Nov. 2, 2011 Budget Departmental Budget Meetings

Chicago Board of Election Comissioners; Cook County Board of Commissioners; Independent Inspector General

Chicago Board of Election Commissioners

Under the proposed budget, this Election Board, which has jurisdiction over all elections within the City of Chicago, will receive $17.4 million from the County.  This covers only 4 employees: the Chairman and 2 Election Commissioners, plus the Executive Director.  In addition, the County pays the fees for election judges and other related expenses as set forth in the statute which created the Board.  The rest of the expenses for conducting elections in 2012 (the primary and general elections), including the salaries and benefits for all other employees, will come from the City and amounts to another $14.2 million for a total of $31.6 million.  The City has about 1.4 million voters, about the same as the suburbs in Cook County, which fall under the election jurisdiction of the County Clerk.  Comm. Schneider noted that the Clerk was asking for $24.6 million, and wondered why the City’s Election Board needed $5 million more.  Chairman Landgdon Neal explained that the County Clerk is able to call upon services of other County Departments, while the Election Board had to provide its own IT, purchasing, and legal counsel, etc.  (Not asked or answered was why the Election Board couldn’t look to the City to provide some of the services the Clerk receives from the County.)

Chairman Neal said that in order to compare the 2012 budget, one should look at the last year in which there was a presidential election; namely, 2008.  The 2008 budget was 1% greater, and included $3 million from the Help America to Vote Act.  A chief reason for the reduction for 2012 is that the Election Board intends to reduce the number of precincts by 20%, which amounts to about 500 less precincts.  Because of Early Voting and “no-fault” Absentee Voting, there are fewer people actually voting on election day, which allows this consolidation without creating long lines.  Fewer precincts mean fewer election judges and fewer sites that have to be rented.

The Election Board is not proposing to add any new touch-screen equipment, and, in fact, the company that supplied what both the City and County have, no longer makes that model.

Chairman Neal touted the 2,000 high school and 2,000 college students who have been helping on election day, and he says that no other election authority in the country can boast so high a number of young people participating.

Unlike past years, none of the Commissioners raised the question about cost savings should the election duties of the Chicago Board of Elections and the County Clerk be merged under one entity.

Cook County Board of Commissioners

While this meeting supposedly was to cover the departments of the Secretary to the Board and each of the County Commissioners, only the budget for the Secretary to the Board was discussed.  Surprisingly, several of the Commissioners took this public meeting time to ask the Secretary, Matthew DeLeon, about any changes in procedures as a result of Mr. DeLeon and part of his staff moving to a different floor from where the Commissioners have their offices. 

The other main area of questions was directed to the two new positions for legal counsel and administrative assistant called for in the budget.  Many of the Commissioners seemed to have forgotten that they had voted to amend the 2011 budget to add these 3 positions.  This was done in the late hours of the day prior to final passage of the budget, which is why the Commissioners may have forgotten about it.  Another reason may be that the positions have still not been filled.  This is due to the fact that they would be exempt from the Shakman decree (which prohibits the hiring and firing based on politics) and so the County had to seek court approval for the positions before filling them.  There were some questions about the need for these positions and whether they could be eliminated in order to provide some money for salary increases for Commissioners staff whose salaries are proposed to be frozen from 2011.

Mr. DeLeon stated that new cameras for the Board room were being purchased that should allow Board and Committee meetings to be broadcast live on the County’s web site.  Commissioners Suffredin, Tobolski and Silvestri all suggested additional equipment, such as tote boards (for recording votes), screens and projection equipment so the audience in the room (and watching on Channel 900 or on the web) could better follow what is occurring.  This is an issue the League recently raised with Commissioners in letters to all and meetings with many of them.

Even though there was no discussion about the Commissioners’ budgets, which the President is recommending be kept at $360,000 for each (same as that in 2011), this observer noted that the President is also recommending that the number of FTEs for Commissioners Collins (1^st) Steele (2^nd), Murphy (6^th), and Gorman (17^th) be reduced to 1 (just themselves and no staff).  I verified with Commissioner Tobolski that this is not a typo in the budget book.  Expect this to change, but obviously, the President was sending a message.

Independent Inspector General

Patrick Blanchard, the Independent Inspector General, has one of the few areas where the number of employees and overall budget is proposed to be increased.  He explained that his office is dealing with an increase of about 10% in complaints, and he expects to add 2 more people to deal with Shakman decree-related oversight.  He stated that he expects that the Federal Court to find that the County and Forest Preserve District (which his office is also dealing with through an inter-governmental agreement) and Recorder of Deeds’ office to be in compliance with the Shakman Decree in 2012, in part because of the oversight to be provided by his office.  If so, the County will save significant money being paid to the Court-appointed compliance officers and other related costs.  (Note that the Sheriff’s office, the other area in the County that had been under court oversight, has been found to be in compliance by the Court earlier this year.)

Comm. Beavers questioned Mr. Blanchard about his investigation into the $90 million error in the County’s 2010 Annual Report.  Mr. Blanchard stated that there were numerous factors which resulted in the error and it was not appropriate to put the blame on a single person.  Comm. Beavers stated that he thought the President had done just that by firing two people, including the prior Comptroller.

-- reported by Priscilla Mims