Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Pritzker provides a look ahead
Next Post: Inauguration open thread
Posted in:
* Mark Maxwell on JB Pritzker’s plan to personally supplement the salaries of 20 top staffers in his office…
While the disclosure adheres to a measure of transparency not seen in recent years, it also invited immediate criticism from government watchdog groups who raised a host of questions about a dangerous precedent they say could lead to greater risk of corruption, and the appearance of misplaced loyalties.
“If the law allows this, what’s to say the law doesn’t allow a different LLC — whose donors we’re not familiar with — to supplement the salaries of state employees,” asked Alisa Kaplan, the Policy Director at Reform for Illinois, a group that shines a spotlight on campaign finance and ethics in government.
“Do we want a system where companies or individuals can pay state employees on the side,” she asked.
Rachel Leven, Policy Manager for the Better Government Association, raised similar concerns.
“While it may have been good intentioned, this is unprecedented and therefore opens up a lot of procedural and ethical questions that we hope the incoming Governor’s staff and legislators will consider,” Leven said in an email. “For example, what if another private individual or entity wanted to fund state positions. Could a future governor create a private fund based on donations from other individuals? What are the rules that would govern this?”
Notice that they aren’t necessarily criticizing Pritzker’s specific plan. They’re worried about a slippery slope. Some commenters mentioned the Gift Ban Act last week, but gifts are only banned from “prohibited sources” and those sources do not appear to include the governor (click here for the statute).
And, despite the stated fears of some reformers, most state workers are currently allowed to earn outside income. Some of them are landlords, for instance. Or they have other side business, or weekend gigs, or night jobs or whatever. Should the state ban that income?
“Dark money” groups could pose a problem, of course, but that has nothing to do with what Pritzker is doing, since it’s all being fully disclosed and could happen no matter what Pritzker did.
State Rep. David McSweeney, R-Barrington Hills, said as long as the private dollars supplementing salaries for Pritzker’s top staff is all transparent, he doesn’t mind. He thinks Pritzker should cut the taxpayer cost and pay for more out of his own pocket, including to cover the bill passed in lame duck to increase department heads’ salaries by 15 percent.
“Depending on who you listen to, it’s up to a million dollars a year it could cost, maybe $700,000 on the low end, that’s like pocket change to Pritzker,” McSweeney said. “Why doesn’t he just say he won’t sign that bill and that he’ll pay for it himself.”
But paying those agency directors an extra stipend out of his own pocket would likely violate the state Constitution, as Hannah Meisel pointed out today…
Article V, Section 21 of the Illinois Constitution bans “officers of the Executive Branch” from receiving any other compensation for their services, which is generally interpreted to mean the state’s six constitutional officers — the governor, lieutenant governor, attorney general, secretary of state, comptroller and treasurer. But Section 9 of the executive article does refer to personnel who are nominated by the governor and confirmed by the Senate as “officers,” which by some interpretations would then ban them from receiving extra compensation. But Pritzker’s transition team stipulated that the governor would not offer the pay boost through his LLC to those who must be confirmed by the Senate.
* Brian Mackey asked Pritzker: “How can you assure the people of Illinois that your staff will be loyal to them and not to the man who is giving them private pay for public sector work?“…
Well each of them has agreed that they are working for the state and not for me. They are state employees. I’ve been very transparent about what we’re doing. I think that’s not been the case with everybody that served as governor. And it’s very important to me that that each one of them knows that they work for the taxpayers of the state.
Now, as you know with the combination of the new offshoring prohibition the that was passed last year because of Gov. Rauner using people from other agencies as part of his governor’s office, as well as the fact that salaries really have not been commensurate with the quality of the talent that I think we should have in the governor’s office, that’s why I set it up this way.
I didn’t want to cost the taxpayers more. In fact this cost the taxpayers less, because many people are being paid less from the state government. They’re actually going to get a smaller pension as a result of that, and I think this ends up being very good for the taxpayers.
And they are committed. They are taking their own sort-of oath that they work for the people of the state. […]
Look, I just chose some extraordinary people for whom — they’re (currently) making multiples of what they will be making even with the additional income that they’re getting. And they were willing to take that salary cut to come do the right thing for the state. But many of them have multiple children in college and they’ve got other commitments. And so I wanted to make it as fair as I could for them as well as for the taxpayers, and so I’ve taken that burden on myself.
Pritzker told me that the supplemental income can be thought of as applying a “market rate” to the positions.
* From the documentation that the Pritzker transition team gave to reporters last week…
Staff will be required to sign paperwork reaffirming that their fiduciary duties as employees are to the state of Illinois, and their first and only obligation is to serve the residents of Illinois.
* I pointed out to Pritzker yesterday that this topic had generated over 100 comments on my blog last Friday. “I saw that,” he said. So, I asked, what he would say to state employees about this…
I have all along said that I am fully committed to the collective bargaining process. And a fair and open collective bargaining process is what we need to have, it hasn’t happened in four years. I understand why people are frustrated and I want to remove that frustration. The state of Illinois needs to live up to its obligations to ensure that public employees are being compensated fairly.
We need to bring them up to their appropriate step level, we need to compensate them for the back pay pay that they’re owed. In the process of that we need to take into account the financial challenges that the state faces.
Discuss.
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 9:51 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Pritzker provides a look ahead
Next Post: Inauguration open thread
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
It’s not only right and lawful that state workers get their steps very soon, but it helps taxpayers avoid having to pay more later, because of growing interest on that debt. That’s the way I think to look at it.
Comment by Grandson of Man Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 9:55 am
Like I said last week, outside income for non-conflicting outside work is different from accepting extra pay for doing your state job.
What would we think of Ed Burke doing it for city employees? Or Rod (or Mell) doing it for Rod’s employees.
Disclosure doesn’t cure the basic conflict or the appearance problem. And a written fiduciary duty agreement doesn’t either.
The principle underlying the Constitutional provision is correct.
Comment by Keyrock Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 10:03 am
The LLC also means that salary “bump” will be excluded from Tier 2 pension witholdings, which is kind of a nice deal for staff. They get the best of both worlds: qualify for state health benefits without having to pay their fair share to bail out the pension system.
It would be nice if the LLC would make a voluntary donation to the pension fund equal to what would have been contributed had this been state payroll.
Comment by Mockingjay Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 10:05 am
This is so clearly a bonehead idea that one wonders if no one around Pritzker suggested to him that it might be a problem. But in the spirit of what he is suggested why not have private companies sponsor the members of his staff with logos on clothing, tag line like “this press conference brought to you by McDonalds” and finally naming rights. The American Airlines Assistant to the Governor is a catchy title.
Comment by HL Mencken Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 10:05 am
===or the appearance problem===
The “appearance” of a conflict is not a sound argument. I can twist just about anything into an appearance problem. There are rules. Follow the rules.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 10:06 am
I don’t understand why salary ranges for merit comp positions couldn’t just simply be adjusted (increased) through the proper channels at CMS to make them more comparable with other states (Texas, for example).
Comment by Moby Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 10:08 am
I don’t think it’ relevant to talk about pension issues. It’s unlikely that many of these folks are going to spend 20 years working for the Governor’s office.
Comment by Soccermom Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 10:08 am
A piece of paper and an oath has done well to protect taxpayers before…or retirees…or patients…or law abiding citizens.
I thoroughly I appreciate what the Gov is trying to do, but the slippery slope is real. Fidelity to the people, not to a person or ideology.
We built this sandbox, now, play in it.
Comment by Cookie Monster Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 10:09 am
Rich, I can’t thank you enough for helping the frontline stateworker hold Gov. Pritzker accountable on the Steps.
Think of the goodwill and enthusiasm this will generate to be placed immediately on our proper steps in the first week Pritzker is in office.
Secondly, we get that the backpay may take time to appropriate. But make no mistake.
We will not have a backpay issue like we did last time. It took seven years to get that to state workers.
I truly feel that public servants really wanted
Perfidy free communication about what is being done.
But the calcs are done for putting us on our proper step.
Issue the order Governor Pritzker
and we will love you.
Delay and the effects will be….
bad
Comment by Honeybear Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 10:09 am
I’m adamantly against it. Do you work for the state, or the individual/LLC providing the fat bonus? They are not one and the same, and their interests could come into conflict.
The GA should shut this down.
Comment by wordslinger Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 10:12 am
The noise from the “reformers” is fun. Can we ask they release the Schedule B of their 990’s s we can see all the donors. This seems like a better plan the GovJunk big contracts for the BTIA.
JB does need to remember many in the media and the dark money guys at IPI want you to believe $100K is a big bunch of moohla and may feed a little envious reporting. Capt Fax should be accused.
Comment by Annonin' Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 10:18 am
I am bothered by this, and it took me a while to figure out why. It’s not the loyalty problem — I tend to agree that can be worked out. And it sure looks like the transparency issue is worked out as well.
What bothered me is that this is exactly how income inequality happens, and now it’s being brought to the only large employer which was immune to salary inflation at the top. With this program in place, the ratio between top earners in the Governor’s office and rank and file state employees increases exponentially. Even an extremely generous 5% raise for state workers pales in comparison to a 100% raise (or supplement) for those at the very top.
We’ve seen this happen at corporations, and it leads to real problems in the long term. The C-suite becomes a different category when it comes to compensation and rewards, while the rank and file struggle to keep up. The disparity will only grow, never decrease.
I’m also wondering if any of those top 20 employees would refuse to take the job without the bonus? My guess is no, so there is not a market rationale for it. It is, simply put, just transferring the privilege of the corporate C-suite to state government.
It bothers me, even though I support Pritzker and think his top people are worth the money.
Comment by You could say that, I couldn't Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 10:21 am
Don’t all of these people serve at the pleasure of the governor anyway? If they’re exempt / at will employees, then they already owe their jobs to the governor, and getting a private bump through this mechanism doesn’t change that, or even complicate it. If the governor is happy with you, you can stay; if not, you’re out.
Most won’t stick around for the pension anyway, so they won’t be making an interest free loan to the pension funds based on their full salary, but if they do stick around, it seems the private bump wouldn’t be pensionable, so their pensions will reflect only their state-paid salaries, not the privately subsidized portion.
Disclosure is key, as is control of the fund. If the money came from undisclosed sources, or if the money was controlled by anyone other than the governor, there would be a bunch of other issues here.
Comment by Anonymous Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 10:21 am
I give JB credit for trying to raise the income of staff he hires but this is not the way to do it. He needs to take a hard look at the actual salaries of management in general especially middle managers. I and many others suffered when some MC moved into the union and got raises and others did not. It is ridiculous that some MC staff earn less than the staff they supervise. Don’t look at the salary scale for the position but actually salaries.
Comment by illinifan Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 10:21 am
When a Republican wins in 8 to 12 years and tries to do the same thing, the General Assembly will probably pass a law preventing it. Better to just cut this off now.
Comment by Chris Widger Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 10:21 am
I’ve criticized many here and on Twitter for acquiescing to bad decisions made by pols they support. I can’t do that. JB is wrong and must retract the policy.
Signing a piece a paper is meaningless. People respond to economic pressure better than a piece of paper. What sanctions are there for not adhering to the agreement? Obviously, this is an weak attempt to deflect criticism.
With respect to outside employment, this is another red herring. Employees are not allowed to work in outside jobs that presents a conflict with their state jobs. An IDPH nursing home inspector can’t work for a nursing home.
Hiring sufficient staff is a proverbial problem for the state with it’s limited resources. Do we want the Illinois Health Care Association to provide pay supplements to IDPH’s supervisory staff. Heck no.
While you can argue that JB’s motives are pure, the precedent will allow someone like future-Rauner to abuse that practice.
Also, if a governor of ordinary financial means takes over, his/her staff will be paid 1/2 what their predecessors were paid.
I’m sorry to rain on these fine people’s financial standing, but this policy must be reversed.
Comment by Norseman Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 10:22 am
==They are taking their own sort-of oath that they work for the people of the state.==
Sort-of oath?
Comment by Chris Widger Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 10:23 am
Glad he is doing this, and not what Rauner did with Tony Smith. Saves us some pension costs.
Comment by Person 8 Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 10:25 am
There was a time when it was absurd to even think a Governor would supplement salaries, as they wouldn’t have the inclination to do it, nor the coin. We’ve had back to back billionaires as Governor and the trend seems to be self financed campaigns (well, maybe not a trend). The slippery slope caution is legit. Pritzker may be altruistic here and now, but when things get ‘complicated’, who’s to say how loyalty will play out? Exactly because someone has 1 or 2 kids in college, the fealty may waiver at crunch time.
Comment by Anonymous Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 10:31 am
I hate to make this comment on JB’s first day, but what if this becomes standard operating procedure for senior administration officials. What if the next Governor isn’t a billionaire? What if the next Governor is corrupt?
This just isn’t a good idea.
Comment by Not It Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 10:31 am
I don’t like this at all. I thought it was a trial balloon last week when I first heard about it, because frankly, I can’t believe anyone seriously proposed this idea (except for some of the 20 lucky ones, many of whom think this is a swell idea I’m sure).
It’s a lot harder, but he needs to make the case that the taxpayers should pay more for his hires. The Governor’s office has a budget, I’d be in favor of giving him the flexibility to pay higher salaries out of that budget, or even a limited way of charging back to agencies for higher costs. He has to decide if he wants more people or fewer at higher pay. That’s not a heavy lift.
If backtracking on this costs him some of his early staff commitments, so be it. Public service is a sacrifice for many, why should these folks be different? Sorry, this is a non-starter. It’s time for the Lucky 20 to tell their new boss this is not the way to go.
We can’t go from the Best Team in America to the Best Team that Money Can Buy. The jokes write themselves.
Comment by 47th Ward Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 10:32 am
“The “appearance” of a conflict is not a sound argument. I can twist just about anything into an appearance problem. There are rules. Follow the rules”.
I agree the argument can be twisted, but I respectfully disagree that it doesn’t apply, The arguments being made here against the policy are mostly classic “appearance of impropriety” issues. If something is technically inside the law, but doesn’t seem right, creates a possible (but perhaps not actual) dual loyalty, wouldn’t look good if somebody else did it, etc - those are all classic “appearance of impropriety” concerns that speak to why it shouldn’t be done.
Comment by Keyrock Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 10:33 am
== I don’t think it’ relevant to talk about pension issues. It’s unlikely that many of these folks are going to spend 20 years working for the Governor’s office. ==
-Honeybear- , most those top people (Directors, etc.) are not members of SERS; they are in the GARS pension system. Much different rules there. They contribute at a higher rate and accrue credits quicker. And, even in SERS, you only need 8 years (plus be retirement age) to draw a pension.
Comment by RNUG Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 10:33 am
This is a very bad idea - nothing but legal headaches.
I also see many other other non bonus staff with having issues as well -
Maybe I missed - did a selected person reject JD’s offer?
Comment by cannon649 Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 10:33 am
This is still a terrible idea.
The path to hiring great people is now paved with good intent but terrible precedent.
The important aspect of today’s challenges shouldn’t overshadow that other governors will not be able to do the same.
One governor is not bigger than the office he or she occupies.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 10:36 am
Yes Rich, the appearance issue can always be contorted. However, the appearance of a conflict was a concern in many of the decisions/actions taken by my and other agencies. Public opinion is governed by appearance issues. Especially if the media is hyping that appearance issue.
I would argue this isn’t an appearance of a conflict. This is an actual conflict. They will be working at the higher salary level because of the man, not the State of Illinois. I’m not going to try and convince folks that an elected officials’ staff is not dedicated to the person. But the pay supplement certainly ups the incentive to engage in questionable ethical behavior. Sanctions be d….. Maybe not these fine people, but the future-Rauner fellow is what really scares me.
Comment by Norseman Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 10:36 am
===If something is technically inside the law, but doesn’t seem right===
Laws and rules aren’t always based on what we as individuals think they should be. In other words, just because you don’t like it doesn’t mean that somebody else shouldn’t do it.
Appearance of impropriety is purely in the eye of the beholder and it leads to all sorts of nefarious claims.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 10:37 am
“private companies sponsor the members of his staff with logos on clothing, tag line”
IDOT sponsored by “Palumbo Brothers, the earth moves with Palumbo”
Comment by Huh? Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 10:40 am
Bad precedent. It’s messy and makes it more difficult for nonwealthy candidates to get elected. Personal funding muddies the true personal services costs of the state. Rauner was criticized as a non-politician who did not know/follow government laws and regulations. Same thing.
Comment by Justacitizen Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 10:46 am
I wonder if the legislators could use some extra salary ?
Comment by Anotherretiree Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 10:48 am
I remember my old auditor days when being independent in appearance and in fact was a well learned requirement. The public trust is critical to any administration, even more so for a new one. Good intentions by JB, but not wise.
Comment by SSL Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 10:49 am
I’d suggest that if this practice is legal, it’s because no one anticipated that a governor would set up a private LLC to supplement staffer salaries.
Comment by wordslinger Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 10:54 am
HB - Keep up the good fight. While there is a new administration, much must be done to rebuild the government functions that were decimated by 1.4%. Hope for the best, prepare for the worst. Time will tell if Pritzker is the anti-rauner.
Comment by Huh? Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 10:56 am
Forgot to mention.
The public servant grapevine is unreliable sometimes.
But public servants are the ones who have to
run the numbers, make the calculations
type up the order, run it up the chain,
get it done by close of business.
And because so many people are involved
in every function and aspect.
We know when nothing is happening.
Word gets out that legislation is being prepared
or numbers are getting crunched, or not.
That’s the thing about social networks.
And true, sometimes it’s totally wrong.
Come on, we’re not Rich Miller
We don’t know everything going on in advance.
But do have the capability to
follow the breadcrumbs
to connect the dots.
Thus, don’t feed us BS.
We’ve developed a really good nose
for perfidy
Comment by Honeybear Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 10:57 am
@You could say that - I think you really hit the nail on the head. Thanks.
Comment by Shevek Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 10:58 am
When Blago was in office, Bureau Chiefs and Managers got granted paid overtime, something they never had before. It was paid as straight time. Then some of the supervisory positions got admitted to the Technical 916 union and they got time and a half overtime. Since then, people in these positions have been receiving $10,000 to $20,000 (and sometimes more) per year automatically without any accountability as to what they accomplish on the overtime in many cases. In other words, they’re getting their own raises with the overtime. Why can’t the Pritzker people do the same padding of overtime to resolve this “inequity” of salary?
Comment by Gone, but not forgotten Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 11:02 am
Who do agency directors work for? The office of the governor or JB Prtizker? I don’t like this one bit. It further erodes the line between the governor as a person, and the governor as a servant of the state. After watching it go on in Washington for the last two years, my stomach for it is almost nonexistent.
Comment by Ducky LaMoore Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 11:10 am
“Signing a piece a paper is meaningless. People respond to economic pressure better than a piece of paper. What sanctions are there for not adhering to the agreement?”
You know Blago’s folks also took and presumably passed the state ethics test too.
Comment by Leave a light on George Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 11:21 am
Electing Billionaire governors who are willing to buck up for Tier 1A staff is certainly a novel way to address the pension funding problem.
Comment by SAP Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 11:22 am
== You know Blago’s folks also took and presumably passed the state ethics test too. ==
Passing it and obeying it are two different things.
Comment by RNUG Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 11:28 am
This was mention briefly above, but I think it deserves another mention. (Stepping on to soapbox:)
Here we have the Governor giving his office staff double their state salaries; giving heads of state agencies a 15% raise and cost of living increases; and talking about the need to ensure that public union employees’ salaries are properly negotiated. But there has been absolutely no mention of the fact that the small percentage of state employees who are merit compensation (because they serve in management, legal, or policy positions) have not gotten regular (or sometimes any) raises (i.e. merit increases) since Blago came into office and immediately froze those salaries. That freeze is in place up to today. I have watched many many talented people, who provided years of great service to the public, leave the state because they could no longer afford to spend their career make the same amount year after year. I hope that Governor Pritzker can get rid of the freeze as part of his plans for a balanced budget and help keep motivated, talented people working for the citizens of Illinois.
(Stepping off soapbox.)
Comment by Shevek Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 11:29 am
As someone in the computer field, I applied for numerous jobs with government agencies over the years. Just like most jobs, the gov jobs pay a fraction of market rates. To illustrate, a typical system administrator makes between $50,000-100,000 depending on level and responsibilities. Yes, quite a range, but let’s just look at the low end. The person who fixes printers, installs equipment, and handles the garbage work. $50k working for a public sector company, pays about $25,000 for government. Sure there are pensions (will they be there in the future?) the proverbial government workday (shorter hours) - which is a myth in IT because if it’s broken, IT people work until it’s fixed or work after hours to not affect the other staff. So net-net, this is just one example of almost all of the jobs in government.
Now, here comes the new governor, and sprinkles cash on the senior management. Those who make the above example work harder, longer hours, to meet their needs. Did that IT person get a sprinkling to reach the $50k they could be earning?
Now, all that was the preface, but think about this part - this scenario carries out throughout all of government instantly. Every single person either leaves for the greener pastures (if they can) and if they’re stuck due to location, years in position, or any myriad of reasons, they are instantly extra disgruntled. What does this do to productivity? This is a terrible idea.
Comment by Anon Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 11:45 am
I’m offended that this has gone on for even one more day. the idea is ridiculous on so many levels. at a time when the Chicago City Council and Mayor (Chicago….hit several exclamation points here) are going at the idea that elected officials cannot have outside employment, the governor has decided that he alone can fix the salary issue of his key employees by essentially giving them outside jobs with his company. this is ethical compromise territory. end this. now.
Comment by Amalia Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 11:46 am
In a few minutes, J.B. Pritzker basically becomes a candidate for re-election. Being paid by him is a conflict of interest between his political bottom line and employees’ official state duties.
The salary hike is appropriate.
Playing games with salary source is not.
Make the case and raise the salaries properly.
Comment by crazybleedingheart Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 12:00 pm
It may be legal. They might be transparent. It’s just plain wrong. It sets a bad president.
Comment by Generic Drone Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 12:20 pm
I think Rahm calls this spiking the football on the five yard line. There’s high hopes. They haven’t done anything yet.
Comment by Sonny Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 12:31 pm
@Soccermom -
I think you only need eight years to become vested.
At these salaries, who would wanna leave?
Rich is right that whether something is legal is important. But avoiding even the appearance of impropriety is also important.
There is a reason that “Caesar’s wife must be beyond suspicion” has been a proverb since before Jesus.
Comment by Mockingjay Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 12:37 pm
After the reasoned outcry from all corners over this announcement last week I fully expected it to be publicly pulled back this morning. That it was not unfortunately gives us an early peek into JB’s decision making abilities (or his willingness to delegate policies such as this) and is very discouraging. His quoted comment to Rich, “yeah, I saw that”, with the unspoken “and I’m ignoring it”, says a lot.
Comment by Responsa Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 12:37 pm
I have to agree with others that this is a bad move by the new governor right out of the gate. If state employees are under paid, then work within the system to make the adjustments to the pay scale. Are we going to let other private corporations created by presidents of large companies supplement other state positions that may also be underpaid? And how is it going to be decided who is underpaid? Work within the system to correct inequities. Don’t try to go around the system to fix only those that are close to you.
Comment by Lawman Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 12:43 pm
+1 to what wordslinger said (twice, in fact, as I completely agree with both of his comments).
The employees in question work for the State and should thus be paid by the State. If the salary structure isn’t allowing for competitive pay, then lobby to change the law rather than this.
The intent may not be to create an environment where a non-billionaire is discouraged from running for office due to their inability to set up an LLC to supplement the pay of their staff, but it isn’t difficult to see the net result is exactly that.
Comment by thunderspirit Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 12:54 pm
Outside employment IS allowed. But what outside employment are these workers doing? Will they have separate employment contracts and separate, unrelated duties?
Comment by Anon Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 1:14 pm
=== After the reasoned outcry from all corners over this announcement last week I fully expected it to be publicly pulled back this morning ===
And exactly whom in Gov. Pritzker’s inner circle was going to advise him to do that, or which of their direct reports?
Juliana Stratton?
Comment by Mockingjay Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 1:25 pm
“Appearance of impropriety is purely in the eye of the beholder and it leads to all sorts of nefarious claims. ”
Sup Ct Rule 62.
Avoiding the appearance of impropriety is one of the the single most important canons of the judiciary. Its not as slap dash a concept as you think.
Comment by Lobo Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 1:34 pm
===of the judiciary===
I rest my case.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 1:35 pm
” even in SERS, you only need 8 years (plus be retirement age) to draw a pension. ”
If one retires from SERS after 8 years, expect to pay a huge portion of your retirement to the state for your health insurance.
Comment by Anonymous Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 1:57 pm
- Anonymous - Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 1:57 pm:
Oops… that was me.
Comment by Mama Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 1:58 pm
== If one retires from SERS after 8 years, expect to pay a huge portion of your retirement to the state for your health insurance. ==
True, in SERS with only 8 years since the State only pays 50% of the retiree insurance cost. And 8 years only gets you ~13% of your average salary.
Comment by RNUG Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 2:20 pm
I’ve said this before and here is another example of why having a frontliner on the transition team would have been a good idea.
No frontline public servant would have ever agreed with this.
Right?
“The state is gonna drag out my illegally stolen backpay for years and you’re gonna double, more than double, the directors salary?”
Oh Hell no
Attitudes and Behaviors
Two different things
Attitude:
“We need to bring them up to their appropriate step level, we need to compensate them for the back pay that they’re owed. In the process of that we need to take into account the financial challenges that the state faces.”
Behavior: Doubling (plus) Director salaries
Comment by Honeybear Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 2:49 pm
Not sure this is such a clear cut case.
The LLC is clearly seeking official action from the state workers it is giving money to. If they weren’t state workers, they would get no money.
Also, the LLC clearly has interests that are impacted by their actions. if they fail and are fired, the LLC is done for. Also, the LLc’s interests cannot be separated from Pritzker’s really.
At the same time, I don’t think any of the exemptions in the act apply here.
Comment by Mockingjay Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 3:38 pm
The legislative branch sets the salaries of the executive branch - Rule of Law 101. The State’s Gift Ban applies to both the new Governor and the proposed LLC supplying funds to executive employees - agree with Mockingjay. Potential fix - go to the legislature, get a fund approved and created for specified employees and get it funded publicly or through private donations. It is still not a good idea overall (it does have the conflicts and appearance issues) - but at least two branches would have signed off.
Comment by atbat Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 3:56 pm
==The legislative branch sets the salaries of the executive branch==
No they do not. They appropriate funds to pay the salaries but they do not set them.
Comment by Demoralized Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 4:41 pm
No appropriation, no payment. Sounds a little different than the proposal, doesn’t it?
Comment by Atbat Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 8:16 pm
With all due respect Rich, Governor Pritker is not making the payment a LLC, a separate legal entity, is making the gift. The LLC is doing business in the State of Illinois, is registered in the State of Illinois and is subject to its laws. As such it is a potentially prohibited source.
In addition, while state employees may have secondary employment, it cannot be done on state time nor be a conflict with your state job duties. How is that going to work? OEIG does investigate such complaints.
Comment by Sam Hall Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 11:28 pm
Very bad idea. How about the rest of state
employees receiving sub-standard pay?
Comment by Covert Tuesday, Jan 15, 19 @ 3:57 am
–There is a reason that “Caesar’s wife must be beyond suspicion” has been a proverb since before Jesus.–
The saying is from Plutarch’s “Life of Caesar,” so Anno Domini.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Jan 15, 19 @ 8:02 am
The concept of outside groups covering government salaries is not unprecedented. Foundations have been subsidizing government positions/salaries for years. I know for a fact that in Chicago this is common practice.
Comment by Cool Mo D Tuesday, Jan 15, 19 @ 10:36 am