Jim Tobin, President of Taxpayers United for America, appeared on KMOX Newsradio 1120 to discuss Illinois Tollway retirees’ pension payments. To listen, click on the audio player below.
[audio:https://www.taxpayersunitedofamerica.org/wp-content/uploads/il-tollway-pensions.mp3|titles=Jim Tobin on KMOX Newsradio 1120]
Jim Tobin, President of Taxpayers United of America, was quoted in a Daily Herald article on 4th of July federal grants.
Algonquin police received $8,617 in federal grants last year to beef up patrols for drunken drivers and seat belt scofflaws in the two weeks leading up to the Fourth of July holiday.
Despite the extra effort, the additional patrols netted no impaired drivers — and they weren’t the only department to come up empty.
Seven other suburban law enforcement agencies — Cook County sheriff’s, Crystal Lake, Crystal Lake Park District, Elk Grove Village, Kildeer, West Chicago and West Dundee — received a combined $13,046 for increased enforcement that resulted in no drunken driving arrests.
Twenty-eight of the 41 suburban police agencies receiving funds also fell short of seat belt ticketing goals during the same pre-Fourth of July period, according to the Illinois Department of Transportation, which hands out the federal funds.
Despite the lackluster results, those agencies were still eligible to receive more grant funds this year, IDOT officials said.
“That doesn’t mean that the amount requested wasn’t reduced,” said Guy Tridgell, an IDOT spokesman. “The chief reason for that would be past performance.”
Tridgell said the Sustained Traffic Enforcement Program grants funded by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration are parsed out to police agencies in 23 counties that are home to 85 percent of the state’s population and where two-thirds of traffic fatalities occur.
IDOT’s specifications suggest police use the funds to make one DUI arrest for every 10 hours of patrol and write occupant-restraint violations amounting to 30 percent of all citations.
In all, 33 of the 41 suburban agencies studied did combine to make 151 drunken-driving arrests during last year’s Fourth of July enforcement period.
Yet, government accountability groups say the program doesn’t adequately track results and requires minimal reporting on spending.
The legal outcome of the drunken driving arrests is unknown. Neither the state nor federal government requires police departments to follow those cases through the court system for reporting purposes, and many police officials said they don’t track that information independently. Few departments have goals for the officers working the extra shifts beyond the state’s recommendations.
“It’s certainly an admirable goal to reduce the number of DUIs. However, we always need to be looking at taxpayer-funded programs to make sure they’re actually functioning as they’re intended,” said David From, Illinois state director at Americans for Prosperity, a Virginia-based government-spending watchdog organization. “It’s important to determine if these programs are being funded through inertia rather than producing real results.”
Sgt. Jeff Sutrick oversees Algonquin’s traffic grant program. He said the department requested just $5,100 for its Fourth of July enforcement campaign this year, partly because of last year’s results.
“We’ve been a lot more successful in our seat belt enforcement than with DUI,” Sutrick said. “Other departments can utilize the funds, then. It also depends on how many hours we think we can fill with our staffing.”
The grants pay the overtime costs to patrol officers who volunteer to work the additional shifts. The shifts generally run Thursdays through Sundays from 11 p.m. to 3 a.m. Sutrick noted that the grants don’t cover the costs associated with court appearances officers are required to make with many drunken driving arrests. These grant funds are generally available for major holidays like New Year’s and Fourth of July or national events associated with increased alcohol use like the Super Bowl and St. Patrick’s Day.
Records indicate most of the tickets issued during these increased enforcement periods are for other traffic offenses rather than impaired driving or seat belt violations, which are the focus of the campaigns. Last year during the Fourth of July period, 69 percent of the citations the 41 participating suburban agencies issued were for offenses other than drunken driving or seat belt violations, according to IDOT records.
Advocates for the grant program believe any effort to make the roads safe from drunken driving is a worthy endeavor.
“One way to look at these numbers is that once the word goes out that there’s increased patrols out there, maybe there’s less people drinking and driving,” said Rita Kreslin, deputy director of the Alliance Against Intoxicated Motorists. “When you talk to a crash victim, one crash from a drunk driver is one too many.”
But anti-tax groups say the federal government is making broad-based spending decisions with little input from taxpayers.
“If it’s such a problem, then the towns should hire more cops to hand out DUIs,” said Jim Tobin, president of Chicago-based Taxpayers United of America, a group that fights tax hike measures throughout the country. “Let voters decide locally if they want to fund this sort of thing.”
Jim Tobin, President of Taxpayers United of America, was quoted in the Chicago Tribune for the following article on a proposed inspector general for the suburbs.
A proposal to create an inspector general for the suburbs drew skeptical reactions Monday, as officeholders and taxpayer watchdogs questioned how the position would work and whether it’s necessary.
But the idea got a warm reception from Gov. Pat Quinn’s office.
The report by the University of Illinois at Chicago found more than 60 suburbs and more than 100 suburban public officials involved in public corruption over the past two decades, based on criminal convictions or apparent conflicts of interest.
A proposal to create an inspector general for the suburbs drew skeptical reactions Monday, as officeholders and taxpayer watchdogs questioned how the position would work and whether it’s necessary.But the idea got a warm reception from Gov. Pat Quinn’s office.
The report by the University of Illinois at Chicago found more than 60 suburbs and more than 100 suburban public officials involved in public corruption over the past two decades, based on criminal convictions or apparent conflicts of interest.
The proposal came from former Chicago Ald. Dick Simpson, who heads the UIC political science department and co-wrote the report. He said that while Chicago gets headlines for corruption, graft doesn’t stop at the city boundaries.
“This is not just one bad apple in the barrel,” he said. “This seems to be pervasive.”
Reactions to the idea of an inspector general were mixed, but it was met with derision by some conservative officials who said Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan should be doing the job already.
“We don’t need an inspector general,” Illinois Republic Party Chairman Pat Brady said. “We need an attorney general.”
Jim Tobin, president of Taxpayers United of America, called the proposal “a waste of taxpayer money” and said anyone who took the job would be indebted to whatever political party was in power.
Yet state Sen. Susan Garrett, a Lake Forest Democrat, who has successfully pushed for inspectors general for the Illinois Tollway, CTA and Metra, said such a position in the suburbs would provide needed oversight for hundreds of local bodies that now get overlooked.
“It makes so much sense to have an independent agency where no one is beholden to suburban officials to look out for the best interests of taxpayers,” Garrett said. “This is an idea worth doing.”
Spokesmen for House Speaker Michael Madigan and Senate President John Cullerton, both Democrats, said the legislative leaders would consider any legislation but questioned how such an office would be run or funded at a time when the state is deep in debt.
As proposed by Simpson, the inspector could be created by state lawmakers, by each county or by a consortium of suburbs, and funded by 0.1 percent of each suburb’s budget to fund an office budget of perhaps $1 million annually. He called it a small amount compared with the cost of corruption statewide, which he estimated at $500 million a year or more.
Former Chicago Inspector General David Hoffman endorsed the idea of an inspector general, as did Cook County Inspector General Patrick Blanchard, who has authority over countywide elected officials and departments but not municipalities, school districts or myriad other suburban offices.
The study counted about 1,200 separate taxing bodies in the Chicago region, including 540 in Cook County alone, which Blanchard said often operate with very little oversight.
The report identified six common patterns of corruption in the suburbs: officials with ties to organized crime; nepotism and patronage; police officers aiding criminals; kickbacks and bribes to public officials; large construction projects benefiting elected officials, their families and friends; and outright theft of public funds.
“This is not just one bad apple in the barrel,” he said. “This seems to be pervasive.”
Reactions to the idea of an inspector general were mixed, but it was met with derision by some conservative officials who said Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan should be doing the job already.
“We don’t need an inspector general,” Illinois Republic Party Chairman Pat Brady said. “We need an attorney general.”
Jim Tobin, president of Taxpayers United of America, called the proposal “a waste of taxpayer money” and said anyone who took the job would be indebted to whatever political party was in power.
Yet state Sen. Susan Garrett, a Lake Forest Democrat, who has successfully pushed for inspectors general for the Illinois Tollway, CTA and Metra, said such a position in the suburbs would provide needed oversight for hundreds of local bodies that now get overlooked.
“It makes so much sense to have an independent agency where no one is beholden to suburban officials to look out for the best interests of taxpayers,” Garrett said. “This is an idea worth doing.”
Spokesmen for House Speaker Michael Madigan and Senate President John Cullerton, both Democrats, said the legislative leaders would consider any legislation but questioned how such an office would be run or funded at a time when the state is deep in debt.
As proposed by Simpson, the inspector could be created by state lawmakers, by each county or by a consortium of suburbs, and funded by 0.1 percent of each suburb’s budget to fund an office budget of perhaps $1 million annually. He called it a small amount compared with the cost of corruption statewide, which he estimated at $500 million a year or more.
Former Chicago Inspector General David Hoffman endorsed the idea of an inspector general, as did Cook County Inspector General Patrick Blanchard, who has authority over countywide elected officials and departments but not municipalities, school districts or myriad other suburban offices.
The study counted about 1,200 separate taxing bodies in the Chicago region, including 540 in Cook County alone, which Blanchard said often operate with very little oversight.
The report identified six common patterns of corruption in the suburbs: officials with ties to organized crime; nepotism and patronage; police officers aiding criminals; kickbacks and bribes to public officials; large construction projects benefiting elected officials, their families and friends; and outright theft of public funds.
The study documented criminal convictions as reported by news media, as well as reports of what Simpson said were conflicts of interest.
As the most recent instance, Simpson cited a Tribune investigation this month that found the construction of a sports stadium in Bridgeview benefited political insiders while helping to nearly triple residents’ property tax bills.
Another infamous example was the 2001 guilty pleas of former Dixmoor Park District officials, who took bribes and increased the police force to more than 80 officers to guard a single tot lot.
While existing prosecutors’ offices could go after public corruption, Simpson said the U.S. attorney has bigger fish to fry in the city, while county state’s attorneys may be politically beholden to whatever party put them in power, be it Democrats in Cook County or Republicans in DuPage.
Simpson, who served on Lisa Madigan’s transition team, conceded the attorney general could and “should do much more” to prosecute public corruption, whether or not an inspector general is created.
Madigan’s office has argued that it does not have the authority to prosecute public corruption, as prosecutors do at the federal and county levels. In a statement to the Tribune, officials wrote that her office cannot convene a grand jury to investigate corruption, though it can ask local state’s attorneys to use their grand juries. The state attorney general’s office also doesn’t have investigative tools like the FBI and Internal Revenue Service, the statement said.
But the attorney general has worked to prosecute corruption when asked by a state’s attorney or when a state’s attorney has a conflict of interest.
Quinn’s representatives said in a prepared statement that they were “looking forward to reviewing the details of this proposal.”
“Strong ethics, oversight and anti-corruption measures are certainly important to the governor,” the statement read.
rmccoppin@tribune.com
As the most recent instance, Simpson cited a Tribune investigation this month that found the construction of a sports stadium in Bridgeview benefited political insiders while helping to nearly triple residents’ property tax bills.
Another infamous example was the 2001 guilty pleas of former Dixmoor Park District officials, who took bribes and increased the police force to more than 80 officers to guard a single tot lot.
While existing prosecutors’ offices could go after public corruption, Simpson said the U.S. attorney has bigger fish to fry in the city, while county state’s attorneys may be politically beholden to whatever party put them in power, be it Democrats in Cook County or Republicans in DuPage.
Simpson, who served on Lisa Madigan’s transition team, conceded the attorney general could and “should do much more” to prosecute public corruption, whether or not an inspector general is created.
Madigan’s office has argued that it does not have the authority to prosecute public corruption, as prosecutors do at the federal and county levels. In a statement to the Tribune, officials wrote that her office cannot convene a grand jury to investigate corruption, though it can ask local state’s attorneys to use their grand juries. The state attorney general’s office also doesn’t have investigative tools like the FBI and Internal Revenue Service, the statement said.
But the attorney general has worked to prosecute corruption when asked by a state’s attorney or when a state’s attorney has a conflict of interest.
Quinn’s representatives said in a prepared statement that they were “looking forward to reviewing the details of this proposal.”
“Strong ethics, oversight and anti-corruption measures are certainly important to the governor,” the statement read.
rmccoppin@tribune.com
