A couple of reasonable ideas
Friday, Sep 12, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* This sounds like a pretty reasonable idea from Sheila Simon…
Simon said that like her opponent she sees value in consolidation of the comptroller and treasurer’s offices. However, she said, there’s no reason to wait to start saving money, and advocates for combining some functions of the two offices.
That would simply take an intergovernmental agreement, she said. She likened it to how she currently shares certain functions with the governor’s office in her role as lieutenant governor.
“There’s no reason why the treasurer and the comptroller can’t do the same,” she said.
She may very well be right. Perhaps we should ask the two treasurer candidates how they feel about bypassing the constitutional issue by using intergovernmental agreements. As long as Speaker Madigan is running the House, consolidation ain’t gonna happen.
* And I’m pretty sure she’s right about this…
On the area of government consolidation, Simon acknowledged that Illinois is flush with local government entities but said consolidation is sometimes, but not always, the answer. She said intergovernmental agreements to share resources are also an effective way to save money.
Without a doubt, some consolidation can save taxpayers some money, but the services will still need to be provided.
* Meanwhile, this is behind a subscriber firewall, but nobody else has covered it so I thought you might wanna know. From the Illinois Observer…
Comptroller Judy Baar Topinka handed a no-bid contract to a former Republican Party chairman this year.
Topinka’s office paid Patrick Brady and his new lobbyist firm, Next Generation Public Affairs, $40,000 from March to June 2014 to liaison with Illinois law enforcement agencies, according to documents secured through a Freedom of Information Act request by Lt. Governor Sheila Simon’s comptroller campaign.
Brady is to form “strategic partnerships with municipal, county and state law enforcement agencies,” the contract states.
“Steering a huge no-bid contract to a Republican lobbyist who helped you get elected is exactly the type of back-scratching politics that Illinois cannot afford,” said Dave Mellet, Simon’s campaign manager.
Huge? Not so much. And I don’t think Brady played much of a role in JBT’s last election, but a hit is a hit.
- Easy - Friday, Sep 12, 14 @ 10:53 am:
You could ask Mike frerichs what he thinks, but then you’ll have to wait for him to walk it back and then reissue a statement that contradicts what he said in the first place.
- lake county democrat - Friday, Sep 12, 14 @ 11:05 am:
To reformers, the size of JBT’s giveaway isn’t very important. It’s like the length of an adulterous affair: the point is its existence.
- Anonymous - Friday, Sep 12, 14 @ 11:07 am:
“She likened it to how she currently shares certain functions with the governor’s office in her role as lieutenant governor.”
That must be a huge drain on resources in the governor’s office.
- walker - Friday, Sep 12, 14 @ 11:29 am:
Using her relationship with Quinn is hardly a strong example.
Good idea, though.
- Just Observing - Friday, Sep 12, 14 @ 11:56 am:
Why does the state Comptroller need to strengthen relationships with law enforcement agencies?
- The Captain - Friday, Sep 12, 14 @ 12:04 pm:
In 2006 Topinka was hit with hiring the previous executive director of the Illinois Republican Party (Topinka had been the chairwoman the previous cycle) via no bid contract. Seems to be a pattern.
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Friday, Sep 12, 14 @ 12:19 pm:
=== Huge? Not so much. And I don’t think Brady played much of a role in JBT’s last election, but a hit is a hit ===
It’s $10K a month Rich. If them’s small taters, I want a helping.
- Anonymoiis - Friday, Sep 12, 14 @ 12:41 pm:
This will for sure put Sheila over top to win. And by win, I mean win the Makanda precinct.
- A guy... - Friday, Sep 12, 14 @ 1:15 pm:
So JBT picked a guy with little or no clout. Assuming he was qualified for the task. If he wasn’t, it’s news. If he was, it isn’t. IGAs are a go idea. Their inherent problem is their endurance when government bodies change. Still, they should always be pursued if there’s a savings and a service improvement.
- Connect the dots - Friday, Sep 12, 14 @ 1:23 pm:
Usually I don’t mind crazy Aunt Judy, but handing a big government no bid contract to a previous ILGOP Chairman jus stinks of rank corruption to me.
I could live with it if it was a transparent bidding process.
- Not it - Friday, Sep 12, 14 @ 1:23 pm:
If the Constitution says the office has to be managed a certain way, I don’t think you ca just simply dismiss the Constitution with a simple intergovernmental agreement. She should bring up her support for the merger with the Speaker instead of creating a weak press pop.
- Demoralized - Friday, Sep 12, 14 @ 1:26 pm:
@Not it:
Intergovernmental agreements are done all the time between governmental entities. The law allows for them. And the Constitution and the law tells the offices what functions they must do. It’s up to them on how they accomplish those functions. As long as they do it within the bounds of the law (and intergovernmental agreements are within those bounds) then they could make some sort of arrangement.
- Arizona Bob - Friday, Sep 12, 14 @ 3:09 pm:
She’s absolutely right about sharing resources even if you don’t consolidate governments. I once spoke out at a small school district board meeting as they were claiming they needed to raise taxes through a referendum and bond sales. I asked if they had been working with their neighboring districts to share administration, maintenance, curriculum, business office and procurement resources in a cooperative arrangement. They could easily have gotten by with a single business director for the three districts, a single person in charge of common curriculum development, and sharing their manitenance manager, repair staff, and equipment.
You’d think I’d just pinched their mother. They stammered and talked about how great their staff were, and they couldn’t do without them, yada yada yada.
Bottom line is that their friends and relatives had these jobs, and they weren’t about to get efficiency at the cost of patronage and cronyism. The state agencies are the same way.
One thing in Rauner’s favor is that he at least KNOWS how to make an organization more efficient and productive, and knows the people to make it happen. Quinn has no interest in that. Rauner may turn out to be no better than Quinn as Gov, but at least he’s competent to get this done IF HE WANTS TO!