Court rules Cook County erroneously used $243 million meant for roads and bridges
Cook County misspent $243 million intended for transportation, handing a victory to the state road-building industry, a judge has ruled.
Cook County Judge Alison Conlon’s decision Friday concluded the county’s use of millions in transportation tax revenues in 2023 for other departments — like law enforcement and the judiciary — did not comply with the Safe Roads Amendment to the Illinois Constitution.
The amendment, passed by referendum in 2016, aims to keep state lawmakers from raiding gas taxes for other needs by putting them in a “lockbox” earmarked for roads and bridges.
“We are gratified with the Circuit Court’s decision that requires Cook County to finally obey the will of the voters and the Illinois Constitution,” Illinois Road and Transportation Builders Association CEO Mike Sturino said.
“They are the only unit of government who evaded the requirements of the Constitution in this way.”
Sturino said transportation tax revenues should be saved for crucial projects like improving the I-290 and CTA Blue Line corridor, reducing pedestrian and cyclist deaths, and reducing freight railway congestion.
Cara Yi, a spokesperson for Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle, said the county is disappointed by the ruling.
“However, we appreciate the Circuit Court’s time and attention to this important matter,” she continued. “While we evaluate next steps, the county will undertake efforts to ensure its compliance with the Circuit Court’s ruling, as we have noted throughout this litigation and as highlighted by Judge Conlon’s denial of the Plaintiffs’ request for a permanent injunction. ”
The IRTBA and other construction and engineering organizations filed the lawsuit and sought an injunction to prevent transportation funds from being spent on nonrelated expenses in future.
Conlon denied that request, saying she found the county budget director’s guarantee of compliance going forward to be credible.
The county used a formula to determine if transportation funds for expenditures in areas such as the sheriff’s department, state’s attorney’s office and chief judge’s office were eligible.
For example, because some participants in the sheriff’s work alternative program were charged with traffic-related violations, county officials found spending on labor and program supplies like wood chippers, toilet paper and doughnuts were eligible, court documents show.
Conlon disagreed, ruling that “these institutional supplies are general in nature,” and used for people charged with offenses outside of the Rules of the Road.
Another issue was putting transportation funds into a state’s attorney’s office program that supports crime victims and witnesses.
“(That) is not a direct expense of enforcing the Rules of the Road,” Conlon ruled.
Yi said the county remains committed to using transportation funding in a fully transparent and compliant manner.