Kane County board calls for transparency, trust on bonuses

After months of blasting various Kane County department heads for paying out employee bonuses, county board members will now ask those responsible to bring the dollar figures forward for scrutiny.

There is an inherent danger involved with that plan. The reporting may create a road map for budget cuts in those departments. Records show the state's attorney's office, public defender and judiciary departments paid out $1.84 million in bonuses from 2012 to 2015 alone.

The committee called upon all elected officials who support such payments to bring them into the light and explain why they need such bonuses. State law prevents the county board from forcing other county elected officials to disclose bonus payments. The reports would be voluntary under a new policy considered Wednesday by the board's finance committee.

"I haven't heard anybody say they're doing anything underhanded," said Drew Frasz, vice chairman of the committee. "There would be no reason for (elected officials) to not participate and report their payments."

Board Chairman Chris Lauzen has repeatedly criticized payments made to employees by State's Attorney Joe McMahon. But both Frasz and committee Chairman John Hoscheit said they don't have a problem with McMahon's payments. Hoscheit said the payments preceded McMahon and began when the county wasn't handing out departmental raises. As a result, Hoscheit doesn't view the lump sum payments in the state's attorney's office as "bonuses." He views them as "supplemental compensation.

"I don't expect a problem with volunteer reporting," Hoscheit said. "The current process demeans employees. If you have a good reason for the payments, then I would think you would want to make it clear that you did it and why it was done."

That said, Hoscheit did agree the board would take a closer look, and cut a department's budget if there was a "perceived abuse."

McMahon's office assisted with the language of the transparency policy. There is no definition of "abuse" in the policy. Some board members, like T.R. Smith, already have their own definition.

"If you make a salary, that should be your salary," Smith said. "Bonuses are given in private business for productivity higher than they planned on. We don't have that in government."

The county board's executive committee will continue debate on an employee bonus policy next week. The full board will take a final vote Dec. 13.