Update: How will juvenile violence in Chicago effect the Olympics and the bid for Chicago to have the games here?
June 17, 2009
Chicago Police Department
Mr. Jody Weis, Superintendent of Police
3510 South Michigan Avenue
Chicago, Illinois 60653
Re: Letter of Support for the Second Chance Juvenile Mentoring Initiative
Mr. Weis:
On May 22, 2009 I forwarded you an email from Mr. Larry Sachs informing you of the difficulties I was having with getting a letter of support from the Chicago Police Department for the Second Chance Juvenile Mentoring Initiative. I informed you that the deadline for submitting the application for the Second Chance Juvenile Mentoring Initiative was June 15, 2009.
On May 22, 2009 Mr. Larry Sach’s Director of Grants Management, Research and Development Division of the Chicago Police Department (CPD), sent me an email stating that someone in the Superintendent’s office reviewing my request stated that since my agency’s registered office was not in the City of Chicago it would be inappropriate for CPD to issue the partnership I formed with other city of Chicago agencies a letter of support.
I informed you in the email I forwarded to you from Mr. Sachs on May 29, 2009 that since it was a requirement for my agency to have a registered office in the City of Chicago to get a letter of support for the partnership to provide services to juvenile offenders to reduce recidivism, I acquired office space in the City of Chicago and filed the appropriate paperwork with the State of Illinois.
Mr. Michael Masters called me informing me that you asked him to handle this issue of a letter of support. Mr. Masters told me to send information on my target population, the partnership I formed and how we intended to serve them. Mr. Masters told me to send the information to Ms. Denise Perri. I provided this information to Ms. Perri by email, which Mr. Masters provided. On June 3, 2009 I informed the partnership that I provided Mr. Masters with the information he requested. After providing this information to Mr. Masters, he had some other “hoops” he wanted me to jump through.
On June 10, 2009 I sent you an email telling you that Mr. Masters said he would facilitate the letter of support. I informed you that Mr. Masters had instructed me to send my documentation to Ms. Perri by email. I informed you that I had sent 3 emails and had heard nothing from Ms. Perri or Mr. Masters. I sent you a letter of support I received from the Chicago Urban League in this email. I also informed you in this email that the deadline for my application was June 15, 2009. I asked you to intervene. I heard nothing from you.
After sending the email to you on June 10, 2009, Mr. Masters called me on June 11, 2009. It was not a good conversation. Mr. Masters told me that it takes some people requesting letters of support 3 to 6 months before they get them. He appeared to resent me sending an email to you about the non-response of Ms. Denise Perri, who I sent 3 emails to without getting a response. Mr. Masters told me that they could not find any record of my emails. Mr. Masters also told me about the trust he has for Ms. Perri and her diligence toward work. As I told Mr. Masters, I am not challenging Ms. Perri's integrity. I was merely reporting to you in an email that I had sent 3 emails and did not get a response. We have to let the failure of communication go where it does.
Nevertheless, the emails were sent. Mr. Masters confirmed I had the right email address for Ms. Perri. I asked Mr. Masters why is it that my emails get to you, but cannot get to Ms. Perri. I told Mr. Masters it appears that someone is trying to prevent me from getting this letter of support. Our constituents and the public needs to know how we are addressing recidivism and how we are treating those who want to help.
Mr. Masters also told me that someone from his department or the Chicago Police Department talked to the agencies I have listed as partners and they said they did not know me. I told Mr. Masters that no one from the agencies I have listed would say that to anyone. I informed Mr. Masters I just sat with this group of agencies last Monday, June 8, 2009, at 1:30 pm to 4:00 pm going over our proposal for the Second Chance Juvenile Mentoring Initiative. After my conversation with Mr. Masters, he thought he would complicate matters for me.
On June 11, 2009 Ms. Asheley Van Ness, Assistant to Mayor Daley, Public Safety, Office of the Mayor sent me an email. Ms. Van Ness began telling me in the email that the Department of Family and Support Service takes the lead on reentry issues for the City of Chicago. Ms. Van Ness recommended I contact their point person Ms. Carol Kennedy. Ms. Van Ness copied this email to Ms. Kennedy. When I replied to Ms. Van Ness’ email I asked her what was Ms. Kennedy role in this letter of support from CPD. I asked is Ms. Kennedy representing CPD.
I replied to Ms. Van Ness’ email stating I wanted to know how she got involved with my request to you, and why is she telling me I cannot get a letter of support from CPD. I informed Ms. Van Ness that I had received letters of support from Congressman Danny Davis, Congressman Bobby Rush and the Chicago Urban League. I attached my curriculum vitae and the letter I submitted to you asking for the letter of support. I sent these materials because Ms. Van Ness’ email was improperly stating what I was requesting from CPD. She did not know what she was addressing.
My partnership asked for a letter of support from the Chicago Police Department. We did not ask for a letter of support from the Department of Family and Support Service.
On June 11, 2009 Ms. Van Ness responded to my email. She began to talk about how she is one of the liaison people who works closely with the Superintendent’s office, and that her advice stating I should contact Ms. Kennedy was merely a recommendation. She continued her conversation stating that she wishes me luck on my proposal. If Ms. Van Ness had good wishes for me, she would have facilitated the letter of support. We, as a people, have heard this many times. The scenario never changes. This reeks with nepotism, favoritism and disenfranchisement hoping to keep a people disadvantaged. It is what it is.
I answered Ms. Van Ness’ email, copying Ms. Kennedy stating “Your recommendation is duly noted. Ms. Kennedy has the information. She can operate as if she received notice requesting a letter of support. As you state, this is your recommendation. Does this recommendation relieve the Chicago Police Department from issuing a letter of support? This is an important answer. My writings outside of this grant depend on this answer.” I did not receive an answer from Ms. Van Ness.
On June 12, 2009 I sent a more “personal” email to Ms. Carol Kennedy stating, it was suggested by Ms. Van Ness that I contact you regarding a letter of support I needed from the Chicago Police Department for the Juvenile Mentoring Initiative due on June 15, 2009. I have been requesting this letter from Mr. Jody Weis since May 22, 2009. Mr. Masters told me I needed to send in documentation regarding my target population, how I was going to serve them and information on the partnership I am collaborating with to render these services. I sent this to him, and it appears I am being denied the letter.
I attached my curriculum vitae, the letter with the information requested by Mr. Masters and the letter of support from the Chicago Urban League. As of this date June 17, 2009, Ms. Kennedy has not responded. I guess Ms. Van Ness was wrong. Ms. Kennedy cannot possibly be the point of contact. I copied this email to all my partners. My partners have nothing to do with the content of this letter. I am writing this statement just in case some of these “officials” want to punish them for my writing. I copied you this email, Sir. You have not responded.
Sir, this is not supposed to be a difficult process. It appears I am being disenfranchised and put at a disadvantage. How many "hoops" do I have to jump through to complete this process? I had to submit our grant proposal on June 15, 2009. That was the deadline. Why was I being treated in this manner? I asked Mr. Masters if I was being disenfranchised due to my past. Mr. Masters told me that he had not look into my past.
Sir, if this is true who is vetting me? It is a poor manager who does not check out a person’s background to know the person comprehensively and holistically. No matter what my background may have been, there is no violence in it. I am PhD person. As stated before, I attached my curriculum vitae to the email I sent to everyone because I know I have to jump through hoops before “you” people understand that people can change.
I am not your ordinary "passive" person. We, as a black people, have been "step on and kept out of the loop" too long. Our constituents, peers and other public officials’ needs to know how we are addressing recidivism and how we are treating those who want to help.
I guess the next thing these “high” powered people will do is contact who they know in the Federal government to assure I am denied the grant, even though I have an innovative approach to reducing recidivism and my proposal is well written with support from research data. I am aware this may happen. But guess what, there is always a “sacrificial” lamb. There is also, in many cases, a “ram” in the bush. Who will be my ram?
I submitted the proposal on behalf of the partnership on June 15, 2009 with letters of support from Congressman Danny Davis, Congressman Bobby Rush and the Chicago Urban League. Unfortunately, I did have the support the very entity that should want a reduction in recidivism and crime by our juveniles. Let us not forget how the children are killing each other in the streets of Chicago or does anyone really care?
Fred Nance Jr.
http://clickforjusticeandequality.blogspot.com/
Mr. Michael Masters
Ms. Asheley Van Nesss
Ms. Carol Kennedy
Mr. Larry Sachs
