Editorial: Explanation needed for high costs of DuPage court security

Here's a question that could much unsettle the thoughts of taxpayers in DuPage County: Are the suspects and cases that work their way through the DuPage County court system so threatening that they warrant protections costing up to twice as much as what neighboring collar counties pay?

A new study on the costs of court security provides a definitive accounting of the figures allotted by five collar counties, and DuPage does not fare well in the comparison. The study doesn't delve into the harder-to-quantify description of the kinds of cases handled by the various departments, so on that score, some leeway may be due DuPage Sheriff John Zaruba for his insistence that his management of court security operations is responsible and efficient. But considering that Zaruba has been all but insolent in his intransigent dealings with the county board that oversees his budget, he also has a heavy burden to defend his insistence on the merits of his manner of funding court security.

So far, his response has been unconvincing.

Zaruba claims that officials from "several counties" have studied his operation and declared, "this is what they want." Even assuming that DuPage County's operation is as effective as the sheriff says, that's much like automobile customers touring a luxury car dealership and declaring "this is what they want." That high-priced product may indeed get customers where they want to go, but the fact is that alternatives costing much less can be equally satisfactory.

Zaruba counters such criticism with the unarguable observation that while other options might be more economical, "there's going to be a cost if something happens." How true. It's equally true that there's going to be a cost if something happens involving deputy behavior but body cameras weren't available, or if crime rates increased but staffing couldn't be maintained, while funding was diverted to support the courtroom security operation.

Unfortunately, budgeting police operations - like all activities, public or private - is a function with limits. For every option rejected because of the preference for some other option, there will be a cost. Managing such costs in government is the joint responsibility of department heads and the individuals holding the purse strings - in this case the sheriff and the county board. So far, Zaruba has not shown himself well disposed to uphold his side of that equation, and his responses to county board members who want to consider approaches working perfectly well in Kane, Lake, McHenry and Will counties are less than promising.

Instead of replying that "everyone wants what I have" or conjuring vague forebodings that apply to any scenario, Zaruba ought to be showing why DuPage County's challenges require a much more expensive solution than those of neighboring counties. If he can't show that, he should be working more cooperatively with the county board to produce a court-security operation that is both economical and safe.