled the surrounding area.

We were their favorite “restaurant” to eat at, in part because we were open and also because my boss made it clear to me early on that I should give the patrolmen (I don’t remember any female officers) a break financially.

IN SHORT, WE gave the cops a discount, usually charging them something like two or three bucks for a sandwich, chips and drink that would have cost a regular person $5-6 (and would now cost about $8 – I worked at a Subway nearly three decades ago).

My boss considered it a worthwhile financial loss because it usually amounted to a couple of sandwiches per night and because those officers would usually keep a closer watch on her store. It made my boss feel more secure about keeping her Subway store open at late night hours.

So on the surface, it doesn’t shock me in the least to learn that a Chicago police officer had come to expect free food and drink while working.

Although she beat the rap on more serious criminal charges alleging that she stole fruit juice (she was acquitted of a “theft” charge in Criminal Court in 2005), the Chicago Police Board on Thursday noted that a Belmont District patrolwoman was suspended this summer for 15 months because of her behavior when it came to free food.

BARBARA NEVERS ALSO will have to undergo counseling to help her cope with her behavior.

Nevers received the professional discipline (as opposed to criminal charge) for claims that she demanded free coffee from six different Starbucks stores. Police board officials contend that she would sometimes intimidate store workers by flashing her badge, displaying her pistol and screaming at employees that she was entitled.

Her attorneys claim she never demanded anything, but also was not the type of person to turn down a free cup of coffee – if it were offered to her.

What caught my attention about this story was that the Starbucks stores she focused her attention on were all in the Lincoln Park and Lakeview neighborhoods – in short, upscale neighborhoods with some of the lowest crime rates in Chicago.

WE PROBABLY HAVE an officer who thinks she (rather than the upper-income residents) is personally responsible for the neighborhood safety.

But she probably does get a break financially at other businesses on her police beat, which made her think she could also get a free cup of coffee and something to eat to help her cope with the pressures of her job.

The Chicago Tribune reported that one store manager said Nevers would become hostile whenever she was offered just a cup of coffee, and not a pastry to go along with it.

I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that Starbucks managers were willing to tolerate a cup or two of coffee being given out, and that the real issue here is just that a police officer got greedy with her expectations.

THEN AGAIN, WE don’t know how nit-picky corporate management in Seattle was. Would they have gotten worked up if a boss could not account for a cup or two of coffee per work shift? Would the cost of the paper cups really have hurt the financial bottom lines of the six stores in question where Nevers used to hang out while on patrol duty?

If Starbucks’ was really that petty, then maybe they should look at the bigger picture.

I recall that the Subway store I worked in was never held up during the time I worked there. It’s not because it was an overly safe neighborhood, as I know for a fact that some other businesses in the neighborhood (including the 7-Eleven store across the street) were robbed.

But if giving a cop a break on an occasional sandwich helped get us some additional eyes on the business, then perhaps it was worth it.

-30-

EDITOR’S NOTES: Two members of the Chicago Police Board thought Barbara Nevers deserved (http://www.suntimes.com/news/24-7/1096630,080708starbucks.article) a stricter punishment than a 15-month suspension.

“I get coffee for free” is the news quote of the day (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-starbucks-cop-web-aug08,0,6874669.story) on Thursday in Chicago.

Nevers at least has the possibility of continued employment with the Chicago Police Department, unlike a Daytona Beach, Fla., officer (http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080718/D9206HC80.html) who was terminated after it was learned he was pressuring local coffee shops for up to six cups of coffee free per day.

Police in Fort Worth, Texas, are told they can take a free cup of coffee while working, but they should not (http://www.star-telegram.com/news/columnists/bud_kennedy//story/766626.html) demand it.