District Office L195 South Besewood Drive ‘Woodstock, TL 60093 (615) 334-0063, (815) 3349147 Fax Springfield Office STATE OF ILLINOIS Committees Chairman tate Government Administration sTovernational Trade & Commerce | Member JACK D. FRANKS Sivas (210) 557-2118 Fax *Versrans' Affaire STATE REPRESENTATIVE * 63RD DISTRICT ee jack @jackfranks. org March 1, 2016 Lou Bianchi McHenry County State's Attorney Office 2200 North Seminary Ave. Woodstock, il. 60098 Dear State's Attorney Bianchi Director Louis Kosiba, of the Illinois Municipal Retitement Fund “IMRF and I have serious questions of the legality of certain McHenry County Board Members claiming eligibility for iMRF pension benefits. We have a fiduciary obligation in our role of trustees for the public to preserve the pension system for those who are legitimately entitled. We also have a duty to lower our property tax burden and reestablish the public trust while fighting for the integrity of our political system. Nothing is more important, especially in Ilinois, than the integrity and transparency of our government. We must root out corruption and regain the public trust Mctienry County requires 1,000 actuat hours to'be worked to be eligible for pension benefits through IMRF; commuting to meetings and campaigning do not count. IMRF was designed for full time employees, not for part time elected officials. The IMRF guidebook indicates that it would be highly unlikely for any county board member to meet a 600 hour standard much less the higher 1,000 hour threshold required by McHenry County. IMRF relies on its participants to certify under penalty of perjury.and subject to a Class 3 Felony-to state that they have worked 1,000 hours if they are seeking a taxpayer funded pension. Out of the 73 counties that have the 7,000 hour standard to be IMRF eligible, 47 of those counties have no one claiming IMRF. Oniy five counties have ten individuals or more asking for IMRF benefits and MicHenry County has by far the most of any county. McHenry County isa severe outlier with those claiming IMRF benefits. — ‘The IMRF guidelines fequire the county to conduct annual audits and evaluations to determine if the individuals are actually working these minimum hours. The county has never performed its statutory obligation fe conduct these audits. Eighteen present members of the county board RECYCLED PAPER * SOYBEAN INKSsigned affidavits that they are eligible for IMRF and have worked the 1,000 hours although there is no evidence that they have done so, The county has not verified these hours nor have they conducted an audit. Attached are affidavits signed by county board members, along with FOIA responses evidencing that no statutory audits were conducted ‘Some county board members in'2016 attended meetings totaling as little as 73 hours: None of the individuals who claimed IMRF benefits even reached 200 hours between a combination of committee and county board meetings. Some county board members have missed over 30% of the meetings and others call in for meetings remotely while being absent from the county for months at a time. Other county board members work full time in other public jobs, while simultaneously claiming full time employment with their county board position. Those that falsely sign those affidavits to become pension eligible, have stolen from the taxpayers and may have committed a crime, perhaps a Class 3 Felony, as evidenced by their swom affidavits. If they have not met the statutory requirements, they must not only be removed from the pension system but also pay back all money paid! in on their behalf. They also must answer to law enforcement. \We balieve thai there is enough evidence to show that there is potential criminal activity or at the very least civil liability for many of the county board members. Since the State's Attorney is also the county board's attorney, we know that you have a conflict of interest and could not investigate this matter. We therefore request that you petition the court to appoint a special prosecutor or have an appellate prosecutor appointed to do a full investigation of the questions raised by those county board members claiming IMRF benefits. Hook forward to your reply.