John Jung
Peter Austin
Remember the article about Peter Austin, County Administrator, and John Jung, Human Resources Chairman, not complying with County Board Rules?
Well, it seems to be happening again..
After the May 23rd HR meeting both Jung and Austin refused to schedule an HR meeting that the committee requested.
Donna Kurtz
They “willfully and knowingly broke County Board rules by refusing to schedule the meeting on Jun 13th which would be their responsibility to adhere to the stated consensus of a majority of the committee,” according to Craig Wilcox comments at Jun 27th HR meeting.
Donna Kurtz supported this comments and said ,”
“We’ve always had a voice before…for this not to make it on the agenda…it doesn’t feel like my voice matters anymore.”
The response from Jung was telling and convoluted.
He claimed the Resolution would fire two people (those words do not exist in the Resolution) that in his opinion didn’t solve anything, that it didn’t make any sense to waste staff resources and not being a lawyer he couldn’t determine if it was legal.
That opinion seemed to echo what Chairman Jack Franks intimated when he surprisingly joined the Law & Government Committee meeting the day before.
Jack Franks
Franks came into the room upset that Austin and Scott Hartman were still in the committee meeting.
Upon asking what was going on, Franks got an earful from the committee members, and decided to engage them during the publicly recorded meeting.
He claimed to have legal opinions that he is comfortable with, and said he wouldn’t call a meeting for an illegal issue.
What was he implying?
Did he acknowledge having received legal opinions from outside sources, separate from the States Attorney?
If so, were they taxpayer funded opinions?
Back to the “illegal” remark.
What was remotely illegal about the HR committee asking for a meeting for Jun 13th to discuss a Resolution?
County Board rules are pretty explicit about how to call for committee meetings, so that couldn’t be it.
Probably, it was the content of the Resolution itself.
So fast forward back to the Jun 27th HR meeting, where the committee quite clearly asked for a Stat’es Attorney opinion about whether their Resolution violated any laws.
Craig Wilcox drafted the request and forwarded it to Committee Chairman Jung and the County Administrator, among others.
Since then, neither has forwarded the request to the State’s Attorney…as required by Board Rules.
Why won’t Jung fulfill the duties of bring Chairman of the Human Resources Committee?
Is Austin in breach of his contract and the County Administrator Ordinance, or at least minimally his ethical standards under International City/County Management Association, when he blatantly disregards the county board members, to whom he responsible?
The County Board continues to have its own rules thrown in the trash and ignored.
Will members ever stand up for the rights their elections conferred on them?
Get an editor, Cal, because when it comes to clarity, actionable information or scope – you missed all three.
Your thesis at the end of the article played like the tag line at the end of an episode of Batman with Adam West. See below with sentences you wrote:
“What was Batman implying?”
“Why won’t Robin fulfill the duties of bring Chairman of the Human Resources Committee?
“Will Comissioner Gordon stand up for the rights their elections conferred on them?”
Find out next time on “Cal Skinner pointless posts.”
Kudos to those committee members who seek to have the underlying issue resolved. From one taxpayer to another, your actions are well noted.
Now, to the other issue.
When the second referenda to elect the county board chair at large was orchestrated… the board was warned this elected position would have horrible consequences for the voting public.
Examples abound and are playing out before our very eyes.
The antics of the chairman and select county board members is beyond definition.
Does Roberts Rules of Order address board members being denied the scheduling of a meeting?
Can the board members add an agenda item to another meeting to address the issue?
Have the board members attempting to schedule the meeting consulted with the County State’s Attorney’s office on the matter (the County State’s Attorney’s office provides Parliamentarian services to county board members).
Remember, County Board Chair Jack Franks hired his own outside counsel for Parliamentarian services.
It turned out the political action committee (PAC) supporting Mr. Franks’ campaign to become county board chair reported a contribution from that law firm one day prior to the November 8, 2016 election.
Also remember Jack Franks operated under and observed for the the last 18 years the methods used by House Speaker Michael Madigan, who has arguably the most control of any State House in the United States.
Some people put more weight on political power and using that power to gain political advantage.
Others put more weight on a fair and just process.
When you make the donkey the Ringmaster it’s hard to complain when he craps everywhere.
The disenfranchised board members have two recourses in this matter.
The first recourse lies with the electorate and this will be happening soon.
Primary election season is almost upon us.
The second recourse lies with the judicial system.
This recourse may prove to be expensive but it also may prove to be necessary and the board members concerned should prepare themselves for this eventually.
Doing nothing in the face of tyranny is never an option for free men.
I think there is other recourse.
The Board could resolve administrative adjudication of the alleged Code violations committed in the hiring of two workers by Chairman.
If Board Members FAIL to enforce County Code, they are subject to $200 per incident civil fines.
If the Chair refuses to include an agenda item on a resolution for administrative adjudication,
Members might have some protection against personal liability.
(55 ILCS 5/5-43005)
Sec. 5-43005. Applicability. This Division 5-43 applies only to the counties of Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake, McHenry, and Will.
(Source: P.A. 96-1386, eff. 7-29-10.)
(55 ILCS 5/5-43010)
Sec. 5-43010. Administrative adjudication of code and ordinance violations; definitions.
(a) Any county may provide by ordinance for a system of administrative adjudication of county code violations to the extent permitted by the Illinois Constitution.
(55 ILCS 5/5-1013) (from Ch. 34, par. 5-1013)
Sec. 5-1013. Neglect of duty. If any member of the county board of any county in this State shall wilfully neglect to perform any of the duties which are or shall be required of him by law, as a member of the county board, he shall, for every such offense, forfeit the sum of $200, to be recovered in a civil action.
(Source: P.A. 86-962.)
Now that’s a great quote, CP!
Courtesy of Kelly Liebmann research, here are some alleged County Code and Policy violations:
Fiscal Budget Policy:
R-200210-12-196 authorized a Countywide Budget Policy on vacant positions.
R-200305-12-113 Employee Wage and Compensation System
R-200802-12-058 Job Classification System
The Position Reclassification Budget Directive
The Salary Administration Policy including:
Position Analysis
Position Descriptions developed by the Human Resources Department
Mid-year New Position Requests must be approved by the County Board
Position Evaluation
Salary Structure Policies
I did not see anything in ILCS limiting the amount of times/number of litigants who might try to collect $200/per incident fines from Board Members.
(looks like 9 incidents x $200).
(55 ILCS 5/5-1013) (from Ch. 34, par. 5-1013)
Sec. 5-1013. Neglect of duty. If any member of the county board of any county in this State shall wilfully neglect to perform any of the duties which are or shall be required of him by law, as a member of the county board, he shall, for every such offense, forfeit the sum of $200, to be recovered in a civil action.
(Source: P.A. 86-962.)
Is this remedy eligible for Small Claims Court adjudication, for any taxpayer in McHenry County?
Citizens should call Il States Atty for advice on pursuing this civil matter, as I have done.
Our only self defense against elected officials who see fit to tax property at a rate which is approximately triple the national average property tax rate, in return for the same quality level of social service provision, and with the effect of destroying property values relative to property values across America (and Illinois, seems to be judicial review.
Wish I had an attorney.
CP, good one! Makes total sense to me!
CP, This could also be said for the wayward elephants! (RINOs)
Peter Austin needs to go.
A professional administrator does not get involved in politics.
He has violated the ICMA code of ethics by participating in a jaded hiring practice.
With Jung in charge of anything, expect it to fail in short order.
The man is reeks of rotten onions.
-But that’s a far more tolerable fetor than the foul stench of the County Board Chairman … a putrid odor that could gag a sewer rat.
Anyone listed to the 7/23 HR meeting?
At approx the 20 minute mark, Wilcox brings up a great suggestion to keep part time workers out of IMRF.
It was a great suggestion knocked down by career government worker Peter Austin and short term thinker Donna Kurtz.
Make positions 500 hours; interns can get 2 different internships which is the purpose of internships– to begin with–expand your portfolio and make new contacts.
Did you realize County employees can put an additional 10% of their income into IMRF on top of their regular 4.5%?
IMRF is guaranteeing them 7% interest on those contributions.
The only other retirement option the County offers is a 457 plan, which the HR director described as a bad option that is like an annuity.
Is it any wonder on 20% of county employees contribute to the 457 savings plan?
Which county board member will push for more savings options for County employees?