Chicago Sun Times Editorial - Snowball's chance in hell for county hiring freeze?

Chicago Sun Times Editorial - Snowball's chance in hell for county hiring freeze?
Copyright by The Chicago Sun Times
August 30, 2006


Most of us, when we hear about how such-and-such business or government has instituted a hiring freeze, no doubt think that means a freeze on hiring. As in, hiring is frozen. As in, nobody's getting hired. In the topsy-turvy world of Cook County government, however, a hiring freeze appears to have an entirely different meaning. This summer, in the midst of the succession follies that followed former President John Stroger's stroke, it meant load up the payroll.

Sun-Times reporter Steve Patterson on Sunday documented how nearly 1,648 people have been hired this year -- nearly 1,300 of them after Stroger suffered his stroke in March -- all at a time when the county supposedly had a hiring freeze in place. We are assured by the county's director of communications, one of the new hires, that this does not constitute an unusual spike in hiring. That statement in itself is unsettling, because a spike in hiring -- unusual or not -- is the last thing you should see during a hiring freeze.

Remember, the idea for the freeze is to save money. We're trying to save money because the county's finances are in a mess. And the county's finances are in a mess in part because the payroll is bloated. So bloating it some more would appear to be a bit counterproductive, wouldn't it? Those 1,648 positions are costing the county $41 million this year -- a sizable chunk of money, considering there's an $80 million hole in this year's budget and a $300 million hole in next year's.

Officials said that the county is filling only "critical positions." They also say the freeze is being lifted only for public safety and health. We concede that some of the hires are justified. Sheriff Michael Sheahan, whose office filled about a quarter of all new positions, was ordered to add more jail guards, and some of the new workers are replacements for people in key positions.

But hundreds of the new hires are outside the public safety and health areas. Some are politically connected, such as Stroger's campaign manager, such as the sister of Commissioner Joseph Mario Moreno and such as the daughter of James Whigham, Stroger's chief of staff. Whigham, remember, was the man who apparently ran the day-day-day county operations after Stroger was incapacitated. He's upset anyone would think he had something to do with his daughter getting a county job.

The hiring frenzy shows that county officials -- not enough of them, anyway -- still don't recognize the rough financial waters they are in. Bobbie Steele, the county's caretaker president, seems to be coming around, saying Sunday she's "uncomfortable" about the explanations given for some of the new hires and issuing an executive order Tuesday "prohibiting political patronage in hiring." But even she had a chance to set an example -- by axing Stroger's patronage chief -- and she blew it. She admitted she couldn't figure out what Gerald Nichols was doing to earn his $114,000 annual salary but then she simply transferred him to an office upstairs, where he's still getting paid.

And Cook County is already supposed to have a ban on patronage in place. A federal court order, the result of a 1969 lawsuit filed by attorney Michael Shakman, applies to the county, prohibiting employees from being hired or fired for political reasons. Even before then, Stroger had agreed to abide by the ban. Somehow, however, patronage hasn't been snuffed out but in fact is alive and well.

Recent investigative reports in the Sun-Times, in fact, prompted Shakman to return to federal court this week to request the appointment of a monitor to oversee all hiring in Cook County government. That would unfortunately cost the county more money, but it's necessary because the county appears incapable of monitoring itself. "It has become clear that . . . Cook County has engaged in substantial, illegal patronage hiring and promotion of nonexempt employees in violation of the judgment," Shakman said in court papers.

So we have a hiring freeze that's not really frozen -- it's kind of slushy, at best. We have a ban on political hiring that isn't so much a ban as it is an extra hoop to jump through before hiring someone with clout. It would be nice if the county's fiscal probl