Letters
intoxicated and being involved in an accident in which a motorcyclist was injured. Law was censured.
1974
Circuit Judge Randall S. Quindry (Wayne) charged with attempting to persuade a county clerk to alter absentee ballots to favor a political party in a precinct committeeman's race. Quindry was removed from office.
Circuit Judge William Ginos (Montgomery) charged with making promises of lowered bail to jail inmates if they would give him information about drug traffic and crime in the county. Ginos was censured.
Associate Judge George H. Bunge (DuPage) charged with issuing bench warrants against defendants in small claims cases and sentencing them to jail without a trial. Bunge's complaint charges were dismissed, and he was exonerated.
Circuit Judge John P. Shonkwyler (Piatt) charged with entering orders in probate cases in which his father, who was a lawyer, had participated. Shonkwyler was reprimanded.
Associate Judge Keith Sanderson (Henderson) charged with assessing costs against defendants against whom no judgment had been entered. Sanderson was suspended one month without pay.
Associate Judge Charles A. Durham (Cook) charged with offering to dismiss the criminal cases of two defendants if they, in turn, would drop charges of police brutality against the arresting officers. Durham was reprimanded.
1975
Associate Judge James L. Oakey, Jr. (Cook) charged with operating a private detective agency and receiving income from that business. The Courts Commission has not yet filed an answer.
Personnel Code
DEAR EDITOR: Ms. McConnelFs article on Secretary Hewlett in the April issue contained two significant inaccuracies. First, Senator Berning's 1974 S.B. 1475, to give Hewlett a separate merit system, was not vetoed by the Governor—because it died in a House committee.
The bipartisan Advisory Board to the Department of. Personnel labeled the S.B. 1475 '"ill-considered" and promised to take a basic look at the Personnel Code before the next session. It has now done so. A thorough-going revision of the Personnel Code. H.B. 2534, was recommended 'do pass' by the House Executive Committee on May 1.
Part of the rationale for the Howlett-Berning attempt to fragment the central personnel system was based on Judge Verticchio's trial court decision in Sangamon County on Boner v. Drazek. which seemed to uphold Hewlett's quoted contention that "it is unsatisfactory for any elected official to have power over the employees of another elected official." This alleged constitutional basis for separate merit systems for the "other" elected officers has now been fully reversed by Justice Schaefer's opinion in the Supreme Court in Boner v. Jones. While the Berning bill has been reintroduced, its purported constitutional justification has been conclusively denied.
Furthermore, it is not correct that all the civil service employees in Hewlett's office were put there under the Ogilvie administration. There have been successive extensions of merit coverage under successive secretaries of state—at their request—beginning with Carpentier and continuing with Powell. The qualifying examinations given to the latest, and largest, batch to which merit coverage was extended during John Lewis' tenure as secretary have been upset by the other aspect of the Boner decision. Tom Page, Member, Advisory Board to the Department of Personnel
State surplus property DEAR EDITOR: The recent article by Arvid Hammers entitled "How to Buy State Surplus Property" failed to mention one of the property control division statutory responsibilities which the Department of General Services has totally ignored much to the detriment of units of local government. That is Section 133 (b) 11 of Chapter 127 whereby units of local government are entitled to review lists of available State surplus property once that selection has been made available to State agencies and before the sale of such items at auction.
Requirements of this Section became effective in October of 1972; however, the benefits have never been made available to local government by the property control division.
My February 1974 inquiry concerning the established procedure under this section did not even produce a reply.
The obvious intent of this legislation was to provide the taxpayer with the maximum return on his tax dollar by providing this form of assistance to local government without any increase in actual State equipment expense and it would seem that failure to implement the legislation by the Agency has effectively frustrated this intent by the legislature.
Richard M- Baner Village Attorney Goodfield, Illinois
Illinois Issues called the Property Control Division Office and were told that any local government wishing to receive the information described in Mr. Baner's letter should write to:
Mr. Joseph McCue
Property Control Division Officer
4390 South Jeffory Street
Springfield, 111. 62705
Federal aid
DEAR EDITOR: I have enjoyed reading the many interesting articles contained in recent issues of your fine publication. I would, however, like to make one small point about a note in your June 1975 issue where you indicate that Illinois ranked 4th in federal aid for 1974. This is true in total dollars. But, I think it is more meaningful to indicate that Illinois ranks 33rd in per capita federal aid or 22 states below New York which ranks 11th. In fact, Illinois ranks below the national average in terms of per capita federal aid.
I wish you continued success with, Illinois Issues.
John N. Lattimer Executive Director Commission on Intergovernmental Cooperation
August/1975/Illinois Issues/239