Democrat candidates for Cook County circuit court clerk spar over e-filing
Candidates running in next month's Democratic primary for clerk of the Cook County circuit court agree electronic filing of court documents is a priority for the office that serves one of the world's largest unified court systems.
But that's about the only subject on which incumbent Dorothy Brown of Chicago, running for her fourth term, and challenger Ricardo Munoz, a Chicago alderman, agreed during a joint interview with the Daily Herald Editorial Board.
Currently, electronic filing of court papers is available only for commercial litigation within the law division, according to the Cook County clerk of the circuit court website. Brown has indicated the service will expand to all civil court filings but has not said when.
Munoz, who described the clerk's office as “hopelessly out of date,” criticized Brown for failing to expand e-filing countywide. Brown said she's awaiting Illinois Supreme Court approval to expand the service.
Munoz also criticized Brown for approving what he called a “no-bid” contract potentially worth more than $30 million with On-Line Information Services, the Alabama company that manages Cook County e-filings, and which he says contributed to Brown's campaign.
Illinois Board of Elections records show that representatives from On-Line Information Services donated $13,400 to Brown's campaign fund between 2001 and 2011.
“My opponent speaks with a forked tongue,” said Brown, who defended OLIS contributions — and contributions from other vendors — as standard “business practices” and suggested vendors have contributed to Munoz's campaign as well.
She defended the contract, saying the Cook County Board approved the vendor, which she said provides the service at no charge to the taxpayers. Brown trumpeted OLIS' “free to the court,” service which she said requires litigants to pay $4.95 to file documents electronically. Two-thirds of that goes to Cook County and OLIS splits the remaining third with a minority business partner, Brown said.
However, that provision is not written in the contract.
Brown also disputed Munoz's claims that the contract, which is up for renewal this year and requires county board approval, is worth $30 million.
Munoz said he used figures the clerk cited in her online newsletter “Court Technology Today.” In the September 2011 edition, Brown indicated her office recorded 19.7 million case activities countywide in 2008. Multiplying that times $1.65 (the one-third OLIS gets from the filing fee) equals $32.5 million owed the company under the current contract.
“It's not that good a deal,” said Munoz.
A representative from Brown's campaign responded by email that Munoz's numbers were wrong and offered to provide what she said were correct figures but did not provide that information by deadline. Additionally, Munoz's campaign manager Andrew Sharp provided the Daily Herald with a copy of the OLIS contract, which does not indicate that OLIS is to split their share with a minority business partner.
Munoz says he prefers a pay-per-view e-filing system similar to the one the federal courts use. That system allows users one free view and charges a set fee for every page view thereafter.