August 13, 2008

Mr. Millsaps:

On August 13, 2008 I, Fred Nance Jr., was involved in an automobile accident. Officer K. Burrow Star #129 responded to the call I made to the South Holland Police Department. When Officer Burrow arrived upon the scene I gave him my driver’s license and insurance card. Officer Burrow asked me for my phone number. Officer Burrow wrote my phone number on my insurance card. This was inappropriate. Officer Burrow issued me a ticket, which states “Fail to reduce speed to avoid accident.” There was no reduction in speed needed for this incident. We were only driving about 5 miles an hour. This is a bogus ticket.

I explained to Officer Burrow the following about the car accident: As I came around the bend in the road on Thornwood drive approaching the stop sign, a Dodge Caravan was stopped at the turn in the bend. The Dodge did not have its emergency blinkers on. I could not go around the Dodge at the time because another car was coming in the opposite direction.

When the other car went by, I was about to turn out and pass the “parked” Dodge. I blew my horn. The Dodge began to move. I turned back behind the Dodge. I began to move. The Dodge stopped again. I stopped my car. I blew my horn for the second time. The Dodge started moving again. I started moving again to turn out to pass the Dodge. All of sudden, the Dodge came to a dead stop again. This is when the front bumper passenger side of my vehicle hit the rear driver’s side bumper of the Dodge. The Dodge was about 30 to 40 feet from the stop sign. I took photos of the accident scene with my cell phone.

The driver of the Dodge got out of her car. This driver had her cell phone in her hand. The driver of the Dodge had been on her cell phone during these events. The driver of the Dodge lives in this complex. The driver of Dodge called her husband to come to the scene of the accident. When the husband came over to talk to her about the accident she informed him she was talking on her cell phone to someone when the accident occurred. The driver of the Dodge did not have an earpiece for her cell phone. She was talking on the cell phone and caused the accident.

I took pictures of the accident scene, that is, the position of the cars involved, where the cars had damage, the area between the Dodge and the stop sign, and the area of space I described above where the stop-and-go action occurred. The pictures will be faxed with this letter to South Holland Police Department Chief Millsaps.

When I objected to this ticket and refused to accept it from Officer Burrow, Officer Burrow through it in my car window. I informed Officer Burrow I had a AAA bond card, as I told him to give me my driver’s license. I informed Officer Burrow that when he decided to write me a ticket he was supposed to ask me if I had a bond card before taking my driver’s license. Officer Burrow told me don’t tell him how to do his job. I informed Officer Burrow if he was doing his job he would not have taken my driver’s license before asking me if I had a bond card. I informed Officer Burrow I know my rights.

Officer Burrow told me I would have come to the police station if I wanted my driver’s license because I was causing a disturbance. My wife drove up at this time. I told Officer Burrow I was not going to the South Holland Police Department to get my driver’s license. Officer Burrow decided to take my bond card but would not give me my driver’s license stating he had to check out if he could accept my bond card. I went to my car to get paper and pen to write information about this incident. After making me wait for several minutes, I had to go to Officer Burrow’s police car, and wait again before he gave me my driver’s license.

Officer Burrow should have given both drivers a ticket, if he was going to issue tickets. Officer Burrow was not on the scene when the accident occurred. The only person giving Officer Burrow information about this accident was the driver of the Dodge Caravan and me. If Officer Burrow says he got information from someone else, he is lying.

I called the duty officer, Lt. Becka. I informed Lt. Becka of the issues, stating Officer Burrow wrote me a bogus ticket retaliating and threatening me because of my complaints about the South Holland Police Department and him in past writings. I asked Lt. Becka how did he spell his name for the record. Lt. Becka immediately told me that I should know how to spell his name since I have written his name in past complaints.

On March 18, 2005 I was involved in a 3-car accident where there were no tickets given by the officer for the South Holland Police Department. I complained because the driver that caused the accident was “white” and should have received a ticket. My car and the other driver of the 3^rd car are “black.” The “white” police officer for the South Holland Police Department decided not to issue the “white” female driver a ticket. When the case was settled the “white” driver was found negligent and the cause of the accident. I filed a formal complaint about this issue with the South Holland Police Department. I never received a reply from the South Holland Police Department on the complaint written on or about March 18, 2005.

This is part of what I wrote to Chief Millsaps on or about March 18, 2005:

On March 18, 2005 I was involved in a three-car accident at 170^th and Langley. Involved in the car accident was a white woman (Denise Lenting) and her passenger (Bonita Vasquez) driving a Toyota Camry, license plate number 3472264; a black woman (Mary Ambrose) and her son (Sullivan Ambrose age 14) driving a Lexus, license plate number 2720486; and my car (Fred Nance, a black man) driving a Nissan Altima, license plate number 1268347.

There was an outside witness to the accident, Ms. Laura Clemons, license plate number C936809, telephone number 708-331-2291. As the Toyota came off of Langley to proceed onto 170^th Street, Ms. Clemons blew her car horn continuously attempting to alert the Toyota driver to the oncoming traffic, the Lexus and Nissan. The Toyota ignored the warning.

The Lexus and Nissan driver gave the above information to Officer Kremski (white). Officer Kemski ignored the information about Ms. Clemons stating that if she was a witness she should have stayed on the scene. I asked him why would she have to stay on the scene if she gave her information up freely to be contacted by SHPD. I asked Officer Kremski doesn’t he do an investigation into the facts of the matter. He informed me that he only questions people on the scene about car accidents.

I asked him why didn’t he issue tickets so that a fact-finder, such as the courts, could get testimony and seek all witnesses. Officer Kremski informed me that because of his past experiences with traffic court and people not showing up has discouraged him from giving tickets at the scene of accidents. This is ludicrous.

The South Holland police officer involved in the March 18, 2005 issue was Kremski, ID #106. I have written about this police officer many times coming to my house harassing and intimidating me (see documents I submitted to you on February 11, 2005). As with Officer Kremski, I have written many times about Officer Burrow harassing and intimidating me coming to my home.

Therefore, I am submitting this as a formal complaint against the South Holland Police Department. The ticket I received was bogus and I should not have received it especially, if Officer Burrow was not going to issue the other driver a ticket.

Respectfully submitted,

Fred Nance Jr.

cc:

http://clickforjusticeandequality2.blogspot.com/

http://clickforjusticeandequality.wordpress.com/

http://click.townhall.com/

This case was also dismissed, after I wasted my day and time going to court for it. Chief Millsaps never answered this letter.

January 2, 2008

Mr. Warren Millsaps

Re:       Racial Profiling – Harassment – Intimidation

Mr. Millsaps:

I, Fred L Nance Jr., am an African American. The racial profiling by the South Holland Police Department (SHPD) continues. On December 31, 2007, Officer Pedric of the SHPD issued a traffic citation to me for improper lane usage on Cottage Grove. This ticket was bogus and inappropriate.

As you know, there is only one lane of travel in each direction of travel going North and South on Cottage Grove between 170^th Street and 162^nd Street. If a person wants to make a left turn, they must cross the double lines and enter the lane for turning. If a person decides, after crossing the double lines to make this left turn, they want to return to the lane of original travel, they must cross the double lines again to enter their original lane of travel.

Officer Pedric, who is white, decided to stop me and tell me I misused the turning lane to pass another car on the road. This is not true. After entering the turning lane, I decided to get back into the original lane of travel. Officer Pedric did not ask me why I entered the turning lane in the first place. Officer Pedric told me I entered the turning lane to pass the car in front of me.

I was traveling North on Cottage Grove from 170^th Street, when a car turned into Cottage Grove from a side street in front of me. This car turned into Cottage Grove where I would have had an accident if I did not go into the turning lane. After going into the turning lane, I came out of the turning lane and re-entered my original lane of travel proceeding on my course. This is when Officer Pedric came upon me with his squad car and stopped me. Officer Pedric did not stop the other car that was driven by the “white” driver.

While Officer Pedric was writing my traffic citation, 2 other squad cars appeared on the scene. It is my belief because of previous written complaints about racial profiling and disparate/indifferent treatment of African Americans by SHPD, I was targeted by SHPD. I asked Officer Pedric for the other “white” Officers names and badge numbers. Officer Pedric refused to give me their names and badge numbers. I wrote the officers license plates numbers and car identification numbers down. They are Car #14 M146676 and Car #10 M153782, both “white” officers.

I went to SHPD on December 31, 2008 (a few hours after the incident) to report this incident. I asked to speak to the duty commander. I was informed he or she was out in the street on duty. I left a message requesting a call. I never received a call from the duty commander or SHPD.

Therefore, I am suggesting SHPD targets African Americans for traffic citations, especially those who complain about their other “professional” practices. I am suggesting Officer Pedric called in my name and I am in their system marked as a person of interest if I am ever stopped or approached about any police matters in South Holland. I am suggesting SHPD has a monthly ticket quota to assist in municipal revenue. I am suggesting SHPD does not adhere to public policy regarding racial profiling and harasses its citizens through intimidation, coercion and threats.

I have contested this ticket and will appear in a court of law. Contesting this ticket will cost me employment hours/work days and will become a financial burden to litigate. This financial burden is meant to create disparity and indifferent treatment toward African Americans in South Holland, Illinois.

Racism is alive and well in South Holland, Illinois, and in many other parts of Illinois. Illinois may be the most racist State in the Union. The South Holland Police Department is not racially motivated toward equality for all just because they hire African Americans on its police force. I am suggesting they hire African Americans on their police force for political purposes and because of present laws regarding hiring quotas for African Americans.

Fred L Nance Jr., ABD, MA, CADC, NCRS

cc:

Mr. DeGraff, Mayor Village of South Holland

http://clickforjusticeandequality.blogspot.com/

http://click.townhall.com/

P.S.

See other complaints about the South Holland Police Department on my website at http://clickforjusticeandequality.blogspot.com/

August 12, 2008

What is your plan for reducing recidivism? What can we do with the Second Chance Act of 2007 to overcome this dilemma?

The 2008 Pew report suggests 1 in 100 Americans are incarcerated. Most of this incarceration is due to recidivism.

Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich suggests his “Sheridan Project” is a National Model to reduce recidivism. The Sheridan Project at Sheridan Correctional Center is being run by a nefarious mob of AFSCME Local 31 union members, employees of the Illinois Department of Corrections who have racial discriminatory practices and disparities, and WestCare Foundation, Inc. employees who practice indifferent treatment.

Governor Blagojevich appointed a committee of State employees and community activist who developed and created a report called “Inside Out: A plan to reduce recidivism and improve public safety.” I think we can throw this out the window also. This has 2 major flaws. It includes the Sheridan Project and did not anticipate Governor Blagojevich’s budget cuts for fiscal year 2008-2009.

Governor Blagojevich has cut community-based substance abuse and alcohol services, along with their aftercare programs, which is supposed to support the Sheridan Project. Governor Blagojevich has cut these programs by 50% or more. Governor Blagojevich has cut his Sheridan Project’s substance abuse services by only 10%. What do we need with substance abuse services in prison when there will be no aftercare services in our communities?

What Governor Blagojevich has done is unleashed the dilemma of substance abuse and alcoholism upon the communities of Illinois attempting to persuade other Illinois lawmakers to go his way with the Illinois budget. Is this nefarious or what?

July 30, 2008

CERTIFIED MAIL

Mr. Walker:

The Illinois Department of Corrections has not offered a rational basis for locking out Fred Nance Jr., which was an adverse employment action on or about May 14, 2008.

On May 1, 2006 I began working at Sheridan Correctional Center (Sheridan) as a counselor III for Gateway Foundation, Inc. (Gateway) On or about November 1, 2006, Gateway relinquished their counseling contract with the State of Illinois at Sheridan. On or about November 1, 2006, WestCare Foundation, Inc. (WestCare) began providing counseling services at Sheridan.

On Mother’s Day, May 12, 2008, Mr. Stanley Brooks, WestCare Director, called me while I was having dinner with my mother stating Warden Michael Rothwell had locked me out of Sheridan. I asked Mr. Brooks if Warden Rothwell gave a reason for the lockout. Mr. Brooks informed me he was not given a reason for the lockout.

On or about May 15, 2008 I received a letter from WestCare dated May 14, 2008 stating, in part, “…Please let this letter serve as a notification that your employment with WestCare is being terminated, effective May 14, 2008, due to the determination of the Illinois Department of Corrections to issue an Administrative Lockout of your security clearance at Sheridan Correctional Facility. As you are aware, it is a requirement of employment that you maintain an active security clearance to enter the facility….” (WestCare letter attached)

Sir, please provide a basis and cause, along with supporting documentation, for the Administrative Lockout of the security clearance for Fred Nance Jr.

Respectfully submitted,

Fred L Nance Jr.

cc:

CERTIFIED MAIL DELIVERY

Re:       The Second Chance Act of 2007 – Illinois’ Sheridan Correctional Center

Ms. Adams:

I, Fred L Nance Jr., am writing this letter suggesting the Federal Bureau of Prisons consider rescind or reduce any funding and/or deny any future funding to Governor Blagojevich’s Sheridan Project in Illinois. I base this suggestion upon the content of this letter, the letter written to Governor Blagojevich on May 12, 2008 (attached), the letter written to President George W. Bush on May 16, 2008 (attached) and all statements written by me on my blogs, and public news and community websites. The letters attached demonstrate a program lacking integrity, honesty, restorative justice and a true reduction in recidivism. The Sheridan Project does not and will not reduce recidivism. The Sheridan Project data provided to support a reduction in recidivism is manipulated.

The Second Chance Act of 2007 (“The Act”) has a total annual authorization of $165 Million Dollars. A brief purpose of “The Act”, as it relates to Sheridan Correctional Center (Sheridan), is to break the cycle of criminal recidivism and to provide offenders in prisons…with educational, literacy, vocational and job placement services to facilitate re-entry into the community. Sheridan does not provide “meaningful and adequate” services to meet the criteria of “The Act”. The lack of services mentioned here provided to the inmates of Sheridan mirror my experiences illustrated in the letter I presented to Governor Blagojevich dated May 12, 2008, which has been ignored by his administration.

WestCare Foundation, Inc., the company contracted at Sheridan to provide counseling services to the inmates, hired a black male Director Harold Parker. Mr. Parker attempted innovative changes to Sheridan to provide optimal and comprehensive services to the inmates, promoting restorative justice, a reduction in recidivism, and staff adjustment and assimilation to the cultural differences and similarities of inmates and peers. Sheridan Correctional Center and WestCare Foundation, Inc. management forced Mr. Parker to relinquish his employment at Sheridan.

On April 9, 2008 President Bush signed into law the Second Chance Act of 2007. On July 9, 2008 provisions related to the Bureau of Prisons will take effect. On October 9, 2008 “The Act” will take effect. The U.S. Department of Justice will have jurisdiction over all the programs except Section 212. The U.S. Department of Labor will have jurisdiction over Section 212.

The taxpayers, who are paying the $165 Million Dollar bill for “The Act”, are hoping the Second Chance Act of 2007 will reduce recidivism. The taxpayers would hope the people implementing the funds and those entities providing the services are not practicing racial disparities and indifferent treatment. Criminal thinking and behaving happens in and outside of jail. Criminals cannot watch criminals.

Therefore, I hope this brief letter does not fall on deaf ears. I believe there is integrity, honesty and sincerity in the Federal Bureau of Prisons. I believe the U.S. Department of Justice wants to reduce recidivism. I believe in reducing recidivism. I am a product of the Second Chance Act of 2007.

I have been treated by the Illinois Department of Corrections and WestCare Foundation, Inc. as if “The Act” does not exist. If I am treated as illustrated in the letters attached, with what I have accomplished in the last 16 years, the past- present- and future inmate population at Sheridan will produce just what they see in the ones who are guarding and counseling them, which is criminal thinking and behaving.

The Sheridan Project is not reducing recidivism. A lot of people talk to me that provide services to previous Sheridan residents. A parole officer attempted to share with a group of social service professionals at a meeting I attended that Sheridan was manipulating the data to suggest a reduction in recidivism. The parole officer tried present his evidence based allegation. He met strong opposition to his statements from a TASC provider at Sheridan who attended the meeting. I question people who refuse to examine empirical data.

When I was working at Sheridan, no employee in the institution matched my academic achievements and empirical experiences. I was ignored, dishonored and disgraced for attempting to provide comprehensive and optimal service toward restorative justice and reducing recidivism. The Second Chance Act of 2007 suggests a theory of comprehensive and optimal services toward restorative justice and reducing recidivism.

Respectfully submitted,

Fred L Nance Jr., ABD, MA, CADC, NCRS

cc:

The Sheridan Project: Sheridan Correctional Center

Illinois Correctional Officers’ Employment Security and Restorative Justice

Essay by Fred L Nance Jr.

July 7, 2008

I, Fred L Nance Jr., was incarcerated in January of 1992. At the end of my incarceration in 1994, I was housed in the East Moline correctional center. This correctional center housed males only. The building I was housed in also housed the visiting room for all inmates. One weekend day, while exiting this building, I saw a young black woman coming up the walkway, approaching the stairway with 2 small black children. Apparently, they were going to visit an inmate.

There were 2 white correctional officers standing at the entrance to the building. As the young black woman approached the entrance to the building, one correctional officer stated to the other in a loud tone “I know my kids will have a job because these children visiting their daddy will be taking their place one day.” The young black woman heard this remark and her face and body language displayed outraged, as she grabbed the little black children and pulled them closer to her. The behavior illustrated and demonstrated by these correctional officers at East Moline mirrors the behavior of the correctional officers at Sheridan Correctional Center (Sheridan) in 2008.

When I became a supervisor for WestCare Foundation, Inc. at Sheridan Correctional Center, my workdays were Tuesday through Saturday. One Saturday I had lunch with a white Chaplin who worked at Sheridan. This Chaplin gave me a brief overview of how and why Illinois prisons were built on farmlands. For the purposes of this essay on job security, I will elaborate only on this part.

The Chaplin stated Illinois farmers were offered a chance to sell or lease their land to the State of Illinois for profits that far exceeded what the land was worth. Illinois farmers were informed they could also have employment watching and caring for inmates like they watched and cared for their livestock. Illinois farmers were told it would be much easier watching inmates than farming. Illinois farmers were told not only could they have “lifetime” employment, but that their children’s children would have “lifetime” employment also. Illinois farmers were told and it is true that they would have life and health insurance that they could not afford to have working farmland because the State would pay for it. Of course, you know there are no “black” farmers in Illinois.

To guarantee this nepotistic employment, entities like the union AFSCME Local 31was taken to task. It is mandatory for all correctional officers, except those exempt because of job classification, to join AFSCME Local 31. AFSCME Local 31 defends any and all charges/complaints against correctional officers to protect this employment, no matter if they are guilty or not and no matter the cost to Illinois taxpayers. This is definitively job security, for the immediate family, relatives and friends of those who owned farmland where the Illinois government decided to build its prison systems.

WestCare Foundation, Inc. is a human/social service agency based in Las Vegas Nevada. This company acquired the Illinois contract to provide addiction counseling services at Sheridan. This company partnered with Amity Foundation, Inc. to provide a curriculum for these counseling services. Amity also comes from the Western geographical area of our country. Amity’s drug and alcohol curriculum addresses this addiction but it does not address restorative justice. Drug and alcohol addiction is only a small part of the problem of criminal thinking and behaving.

Restorative Justice is commonly known as a theory of criminal justice that focuses on crime as an act against another individual or community rather than the state. The victim plays a major role in the process and may receive some type of restitution from the offender. Today, however, "Restorative justice is a broad term which encompasses a growing social movement to institutionalize peaceful approaches to harm, problem-solving and violations of legal and human rights. These range from international peacemaking tribunals such as the South Africa Truth and Reconciliation Commission to innovations within the criminal justice system, schools, social services and communities. Rather than privileging the law, professionals and the state, restorative resolutions engage those who are harmed, wrongdoers and their affected communities in search of solutions that promote repair, reconciliation and the rebuilding of relationships. Restorative justice seeks to build partnerships to reestablish mutual responsibility for constructive responses to wrongdoing within our communities. Restorative approaches seek a balanced approach to the needs of the victim, wrongdoer and community through processes that preserve the safety and dignity of all. Illinois has adopted restorative justice in their juvenile justice system. This is the first thing a person must understand who practices criminal thinking and behaving.

There is no “real” restorative justice in the Amity curriculum. The curriculum is about inmates getting in touch with their feelings and how those feelings affect their relationships. This curriculum is basically created by criminals for criminals. What do you think it will be about? With this mindset, the inmate is led to believe it is all about them and not their victim. Victim empathy should come first. Victim empathy cannot be last, because the victim was last in the assault or crime. If there is no victim empathy first, there is no restorative justice. In addition, this curriculum lends itself to good data for program longevity. If a person’s negative behavior is not challenged, the person will have the tendency to give a “good” report to the system that condones and supports the behavior. This is how the “Sheridan Project” data is manipulated.

A “real” addictions counselor would constantly have problems with an inmate in lifestyle change if the inmate thinks it is all about them. The selfish attitudes that led to criminal thinking and behaving remain because there is no restorative justice. The reason some counselors at Sheridan may not have problems with inmates is because they are not “real” counselors. They may have some “book” sense about addictions but they have no experiences with “real” addicts. This is going to be common because of ones cultural identity. This is not a bad thing. One only knows what one knows. If one has not been exposed to a cultural issue, they will not know the cultural issue. Regarding criminal thinking and behaving, you know it best if you have lived it.

While I was at Sheridan and under the WestCare regime, the counselors being hired are what they call “career” change employees. These employees have no clue to what “real” addiction counseling is all about. WestCare hires the people mentioned above in the “job security” section of this essay. They put them with the inmates. Then they train them in the Amity curriculum. Many of the “new” employees are scared out of their minds. Therefore, the inmates act out in ways where their selfishness continues to promote their criminal thinking and behaving.

If the Amity curriculum does not have restorative justice, when does restoration appear? If WestCare contractual obligations with the State of Illinois are to provide counseling with professional addiction counselors how does this happen if they are not hiring professional counselors?

The Second Chance Act of 2007 (The Act) solves the WestCare employment problem, but they fail to utilize it. It also solves IDOC’s problem with giving clearance to professional addictions counselors. The Act was signed into law on April 9, 2008 by President George W. Bush. It is a piece of legislation that should be enforced and implemented. You do not have to vote on it. It is there. The Act is a modest, commonsense response to the increasing number of people who return to their communities from prison and jail. The Act ensures the transition people make from prison or jail to the community is safe and successful. The Act produces people like me, who have made a safe and successful transition from a life of criminal thinking and behaving to achievements that far exceed the norms of restorative justice and victim empathy. The Act provides a solution to the reduction in recidivism.

Many of the professional counselors in substance abuse and alcohol are previous addicts, who may have been incarcerated or have members of their families who were addicted to drugs, alcohol or incarcerated. The Illinois Department of Corrections (IDOC) does not give clearance to those professional counselors. This may be WestCare’s dilemma. WestCare’s hands could be tied by the administration of IDOC. This in no way negates WestCare from having a curriculum that reflects restorative justice and victim empathy. If they claim to have it, the curriculum should illustrate and demonstrate “clear” evidence of it. This “clear” evidence should also be illustrated and demonstrated in inmate instruction by the counselors.

On May 19, 2008 at St. Leonard’s House honoring some recent parolees from his Sheridan Project, Governor Rod R. Blagojevich announced historic reductions in repeat crimes by ex-offenders and a slower rate of growth in the state's prison population. Joined by law enforcement officials, community leaders, faith-based leaders and state officials, Governor Blagojevich announced that statewide reforms have led to historic reductions in crimes by former offenders and significant savings for taxpayers. An intensive effort launched by the Governor in fiscal year 2004 to provide incarcerated offenders and parolees with access to education, job training, substance abuse treatment and counseling has led to the lowest conviction rate among parolees in state history, a 23% reduction in arrests among the general parolee population, and a 40% reduction in repeat incarceration among parolees with substance abuse histories who graduated from the Sheridan Drug and Reentry Program (The Sheridan Project). The drop in recidivism has saved the State an estimated $64 million in incarceration costs since 2004. The data to produce these numbers may have been manipulated.

In addition, IDOC Director Roger E. Walker Jr. stated “I was very proud to have my department helping to lead this process. Until we began to implement the Governor's plan, we were only experiencing increases in prison admissions and recidivism….” Deanne Benos, Assistant Director of IDOC, offered this statement “Ultimately, this is an issue about public safety and communities. We have made tremendous progress in driving down recidivism rates among our parole population in recent years….” With the notion of job security as mentioned above, what makes Governor Blagojevich, Mr. Walker and Ms. Benos believe IDOC personnel will buy into reducing recidivism? It is not going to happen. Not with the present system IDOC has in place, as illustrated in my other writings. Reducing recidivism will mean a loss in employment. The people who auctioned off their land for job security are not trying to reduce recidivism.

If Governor Blagojevich, IDOC Director Walker and IDOC Assistant Director Ms. Benos statements are true, then why did they condone and enforce Warden Michael Rothwell’s locking me out of Sheridan Correctional Center? Why are they condoning and enforcing WestCare Foundation, Inc. decision to terminate my employment because of this lockout, as WestCare has stated in their termination letter to me? It took 4 requests for me to become a supervisor with WestCare. I filed many grievances with WestCare about this supervisory issue, which were ignored. There is no staff working with WestCare at Sheridan Correctional Center who has the academic standing I have. There is no staff working with WestCare at Sheridan Correctional Center who has the experiences I have academically, professionally and socially. It is my belief WestCare terminated my services with this 3^rd illegal lockout to avoid having to promote me to a higher status within the system, along with tenets of race, age and sex disparities and indifferent treatment by both IDOC and WestCare.

I am an expert, practicing restorative justice and victim empathy daily. I was incarcerated in January of 1992 for drug related criminal activity. I did not have a G.E.D. when I was incarcerated. By the time I was released in December of 1994 I had started my Bachelor degree program at Roosevelt University. In September of 1997 I received my Bachelor degree from Roosevelt University in Social Science. In September of 1999 I received my Master degree from Roosevelt University in Community Counseling. I am presently a PhD candidate at Walden University. I will receive my PhD in Human Services with a focus on Social Policy Analysis and Planning in the fall of 2008. I have been increasing my academic standing for the last 16 years. My Curriculum Vitae illustrates and demonstrates my achievements academically, socially and empathetically. Do I meet the criteria to which Governor Blagojevich, Roger Walker and Deanne Benos offer as successful reentry and reduction in recidivism? I am the Second Chance Act of 2007. If WestCare and Amity are promoting restorative justice and victim empathy, where is mine?

On another note but which may have similarities to the subject matter here: The Illinois prison systems or “captivity chambers” are not built in communities where crime occurs. For example, there are many vacant lots in the city of Chicago where a prison system may stimulate the economy of that area and would act as a “revitalization stimulus” to offset criminal thinking and behaving. One such area is the Honorable Congressman Danny K. Davis’ 7^th Congressional District, where the statistics suggest a majority of inmates being released on parole from the Illinois Department of Corrections are being paroled to the 7^th Congressional District.

This is another story in the “naked” city. I will write later about this dilemma.

Re:       Nance v Westcare Foundation, Inc., Control No. 090714051

            Nance v State of Illinois Department of Corrections, Control No. 090714051

Mr. Roeser:

On July 17, 2008 I received correspondence from the Illinois Department of Human Rights stating “The United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and the Illinois Department of Human Rights (Department) are parties to a cooperative agreement. Under this agreement, when you filed your charge of discrimination with the EEOC it was automatically filed with the Department. The Department is keeping a copy of your EEOC charge on file to preserve jurisdiction under Illinois law. This letter is to inform you that you may proceed with your charge at the Department. This does not affect the processing of your charge at EEOC. If you wish to proceed with the Department, you must notify the Department in writing of your decision, either by mail or in person, within 35 days of receipt of this letter. Please include the Control Number indicated above on the letter you send to the Department regarding this charge…As stated above, this letter does not affect the processing of your charge at the EEOC, and does not apply to any settlement of this charge the parties have made with the EEOC.”

On or about July 21, 2008 I will submit this letter/correspondence requesting to proceed with my charge at the Department, as long as it does not negate the processing or jurisdiction of EEOC to prosecute and/or litigate my charges against Westcare Foundation, Inc. and the Illinois Department of Corrections. This request embraces the cooperative agreement with the Department and EEOC, preserving jurisdiction for both the Department and EEOC.

Respectfully submitted,

Fred L Nance Jr., ABD, MA, CADC, NCRS

cc: