Will board perks fall prey to cuts?

Short of a financial miracle, it appears DuPage County will go through the budget wringer this year.

With the county facing a revenue gap that could lead to staff layoffs and benefit cuts, some are asking if it's time elected leaders made financial sacrifices also.

A new report by the county's cost-efficiency committee looks at sacred cows such as specialized pensions and stipends.

But whether perks for elected officials will be considered a disposable luxury or well-deserved compensation is uncertain as budget talks come to a boil this fall.

Super-sized 401k

When a plan to generate extra revenues with a cigarette tax faltered in January, the county eliminated jobs and slashed millions from its budget. Reductions included $2.5 million from the sheriff's office and $1 million in human service programs that help DuPage's neediest.

The cigarette tax flame is still flickering in Springfield, but its prospects of success are iffy. Meanwhile, the gap between revenues and expenditures is a potential $20 million in the county's corporate fund, officials said.

Among the money-saving options proposed by the cost-efficiency committee are eliminating the much-criticized Elected County Officials pension plan.

Crafted in 1997, the ECO system lets county elected leaders accumulate pension earnings at an accelerated rate compared to the Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund, which covers many public employees.

"The ECO pension system is a very inflated benefit, and it's only for elected officials," Cost Efficiency Committee Chairwoman Debra Olson of Wheaton said.

"It's an unbelievable pension, and it costs the county huge amounts of money."

For example, a board member earning $50,079 in 2008 who's served 20 years will be paid a pension representing 80 percent of his pay -- $40,063.

By comparison, a 20-year county employee would receive 35 percent, or $17,527, through IMRF.

The plan also requires a hefty contribution from the county -- 38 percent of a participant's pay, compared to 9 percent with IMRF.

Eliminating ECO for future county board members and most countywide elected officials and shifting them to IMRF could eventually save $500,000 a year, staff experts estimate.

Another alternative would be to scrap both ECO and IMRF for board members and for Chairman Robert Schillerstrom, which results in savings of $395,000.

Longtime board member Robert Schroeder of Naperville said he'd support ending the ECO pension and reverting to IMRF but not throwing out the entire retirement plan.

"If our employees have a right to have IMRF, I would think the elected officials should have that privilege too," he said.

Salary split?

The report also singles out salaries of board members and Schillerstrom, noting that if their earnings were cut in half, the savings would range from $300,000 to more than $528,000 during the next few years.

Although likely to be unpopular, it's an idea worth considering, Olson said.

"And, it's not because we don't work hard," she said. "In these financial times, I don't know how we cut employee raises and not take a cut ourselves." She added the cost-efficiency committee's work needs to continue.

Following a 9-8 vote last year, board members who now earn $48,620 will get a 3 percent raise in 2008, a 3 percent raise in 2009 and a 4 percent raise in 2010, topping out at $53,645. Schillerstrom currently is paid $110,150 and would earn $121,540 in 2010.

Compared to neighboring collar counties, DuPage is at the high end. Lake County Board members make $36,400 and Kane County leaders are paid $17,500.

Chopping wages, however, wouldn't have an immediate budget effect because of state law that prohibits changing elected leaders' salaries during their current terms.

Meanwhile, county employees making $70,000 or less will receive a 2 percent merit increase this year.

As expected, the discrepancies with raises and pensions have caused hard feelings among some county workers.

Among the complaints is that increases in employee health insurance costs have wiped out wage gains.

Little extras

Whenever a board member heads up a committee, it's a bonus $3,000. If you're vice chairman, add another $1,000.

The total comes to $50,000 annually, and it's another extra that could go, the cost-efficiency report states.

Countywide elected officials also receive stipends for additional duties that add up to a combined $25,000 a year.

Ending stipends for board members has merit, said board member Paul Fichtner of Elmhurst. He's among 10 board members who opted to return their stipends.

"Stipends are going a bit far," Fichtner said.

One hot-button option is reducing the size of the county board from 18 members to 12, two in each district instead of three.

Such an action would recoup an estimated $322,000 annually but it would take until 2013 to enact.

Board member Jim Healy of Naperville, who pushed for a decrease in council numbers when he served as a Des Plaines alderman, said it's worth considering downsizing, within reason.

"I represent an area that's larger than the city of Aurora," he said. "Because of the sheer size, you need a minimum of two people."

Another area the report delves into is car allowances.

Twelve elected countywide officials and top staffers have $450-a-month car allowances. The report notes that eliminating those allowances would mean a savings of $64,800 a year, but this would be offset by compensating the 12 individuals for mileage reimbursement.

Reality check

The next step for the report is the county's finance committee.

Committee Chairman Patrick O'Shea of Lombard held back on any appraisals, saying he needs time to review it.

But it's clear putting ideas in a report and getting them passed are two separate things.

Concerning salary decreases, Schroeder, who opposed the 2006 raises, notes, "I think that kind of cut will not pass. If you attempt to moderate it, it may be doable."

Certain perks are a political reality, the Better Government Association's Dan Sprehe said.

"Certainly people who serve the public deserve to be compensated -- otherwise no one would want to do the job," said Sprehe, the government watchdog group's chief investigator.

"If they are cutting access to services for some of the most vulnerable people, scaling back things for everybody else and asking a lot of other people to sacrifice -- then it's extraordinarily fair to ask them to do the same, to look inward."