SAO Outsources Collections

A recent news article reported that the McHenry County State's Attorney's Office has contracted with an out-of-state firm to collect $300,000 in unpaid fines.

Usually, collection agents take their cut out of the money collected. According to the Northwest Herald article on January 15, the firm, of Gig Harbor, Washington, will be allowed to add up to 30% to the amount owed for their efforts.

No one should think for five minutes that it will collect 100%. I wonder if the SAO analyzed the accounts and determined what percent was likely to be collected - also, why its own collection efforts had not been successful.

Does it know where all the culprits are? How many are without funds? Does the phrase, "You can't get blood out of a turnip" apply here?

In a recent hearing at the courthouse, a man showed up for the final stage in his court case, which ended two years ago this month. Last week the representative from the SAO told the judge that this man still owed his $2,700 fine.

After a short delay, the SAO realized that there had been a "bookkeeping error" and acknowledged that this man's fine had been paid in full!!!

What kind of carelessness loses track of a $2,700 fine? And why didn't they take action within the past two years, if they thought he hadn't paid his fine. They knew exactly where he was - only a letter or a phone call away. Was this $2,700 in the $300,000 that the collection agency thought it could collect?

How much of the $300,000 was handled in the same way as this $2,700?

Another question for the SAO is, "Why didn't you hire a northern Illinois business to collect this money?" There are certainly collection agencies in McHenry and Lake County that might have wanted the business. Or maybe they looked at it and didn't want it.

Why did you contract with an out-of-state firm? Were bids solicited for this contract? Were you guaranteed a minimum collection amount?

Let's hope the public is kept apprised of the results of this contract and also of the results of its collection attempts. Debt collection agents are bound by tight rules. How many will they find who have declared bankruptcy or who are incarcerated or who just are absolutely unable to pay?

House Raffle Called Off

On May 1-2 I wrote about the planned raffle of a Wonder Lake house, after a Realtor/speculator and her husband began selling $100 raffle tickets. My "nose for what's wrong" quickly went into overtime. The real estate company said it didn't see any problem, because the Realtor's attorney okayed the deal.

It's a different story now. I guess if you ignore (or don't investigate fully enough to find it) and try to rely only on a local law, then it's okay. The reader comments to the May 21 Northwest Herald article were certainly interesting (search for Kozicki on http://www.nwherald.com/). Many of those comments seem to reflect that it's okay to break the law, if it helps someone (or more than one person).

The State's Attorney got involved and made his point. And the raffle was called off.

It never should have started in the first place. Had the Realtor gotten good legal advice, she would have known from the get-go that the raffle was illegal.

It didn't help when I called the Secretary of State's office and a clerk in the charitable division told me that Illinois did not regulate raffles, only lotteries and bingo. It is inexcusable that an employee in the specific State office that does regulate raffles didn't know the correct answer to my question.

Creativity in business is not to be stifled. Thinking outside-the-box is good. But it has got to be legal!

© 2008 GUS PHILPOTT

Driving Drunk

DuPage County State’s Attorney Jane Radostits killed herself while driving drunk on May 11.

After a bomb scare at the SA’s office others and she took off for errands and a lunch of appetizers and drinks for three hours.

The DuPage County sheriff’s report indicates that she was speeding about 85MPH in a 45MPH zone, may have been on her cell phone and was not wearing her seatbelt when she lost control of her car.

A poster in the Daily Herald wrote that many, if not most, drunk drivers pulled over are first-time offenders. Sorry, but I think he is wrong. They might be getting caught for the first time, but it’s not the first time they were driving while drunk. They have just been lucky too many times before, because there are too few cops on the road looking for drunk drivers and, when they stop one, they are tied up far too long with paperwork and then miss many more.

And what if Radostits had been stopped before she caused the wreck? Would she have flashed her ID card at the cop? Would she have been passive or belligerent? By nature of her work, might she have become at least “assertive” with the officer who stopped her? Would she have gotten a “pass”? Been taken home? Had her husband called to pick her up? Been driven home by the cop’s supervisor or commanding officer? Called one of her State’s Attorney drinking buddies to come and get her? Taken to a coffee shop to “sober up”?

Professional courtesy, don’t you know? I guess it all depends on where she got stopped and the level of the cop’s integrity.

Had I stopped her (when I was a deputy)? Ignore the State’s Attorney ID. Disarm her, if she was carrying a weapon. Roadside sobriety check. Handcuffs. Have her car towed. Off to the pokey. Breath or blood tests. Arrest, photographs, fingerprinting. Jail. Bail. Court date. Prosecution and, hopefully, conviction and jail.

What about her drinking buddies that day? Why didn’t the DuPage County Sheriff’s report dig more deeply into their own consumption of alcohol? Sitting for three hours in a restaurant, eating only appetizers? Does anyone else wonder just how much alcohol each really had to drink?

And what about right here in McHenry County? Where are the favorite water holes of the bureaucrats, politicians and cops?

According to the Daily Herald (not the Northwest Herald) on May 26, McHenry County State's Attorney Louis "Bianchi has a standing agreement with his staff: If, for any reason, they cannot drive, he personally will reimburse them for their cab fare home."

Thanks, Daddy. I presume that he will not charge taxpayers for this cost on a County expense reimbursement form. It's pretty nice that he plays "Daddy" for his employees. Of course, what employee is going to call him at 2:00AM? "Lou, I'm too drunk to drive and need a cab home" or "Lou, I was too drunk to drive last night and took a cab home. Here's the bill for $100."