Copyright 2024 All Rights Reserved.

June 15, 2024

Joliet Township – Elected official’s compensation in violation of law – Part V

By Kirk Allen & John Kraft

On November 12, 2019

Will Co. (ECWd)-

For those new to the series on Joliet Township, we encourage you to start reading from the beginning to grasp the magnitude of malfeasance taking place in the Joliet Township government.   CBS coverage, Carefully chosen words, Part II, Part III, and Part IV.

As part of our first Freedom of Information Act request, we asked for a copy of the approved compensation setting resolution.  This resolution is a contract with the people, and elected officials can only receive the compensation established in that resolution.

The applicable law for Compensation of Township Officers:

(60 ILCS 1/65-20)
    Sec. 65-20. Road district treasurer; new township; multi-township officers.
    (a) Compensation of township officers shall be set by the township board at least 180 days before the beginning of the terms of officers, including compensation of the road district treasurer, which shall be not less than $100 or more than $1,000 per year. Compensation of a township assessor and collector shall be set at the same time as the compensation of the township supervisor. Compensation of a multi-township assessor shall be set at least 150 days before his or her election.

The Compensation Resolution adopted by the Township is crystal clear, however, what is also crystal clear is that elected officials of Joliet Township are receiving additional benefits not authorized in the resolution and such receipt of those benefits conflicts with the Illinois State Constitution.

Under Article VII Section 9b of our State Constitution, it outlines additional limits on the compensation of elected officials.

“(b)  An increase or decrease in the salary of an elected officer of any unit of local government shall not take effect during the term for which that officer is elected. (Source: Illinois Constitution.)”

As can be seen in the required publication of compensation, the Supervisor, Clerk, Assessor, and former Highway Commissioner all receive Life Insurance and Accidental Death, of which neither qualify as Health Insurance, the only insurance authorized in the compensation setting resolution. Such receipt of benefits not authorized appears to constitute an increase in the salary (compensation) of those officials.

Most telling on this matter is the response from the Accountant during the first meeting we attended.  She justified the Life Insurance as something all employees get, yet fails to address the fact all compensation for elected officials is set by the resolution which clearly does not include Life Insurance.  More concerning is the comment she makes about accidental death insurance.  She states that they would have to pay for that if they wanted it.

If we are to believe the elected officials are actually paying for their ADD coverage as stated by the accountant, then why on earth is it listed as part of their compensation on the required compensation disclosure?  They can’t have it both ways!

We have asked if these benefits are going to be terminated and have not recieved a response at time of publication.

Below is the video of the Accountants comments on this matter.



Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on print


  • Dave
    Posted at 12:46h, 12 November Reply

    The question is, was it willful ignorance or incompetence

  • Adam
    Posted at 06:37h, 13 November Reply

    That’s petty but what they shouldn’t be receiving is health insurance. You make a thousand dollars a year and get health insurance?

    • Kirk Allen
      Posted at 08:26h, 13 November Reply

      Not just health insurance but they even put the deductible on the back of the taxpayers!

Post A Comment