So what happens if Kane County spends more money than it has?

It's not a good sign when Kane County Board Chairman Karen McConnaughay finds herself worrying about who state law says is ultimately responsible when a government body spends more money than it has.

Yet that's exactly the condition the county budget is in as officials near the deadline to lock in their final budget numbers for the year.

County board members have spent months investigating employee buyouts as a magic salve to solve the county budget woes. But when Sheriff Pat Perez announced he expects only one or two of his employees to take the buyout, it became clear the only magic was the illusion of vast savings.

"Too many people are under the belief that this is the tool to help departments and offices get to a balanced budget," McConnaughay said. "It's not going to be as productive a mechanism for balancing the budget as some people hoped it would be. It's still going to come back to elected people (making) hard decisions."

Numerous county departments have put those hard decisions on hold by not even submitting drafts of plans to cut their budgets yet.

That's left McConnaughay looking for more ways to slam home the hard fact that departments were told how much money they will receive, and there's not a penny more to dole out.

The problem is, elected department heads, such as the state's attorney, sheriff and county clerk, have all the control about how to spend the money the county gives them. McConnaughay said all she and the county board can do is tell them the well is dry.

"As we stand here today, if an elected official has not turned in an adjusted budget, as arrogant as that sounds, that's a suggestion that it's not going to be a balanced budget," McConnaughay said. "Everybody has to cut, but I don't see any changes in what's happening. I see no rollbacks in salaries. I don't see a whole lot of furlough days going on. So in the remaining months of the year, how are you going to get to a balanced budget?"

The current lack of a universal solution has resulted in an ongoing staredown between departments, each thinking there's nothing left for them to cut while believing other county operations are wallowing in excess.

As the days tick by, departments sink deeper into the red, making it even more difficult to cut enough expenses to reach budget targets. That sets the stage for the budgetary stare down to become a full-blown showdown at the end of the year.

"It will put the county board in a position where it has to answer, 'What do you do when an elected official disregards a budget?'" McConnaughay said. "You need to live within a budget or the county board will exercise its ability to not give you any more money."

But what happens in that situation? If, for instance, the county clerk doesn't meet his budget, and the board refuses to pay the difference, who is left responsible for the debt?

McConnaughay said maybe the court system would have to decide that, but ultimately it's the taxpayers left holding the bag because it is all their money that funds the county.

"We have to change the way we do business," McConnaughay said. "People think this is the way we've always done business; this works well; therefore, this is the only way we can do it. 'I can't change' is not an option. There is no rescue coming from the taxpayers. If you get no other message, that's the message."