Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: It’s just a bill
Next Post: After backlash, Rep. Slaughter says he won’t move controversial traffic stop bill, but wants conversation
Posted in:
* ABC7…
Taxpayers foot bill for relocating migrants who want to leave Chicago
It’s the secret side of Chicago’s migrant crisis.
Some migrants who arrive here don’t want to stay.
More than 35,000 migrants have been sent to Chicago since 2022, mostly from Texas. The question is, who pays for them to leave? […]
According to the Illinois Department of Human Services, migrant travel costs in the Chicago area, including people leaving by bus, plane and train, total more than $775,000. And when additional travel related expenses such as rideshares are factored in, it’s almost $850,000 of taxpayer money that has been spent on migrants moving out of Chicago.
Seems to me, if migrants want to leave for another state, it makes fiscal sense to help them get there. A one-way ticket is a whole lot cheaper than shelter, food and medical care. Not to mention that it’s the right thing to do.
The state’s tab so far is $638 million. That means $850,000 would be 0.13 percent of the total. Again, this makes fiscal sense.
* This also isn’t a “secret.” From a November 2023 press release…
The State is deploying targeted additional funding through a data-driven approach that will address these bottlenecks in all stages of the current asylum seeker response. This includes:
1. WELCOME: $30 million to stand up a large intake center to centrally welcome and comprehensively coordinate new arrivals, prioritizing onward movement. This investment will ensure both a more integrated approach across state, county, city, and community-based organizations but will also ensure better support for those coming to Chicago who are seeking another final destination, or who have sponsors in Illinois and don’t require shelter, thereby better maintaining shelter capacity as a whole. With this approach, data indicates the number of new arrivals requiring shelter can be reduced by 10%.
And this is from the governor’s remarks the same day…
In order to address these backlogs and get people off of the streets as we head into winter, the State of Illinois will invest an additional $160 million in IDHS funding to improve every stage of the asylum seeker resettlement journey.
First – Welcome. A portion of new arrivals don’t need shelter as they have friends or family members here in Illinois or do not have Illinois as their final destination. Unfortunately, these individuals are not always identified on the front end and often end up in shelters where they take up capacity and resources before they can continue along on their journey.
To address this, we’re going to invest $30 million toward establishing a large intake center — growing our capacity to centrally welcome and comprehensively coordinate new arrivals needs, including prioritizing onward movement. This investment will ensure both a more integrated approach across State, County, City and CBO providers but also more immediately divert new arrivals from shelters to their final destination, thereby better maintaining our shelter capacity.
The State is also funding a New Life team to deploy to the bus landing zone to ensure every new arrival is supported in a choice to seek alternate arrangements outside the City shelter system. With this approach, we expect to reduce the number of people who need to enter shelters by 10 percent.
* Back to ABC7…
State officials say 4,327 migrants have now come and gone. That is more than 10% of the migrants sent to Chicago over the last year and a half.
So, maybe it’s working? I dunno.
* ABC7 also reports that many those who are leaving are heading to New York, Florida and Georgia. “And some are going back to Texas.”
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Jan 31, 24 @ 11:06 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: It’s just a bill
Next Post: After backlash, Rep. Slaughter says he won’t move controversial traffic stop bill, but wants conversation
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
I mean… the idea that Texas is busing people to Chicago that don’t want to be there seems like it reinforces that idea that a human trafficking analogy is sensible.
Comment by TJ Wednesday, Jan 31, 24 @ 11:34 am
-A one-way ticket is a whole lot cheaper than shelter, food and medical care. -
Plus education, plus legal aid, plus daycare, plus after school programs, plus English language classes.
Comment by Steve Wednesday, Jan 31, 24 @ 11:35 am
Back in the 70s at least some Township assistance offices in Illinois would give people a bus ticket to go back to where they came from.
Comment by Bigtwich Wednesday, Jan 31, 24 @ 11:41 am
Traditionally, immigration is good for the economy. Migrants bring labor and start businesses. Is there a reason we don’t expect migrants to benefit chicago in the medium-long term?
Comment by Mountain Goat Wednesday, Jan 31, 24 @ 11:47 am
-A one-way ticket is a whole lot cheaper than shelter, food and medical care. -
Exactly right. And the reason Texas is willing to charter expensive flights to send the migrants elsewhere.
Comment by Yep Wednesday, Jan 31, 24 @ 11:56 am
Amybody doing the per cspita math on this rolling story. Seems costs are pricey. Which probably means vendors are gettin’fat
Comment by Annonin' Wednesday, Jan 31, 24 @ 12:15 pm
just gotta be careful. was it Jeremiah Joyce back in the day who suggested offering welfare recipients travel to elsewhere? and that comment got lots of clap back.
Comment by Amalia Wednesday, Jan 31, 24 @ 12:23 pm
===suggested offering welfare recipients travel ===
That’s completely different than this. Completely.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Jan 31, 24 @ 12:29 pm
Rich, I agree it is different. but perceptions get loud fast. the devil is in the details. the state running it would have the confidence necessary. but just one migrant claiming forced to leave or activists claiming such is something to prepare for.
Comment by Amalia Wednesday, Jan 31, 24 @ 12:40 pm
Most of the discussion I’ve seen seems to assume that this influx of refugees is a one-off thing, and eventually this will settle down. Given what we know about climate change and its expected impact on the poorest parts of the world, is this a reasonable assumption? It seems like we should be capacity-building now (E.g., buying or building brick-and-mortar facilities), not overinvesting in stopgap measures that haven’t worked terribly well. I know that’s an expensive proposition for a tight budget, but I’m not sure that we have a choice long term.
Comment by Just thinking Wednesday, Jan 31, 24 @ 1:00 pm
“I’m not sure that we have a choice long term” Eventually IL will be forced to not allow migrants - math in a broke state says so.
Comment by Nothing Wednesday, Jan 31, 24 @ 1:02 pm
TJ, people can change their minds, circumstances can change. People can take the first ticket offered to them and then keep working on getting somewhere different.
At a minimum you have to prove Texas is deceiving or coercing people, and nobody’s come anywhere close. Give the “human trafficking” line a rest.
Comment by Perrid Wednesday, Jan 31, 24 @ 1:03 pm
=== I’m not sure that we have a choice long term” Eventually IL will be forced to not allow migrants - math in a broke state says so.===
How can Illinois stop people legally allowed to be here?
Math has nothing to do with it.
Comment by Da big bad wolf Wednesday, Jan 31, 24 @ 1:49 pm
=Traditionally, immigration is good for the economy. Migrants bring labor and start businesses. Is there a reason we don’t expect migrants to benefit chicago in the medium-long term?=
This all day.
=math in a broke state says so.=
Illinois is not broke, and see the comment quoted above. Migrants that settle here will make Illinois stronger financially.
Comment by JS Mill Wednesday, Jan 31, 24 @ 2:03 pm
==Illinois is not broke==
The Civic Committee keeps saying Illinois is broke and can’t pay for teacher pensions after they’ve served children and their communities for 35 years.
Go figure. Priorities?
Comment by A Wednesday, Jan 31, 24 @ 2:39 pm
===The Civic Committee keeps saying Illinois is broke and can’t pay for teacher pensions after they’ve served children and their communities for 35 years===
Link?
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Jan 31, 24 @ 2:40 pm
Abbott sends people here rapidly after they arrive in Texas. They do no assessment. If an individual or family gets here and articulates a specific desire to wind up elsewhere, for a reason that makes sense (which is usually that they have friends or family in another place and no ties to Chicago) then both morally and for cost reasons we should pay for that travel. Of course we shouldn’t be pressuring anyone to go elsewhere and if someone’s reason for wanting to go to LA is “well, LA sounds like a cool place,” that is likely not enough reason to send them there into a situation of no resources just in another city.
Comment by Jeremy Rosen Wednesday, Jan 31, 24 @ 3:38 pm
“Traditionally, immigration is good for the economy. Migrants bring labor and start businesses. Is there a reason we don’t expect migrants to benefit chicago in the medium-long term?”
In the medium to long term, yes immigration grows the economy, but requires really decades. If you have a young couple (in their 20s) with no english skills, they can contribute, but really they will needs lots of assistance for years. Housing, medical, child care, etc. Then the children grow up here they are where the growth, new businesses etc come from. The parents are often “low-end” labor>
but generally you are correct. But can the Chicago or Illinois budget keep this up for 10 years? 5?
look at the research around immigration and you can see a net positive. BUT it takes longer to reach that positive than just a year or two in any culture/country (this assumes that the migrants both assimilate, Studies out of France and some parts of germany are showing a broken trend in some of their immigrant areas over the last 10 -15 years.
Comment by Ron - In Texas Wednesday, Jan 31, 24 @ 3:40 pm