The Madison County Government Relations committee voted 3-2 in favor of a non-binding resolution to present an advisory question on the November ballot regarding whether retired employees and officials should be permitted to "double dip" in accumulating pension benefits.
Committee members Don Moore (R), Erica Harriss (R) and Dalton Gray (R) voted for the resolution. Committee members Nick Petrillo (D) and Michael (Doc) Holliday Sr. (D) voted against it.
Committee chairman Chris Guy (R) did not vote because he was not asked during roll call, he indicated, but Guy also said he will be voting in favor of the resolution when it is presented at the County Board meeting.
Guy stressed that the resolution is non-binding and gives taxpayers an opportunity to weigh in on a topic that many board members said has plagued the county.
The resolution was presented by Moore.
“We have a history of allowing this to happen in Madison County,” he said. “I think what we’re doing here today is bringing the taxpayer in on this.”
Petrillo expressed concern if a measure would eventually be put into place preventing county departments from bringing back “highly qualified” employees.
“I can’t see voting for this unless I see more evidence of why we should be considering this,” he said.
Board member Ray Wesley (R) responded that if something were to come from this resolution, it wouldn’t preclude the county from hiring a former employee with expertise. It would prevent employees from drawing both a pension and a salary from the county at the same time.
Board member Tom McRae noted that the resolution is referring to people with “lucrative positions” drawing pensions and salaries. He added that IMRF has seen a need to address the issue and passed a law effective in January 2021 that will provide some double dipping restrictions.
While double dipping may be legal, Harriss questioned its ethics.
“It’s legal, but is it ethical?” she asked.
“At what point have we enabled public servants to become a super lucrative position?
“We want to pay people appropriately .... but also, we are trusted with taxpayer dollars. At what point do we say this isn’t ok?” she added.
Major Jeff Connor with the Sheriff’s Department expressed concern that the board is “opening up Pandora’s Box.”
He questioned how far the issue could be extended, asking if it applies to people in the military, people coming in with a 401K, or people working as contractors with private corporations doing business with the county.
Guy said he raised good questions, but reiterated that this is a non-binding resolution presenting the issue to taxpayers.
“I think we have a choice of just letting things stay status quo … or giving the people a voice, and let’s hear what they say about this,” Moore said.
During the meeting, Holliday asked if the resolution was presented in response to the recent contract between retired Captain Eric Decker and the Sheriff’s Department, which went into effect July 1.
Guy responded that Madison County has a history of double dipping, and the resolution is referring to those situations in general.
Several committee members referred to Decker’s contract as the “elephant in the room,” but disputed that it is the reason the resolution is being presented.
The contract between Decker’s company, Decker Analytics, and the Sheriff’s Department was implemented after Decker retired in June. Decker Analytics is acting as a consultant for $114,000 per year.
Decker Analytics will be responsible for handling tasks such as grants, budgetary issues, use of technology in the workplace, human resources issues, and litigation issues, among other responsibilities, Connor previously explained.
The contract had originally been included on the Public Safety Committee agenda, but was tabled in June so committee members had more time to discuss the request.
At the July meeting, Connor said the approval of the special services agreement was not required from the committee.
Committee member Ray Wesley (R) asked how the situation changed from seeking approval to not needing approval for the contract.
Connor said the department did some research and learned that by “state law, county ordinance, and the Attorney General’s ordinance,” professional services agreements do not require county approval.
During the July 8 Finance and Government Operations meeting, committee chair Moore said he would like the State’s Attorney to look into the situation to see if he agrees that the contract does not need approval.
McRae asked during the meeting how the contract was negotiated and whether or not the Sheriff’s Department accepted bids.
Someone responded that the County Ordinance Purchase Policy does not require bids for professional services.
McRae responded that the contract needs “additional scrutiny” because Decker will receive a “lucrative” pension as well as a $114,000 no-bid contract.
“The optics of that are terrible, and I think people are tired of it,” he said.
“Even if it doesn’t have to be bid, it should be bid,” he added.
Board member Mick Madison (R) agreed. He reiterated that he has the greatest respect for good law enforcement, but said this situation is about management.
“I wouldn’t want to see this anywhere in government,” he said.
“This makes it look like the good ‘ol boys club is alive and well in Madison County,” he added. “This is exactly the kind of thing that infuriates taxpayers.”
McRae said the issue was originally on the agenda for the committee to discuss but was pulled.
Madison suggested it was pulled “because they don’t want to discuss it in public.”
“Well I do want to discuss it in public,” he said.
He added that the county board has given the Sheriff’s Department roughly $2.8 million in additional funds in the past four years.
“That’s how much we respect the Sheriff’s Department. The blatant lack of respect that we’ve received on this issue and the comp time issue, it just blows my mind,” he said.
Connor responded that the contract would save taxpayers money. He said the cost to keep Decker was approximately $165,000 per year, but the contract is for $114,000 per year.
Committee member David Michael (R) asked if the $165,000 was Decker’s actual salary.
Connor explained that his salary was in the low $100,000s. After adding pension payments and benefits, the county was paying approximately $165,000.
Michael said he didn’t understand why Decker was receiving a 10 percent salary increase. He explained that the county was paying in the low $100,000s for Decker to work 40-50 hours exclusively for the county. Now the county is paying $114,000 with the possibility that his attention will be divided among other clients.