Ongoing battle over Peoria County auditor role could end in elimination if before voters

PEORIA– Both the vice chairman of the Peoria County Board and the county's financial watchdog say their stances regarding the possible elimination of the county auditor position isn't personal.

To quote a famous movie, "it's strictly business" regarding a possible referendum that could go before voters this fall to get rid of that elected position.

That's the contention of Jim Fennell, who is stepping down off the board this year after 12 years in office, and Jessica Thomas, who was elected two years ago to the auditor's office and has faced controversy ever since.

"This is nothing about the person in the office, but it's about the office and the dollars and the cents and what the taxpayers are getting out of it," said Fennell, who represents parts of Chillicothe and Medina township.

Said Thomas: "This battle isn’t a Jessica Thomas v. County Board; rather, this is a People of Peoria County v. County Board. The office of the county auditor belongs to the people. The County Board over the years have hijacked the office from the people and refuses to honor the determination of the 2018 primary election. Instead, they want to use the people’s money to continually propose this referendum in an effort to manipulate the voters to answer in their favor.“

More:Illegal cuts or ending duplication? Yearslong fight over Peoria auditor role set for vote

Up to Peoria County Board if decision lands on ballot

On July 28, the board's executive committee recommended to bring forward the idea of putting the referendum on the November ballot. The executive committee is composed of all committee heads, board Chairman Andrew Rand and Fennell, who is the vice chair – which results in a majority of the 18-member board.

That means it's highly likely the entire board will approve the idea at its Aug. 11 meeting.

At that July meeting and in a later interview, Fennell said times have changed since the elected auditor position was created by the Illinois Constitution. He favors eliminating the office and relying on the county's finance department for day-to-day matters and the external auditing firm that comes in annually to check over the books.

"We have the legal right to put it on the ballot to let the citizens of Peoria County vote if it is a necessary and reasonable thing to have," he said. "We are posting transparently all our financial reporting online. We have an external auditor that comes in, and they do the entire countywide audit. We also have our meetings online as well."

The external auditor, required by state law, also gives the county recommendations on how to tighten up its finances or areas where fraud could possibly occur. The county has done very well by the external auditing firm, Fennell said.

The county's bond rating – which is akin to a person's credit rating – has improved from Triple A2 to Triple A1, he said. That's only one place below the highest level of Triple A.

"I have been on for 12 years, and we have not gotten one thing from the county auditor's office for tightening up or cutting dollars. We have not had one check that we were told should have been canceled or rewritten in any manner," he said.

He says the work done by the auditor's office is a duplication of what could be done more cheaply by the finance department. Instead of having the auditor look through checks, a computer program could do it faster and more efficiently, he said.

More:Documents show behind-the-scenes battles over auditor's office in Peoria County

Current auditor claims 'insane and illegal duplication'

Thomas sees it completely differently and notes the board has been trying for years to get rid of the auditor, which is a required position for counties with more than 75,000 people. That's 21 counties within the state of Illinois and of those, 17 still have an elected auditor.

Thomas points to a 1991 letter from then-Attorney General Roland Burris to then-State's Attorney Kevin Lyons in which Burris states it was his "opinion that the county board is required to appropriate sufficient funds to the auditor to perform the duties imposed upon the office by law" as evidence of the county trying 30 years ago to get rid of the office.

When the last ballot measure was done in 2018, Thomas wasn't auditor. She said the board then wanted to hear from the community, and by 19 votes (out of 22,075 cast), voters rejected a ballot question to end elections for auditor and make it an appointed position.

"Now, with the referendum being proposed again, it is clear that the board is not seeking the will of the people from the 2018 referendum or best interest of county resources by bringing this to voters again in hopes they can get the answer they want. It is wasteful for the County Board to use human resources and tax dollars to continually bring forth the same referendum voters have declined just four years ago," she said.

She also notes the board had cut her staff and reduced her budget as well. The moves by the board last year led to highly-public battles between Thomas and the county, which laid bare the dissent between the two.

To her, the reasons for keeping the position are the same as when it was created in 1919 – to act as a watchdog for the people. The duplication that Fennell is talking about, she says, is due to the board's actions over the years to give some of the duties of the auditor to other areas such as the finance department, a move she says is illegal.

"Only the county auditor has legal authority for these duties. Currently, this duplication by the creation of the finance office is costing taxpayers over $682,215 a year (the office's current 2022 budget)," she said. "Keeping the office around means ending this insane and illegal duplication and placing the duties back in the county auditor’s office, who works for the voters."

Uncertainty on future of office even if voted to eliminate

If the measure is put on the ballot and voters do approve it, it's not clear what would happen. Scott Sorrel, the county's administrator, said it's up to the board to decide when to shutter the office. The county is in the midst of its budgetary process for 2023.

But even if the office were eliminated this year, it could create a legal quandary as Thomas has a pending lawsuit against the county for what she says is illegally defunding of her office and stripping her of her staff. Her suit, filed last November in Peoria County Circuit Court, is still pending, with a hearing coming up later this month.

A judge ruled in July that State's Attorney Jodi Hoos, who alleged fiscal mismanagement last year by Thomas, couldn't be involved because she was previously representing the plaintiff in the matter. Thomas successfully petitioned to have a judge appoint an attorney for her as well earlier this year.

Named in the suit are Rand, Fennell, Hoos and the county itself. Thomas said the suit isn't about her, but about the integrity of the office.

"Every elected official should know that their seat is only temporary. This office does not belong to me. I have been elected by the people of Peoria County and commissioned by the governor to carry out duties of this office. The county has been illegally and systematically preventing me from doing my job," she said. "I’m determined to protect this office for the people of Peoria County. I listen and work for the voters, and I respect their 2018 decision. I just don’t understand why the elected County Board members cannot."

But Fennell said the move by the board is more about efficiency.

"We have to look at the whole financial control and the procedures. We get exemplary remarks through the external auditors and the credit bureau on the quality of our reports," he said. "We are doing a good job of protecting the assets of Peoria County and the citizens of Peoria County."

The suit is still in the early stages, and it's not likely that it will be resolved by November.

This article originally appeared on Journal Star: Peoria County Board may put elimination of auditor's office on ballot