CHICAGO – Crane oiler Terry Deets deserves a trial on his claim that his skin color cost him a job on the Stan Musial Bridge project, Seventh Circuit appellate judges ruled last month.

They rebuked and reversed District Judge Nancy Rosenstengel of East St. Louis, who granted summary judgment against Deets.

The judges identified four pieces of evidence that should have allowed Rosenstengel to conclude that discrimination lay behind the adverse action against Deets.

In 2012, Deets’s union referred him to a joint venture of three companies holding the contract to build the bridge.

On May 9, 2012, the joint venture hired him to fuel, oil and grease a Manitowoc 2250 crane.

The joint venture laid him off on May 17, and recalled him on May 29.

On June 20, the joint venture transferred him to a Liebherr crane.

The Liebherr crane began to run out of material in July, and project superintendent John Todt expected that he would shut it down.

On July 5, at Todt’s request, Deets agreed to work on a Tower crane for two weeks while its oiler took a vacation.

On July 17, a day before the Tower oiler would return, Todt told Deets he would be laid off at the end of the day.

According to Deets, Todt said, “My minority numbers aren’t right. I’m supposed to have 13 point nine percent minorities on this job and I’ve only got eight percent.”

According to Deets, pier superintendent Jim Rogier told him he was “sorry to hear about this minority thing.”

On July 18, Todt hired a minority person to work on the Liebherr crane.

After his layoff, Deets rotated through short term assignments until the joint venture terminated him in December 2012.

In 2013, Deets sued Massman Construction, Alberici Constructors, Traylor Brothers Inc., and their joint venture, MTA.

His lawyer, Uchenna Asonye of Chicago, wrote that they laid him off “for no other reason than to create a position for an individual based on their minority status.”

He sought lost wages, back pay, front pay, lost benefits, compensatory damages and punitive damages.

Todt denied telling Deets that minority numbers were the reason for his layoff.

Todt said Deets could not claim seniority on the Liebherr crane because it was out of service more than a week.

In June 2014, Rosenstengel set trial for the following February.

Defendants moved for summary judgment in September 2014, claiming Deets offered no evidence of intentional discrimination.

They argued that even if Todt mentioned minority numbers, his statement related to the hiring of a minority oiler rather than the firing of Deets.

Rosenstengel agreed, and she granted summary judgment in January 2015.

In order to accept Deets’s view, “we must assume that Todt is referring to Deets’s termination and not to the practicality of his hiring,” she wrote.

“In fact, Todt’s statement would be entirely consistent with a response to Deets’s concern about further work.

“Rogier’s statement is no different. His alleged apology about the ‘minority issue’ requires assumption for the same reason.”

She wrote that the context and timing of the statements precisely illustrated that they were aimed at hiring and not at Deets’s termination, and that the decision to hire a minority oiler was made before the decision to terminate Deets.

“Any reference to ‘minority numbers’ with respect to a hiring decision would in no way be suspicious, given MTA’s affirmative action obligations,” she wrote.

“If MTA’s minority numbers were in fact low, a minority worker had to be requested from the union to fill any needed positions.

“As such, the probability for Deets being rehired was low.”

She wrote that sporadic employment is normal in construction.

Seventh Circuit judges ripped Rosentsengel’s decision to shreds.

Justice Ann Williams wrote, “Based on Todt’s statement, it does not take any inference to conclude that Deets was laid off because he was not a minority.”

“That race was the factor that led to Deets’s termination is clear on the face of Todt’s statement,” Williams wrote.

“It is possible that a jury would credit Todt’s denial that he ever made that statement, but that credibility determination may not be resolved at summary judgment.

“We are puzzled by the district court’s conclusion that Todt’s statement related directly to his decision not to rehire Deets rather than his decision to terminate Deets.”

She wrote that Deets lost seniority on the Liebherr machine before it went out of service.

“But just because Deets was not entitled to that position does not permit MTA to lay him off because of his race,” Williams wrote.

She wrote that Deets assembled sufficient evidence of discrimination; there were the alleged statements of Todt and Rogier; Todt knew MTA had been out of compliance with its minority goals for three weeks; and MTA hired a minority worker a day after terminating Deets.

“Finally, Deets offered evidence that Todt’s explanation for his layoff – lack of work – was pretextual because he likely knew that the Liebherr crane was going back into service the next day at the time he fired Deets,” Williams wrote.

Chief Justice Diane Wood and Justice Richard Posner concurred.

Rosenstengel received the Seventh Circuit’s mandate on Feb. 25, and she set a status conference on March 14.

Three of four judicial candidates seeking a seat at the Fifth District Appellate Court have been rated highly qualified by evaluators of the Illinois State Bar Association (ISBA).

But Madison County Circuit Judge John Barberis received a "not qualified" rating, according to results released on Friday. Barberis seeks the Republican nomination to the vacancy created by Justice Bruce Stewart who retires in December. 

Barberis said he was "very disappointed" in the results, but not surprised by them.

He called into question the integrity of the evaluation process, which included a panel of eight ISBA members interviewing him in early February. He said the hour-long interview seemed to go well, and he was given positive feedback on what the ISBA learned about him during 40 hours of investigation conducted beforehand.

When he learned about two weeks ago that he was neither going to get rated "highly qualified" or "qualified," he said the lack of endorsement wasn't the "main reason" he was disappointed. 

It was that one of the panel members who interviewed him was an appointed official from Madison County whom Barberis did not support for re-appointment, he said. 

"The only question he (the official) asked was whether I was going to get financed by Bruce Rauner," Barberis said. "How that has any bearing on my ability to be an appellate judge...It was very, very inappropriate to ask that."

Barberis said he didn't believe the Madison County official whom he didn't vote to re-appoint should have sat on the panel.

"He should have recused himself," Barberis said. 

Barberis said he answered the question about Rauner financing his campaign, by saying, "You need to ask Bruce Rauner."

Barberis said "rumors and speculation" about Rauner support were rampant months ago when the governor dove hunted at his property. 

"We didn't much discuss politics," Barberis said of the occasion. 

"If he plans on supporting my campaign, I'd certainly be happy to have it."

As of Feb. 29, Barberis had not yet created a finance committee for his appellate court campaign. He also did not organize one during his 2014 campaign for circuit judge, having self-funded with approximately $5,000. 

He faces no opposition in the March 15 primary. In the November general election, he will face Williamson County Circuit Judge Brad Bleyer, a Democrat.

After Barberis received a rating of 23.60 in the 2014 ISBA advisory poll and the accompanying "not recommended" evaluation in his race against Madison County Associate Judge Clarence Harrison - a Democrat who was "recommended" - Barberis then, as now, shrugged off the poll as a "political statement."

In spite of spending a small fraction of what Harrison's campaign spent ($112,117), Barberis won the 2014 election by a margin of 54 to 46 percent.

Barberis said he believes the evaluation and polling process is a "tool the Democratic party uses to undermine respect for Republican candidates." 

In the other vacancy created by the retirement of Justice James Wexstten, appointed Justice James "Randy" Moore is running unopposed in the primary as a Republican and Jefferson County Circuit Judge Jo Beth Weber is running unopposed as a Democrat. 

The candidates who were evaluated by members of the ISBA Judicial Evaluations Committee, underwent a comprehensive review, according to the ISBA. It further states:

"This involves a detailed background investigation by members of the ISBA Judicial Evaluations Committee, followed by an in-person interview of the candidate. The Committee then decides whether to rate the candidate Qualified, Highly Qualified or Not Qualified for the judicial office being sought. Ratings based on evaluations are the opinion of the Illinois State Bar Association."

ISBA evaluation narratives

"Judge Brad Bleyer has served as the circuit judge in Williamson County since 2004. He presides primarily over the civil division, although he has served in all divisions of the circuit court. A graduate of Southern Illinois University, he came to the bench after an extensive career as a trial attorney that spanned approximately 20 years. Prior to his career as an attorney he was a teacher and coached youth sports. Judge Bleyer is a native of Williamson County and enjoys a reputation among lawyers as being an impartial and fair jurist who manages his docket efficiently. 

"Justice James 'Randy' Moore was appointed to the Fifth District Appellate Court in December 2014 by the Illinois Supreme Court. Prior to his appointment, he served as a circuit court judge in the First Judicial Circuit, Williamson County, where he presided over a variety of cases. He has served as a circuit court judge since 2007. Before serving as a judge, he was a solo practitioner in Carterville, Williamson County. He also served as a city attorney for Carbondale, Illinois. He received his undergraduate and law degrees from Southern Illinois University.

"Judge Jo Beth Weber has served as the resident circuit judge in Mount Vernon, Jefferson County, since 2012. As a judge, she founded the Jefferson County drug and youth courts, and presides over a variety of cases. She also provides oversight of the courthouse and has led efforts to modernize the courtrooms. Before becoming a judge, she served as a Deputy in the Illinois State Appellate Defender’s office, Associate General Counsel at Southern Illinois University, law clerk to four different appellate justices in the Fifth District, an attorney for the Illinois State’s Attorneys Appellate Prosecutor, and briefly served as an associate in a general practice law firm. Judge Weber is a native of Mount Vernon, having received her undergraduate and law degrees from the University of Illinois. Judge Weber actively serves the Mount Vernon community in various roles."

Four law organizations came together to honor public and private sector leaders with the "Award of Exemplary Professional Service," including Illinois Chief Justice Rita Garman.

A dinner was held Feb. 25 at the Standard Club in Chicago and about 180 people attended. It was hosted by the John Marshall Law School, Illinois State Bar Association, Illinois Judges Association, and the Justinian Society of Lawyers.

Others honored were Illinois Secretary of State Jesse White and senior advisor to the University of Chicago president and former assistant to President Obama and chief of staff to First Lady Michelle Obama, Susan Sher.

“The idea was to honor people who have provided distinguished service over the course of their careers to both the legal system and to the public,” Bob Anderson, 18th Judicial Circuit Court Judge in DuPage County and current president of the Illinois Judges Association told the Record.

Garman was chosen as one of the honorees due to both the length and the content of her career, he said. She has served in the judicial system for more than 40 years. Anderson, who said he knows Garman both personally and professionally, gave a speech about her accomplishments and presented her with the award.

In his speech, Anderson described Garman as “a woman of many firsts and a couple of seconds.”

Garman was valedictorian of Oswego High School in 1961, graduated from the University of Illinois with a bachelor of science in economics and highest honors in 1965, and earned her juris doctor degree with distinction from the University of Iowa College of Law in 1968.

Despite her academic success, her professional ambitions were met with incredulity by her male counterparts. For instance, some of her professors told her that she was only at school to "catch" a husband, Anderson said in his speech.

After graduation, she had trouble finding a job, but eventually became assistant State’s Attorney in Vermilion County, where she served from 1969 to 1973. She entered private practice as a partner with Sebat, Swanson, Banks, Lessen and Garman and served as an associate circuit judge for 12 years.

She was the first woman ever selected as an associate judge in the 5th circuit and went on to become the first presiding circuit judge in 1987. In July of 1995 she became the first woman to serve on the district appellate court for the Fourth District.

After her appointment to the Illinois Supreme Court in 2001, as the second woman ever to hold the role, Garman targeted her focus on children and families. She set out to make divorces less acrimonious and less traumatic for children.

She served on the committee on child custody for the Supreme Court which developed the 900 series rules that govern custody cases.

“The result of these rules have caused there to be fewer contested custody trials,” Anderson said. This makes life easier for the children of divorcing parents.

Garman is the longest serving woman judge in the state of Illinois and the only one to hold positions at every possible level.

“Chief Justice Garman exemplifies the best that the Illinois judiciary has and we are extremely proud of her efforts on behalf of the Illinois citizens, Illinois lawyers and the Illinois judiciary,” ISBA President Umberto S. Davi told the Record. “Her advancements and accomplishments since she first studied law are something that all of us should be proud of and should strive to emulate.”

A fraud case concerning the construction of the Metro East Forensics Laboratory in Fairview Heights is at trial this week in Madison County Circuit Judge Barbara Crowder’s court.

The two-count complaint alleges separate claims of fraudulent misrepresentation for false applications for payment and an altered stored material log.

Contegra Construction Company LLC filed the lawsuit against Robert Sutphen on Jan. 17, 2013.

The plaintiff claims Sutphen misrepresented the amount of work his company was performing on steel fabrication for the project, which caused Contegra to overpay.

Contegra also claims Sutphen altered the stored material log, which prevented the plaintiff from retrieving all of the steel it paid for after Sutphen’s employer, Advance Iron Works, or AIW, filed for bankruptcy.

Sutphen denies the allegations.

Contegra is represented in the case by Nicholas Garzia and Christopher Baucom of Armstrong Teasdale in St. Louis and Alan Napp of Schrempf, Kelly, Napp & Darr in Alton.

Sutphen is represented by Edward Moor of the Moor Law Office in Chicago.

In its complaint, Contegra explains that it was the general contractor on the Metro East Forensics Lap public works project for the State of Illinois by the Capital Development Board, or CDB, which is a three-story steel-framed structure. The facility is intended to house a crime laboratory for the Illinois State Police.

Contegra and AIW entered into a contract requiring AIW to fabricate and deliver structured steel. Contegra says the contract was executed by Sutphen, as vice president of AIW, who was the sole representative of AIW during negotiations with the plaintiff.

According to the contract, Contegra was to pay $1,283,490, which was later increased to $1,369,735.

Contegra agreed to pre-pay AIW for raw steel. And AIW was required to complete a stored material log, present the materials for inspection and certification by the architect, request the architect to also execute a stored material log and acknowledge transfer of title of the materials referenced in the log to the State of Illinois.

Sutphen allegedly executed a proper stored material log for the project through Jan. 20, 2012, and then created a similar log for the pay period of Jan. 21, 2012, through Feb. 23, 2012, but omitted the Transfer of Title Provision.

Contegra claims Sutphen failed to inform the plaintiff of its removal of the Transfer of Title Provision, and Contegra ended up submitted the altered stored material log to the CDB.

Sutphen also allegedly submitted periodic applications for payment, requesting progress payments based on a “schedule of values” for a portion of what was allocated to various categories of work for the project.

Contegra explained that the parties first agreed to assign a dollar value for total fabricated steel on the project, then Sutphen was to inform Contegra of the percentage of that value by applying the actual percentage completion of the fabricated structural steel compared to the total tonnage of fabricated steel required under the contract.

Sutphen allegedly prepared and executed each application for payment.

As of late October 2012, Contegra had paid AIW $881,500, or 64 percent, of the adjusted contract lump-sum. 

However, the structural steel fabricated as of late October 2012 was significantly less than a third of the total steel project and not enough steel to begin erection of the first floor of the three-story project.

The fabrication shop drawings reveal that the total structural steel tonnage required under the contract is 569 tons or more, meaning Sutphen “grossly” understated the total tonnage in the formula used to calculate progress payments, the suit states.

As of late October 2012, AIW had fabricated only 257 tons of structured steel, which has a value of $536,490.

But Contegra paid $793,500, overpaying AIW by $257,009.

As a result, Contegra rejected AIW’s applications for further payment until AIW fabricated and made sufficient steel ready for delivery with the percentage AIW had already been paid.

Contegra alleges Sutphen refused to allow the plaintiff to review the fabrication shop drawings to verify the total steel tonnage used by the defendant to calculate payment applications.

“In the application for progress payments, defendant manipulated the percentage of the structural steel value for which it was entitled to payment by both inflating the amount of fabricated steel and grossly underestimating the total structural steel tonnages for the project.

“Simultaneously, defendant overstated the tonnage of fabricated structural steel in payment applications by including stairs, metal decking and other miscellaneous non-structural steel,” the suit states.

Contegra alleges Sutphen refused to adjust his calculation of payment applications to reflect a proper total structural steel tonnage for the project and refused to deliver critical steel pieces for the job.

Further, AIW allegedly refused to deliver fabricated steel required for the project until Contegra agreed to pay AIW’s applications for payment in full, including the amounts in dispute.

As a result of the dispute, the project’s construction was halted in November 2012.

Then on Nov. 20, 2012, AIW filed a voluntary petition under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Illinois.

At the time, AIW had approximately 95 tons of unfabricated steel at its facility. But because the Transfer of Title Provision was not included in the altered stored material log, the remaining steel cannot be transferred to the CDB and may not be integrated into the project.

The replacement cost to Contegra of the remaining raw steel at AIW’s facility is roughly $100,000, the plaintiff alleges.

“Contegra will not be entitled to reimbursement from the CDB to replace the Remaining Unfabricated Steel because the CDB has already paid Contegra, and Contegra has already paid AIW for the Remaining Unfabricated Steel currently in AIW’s yard,” the suit states.

In his amended affirmative defenses filed Feb. 26, Sutphen argues that the claims are precluded by the doctrine of res judicata.

He alleges that one month before this case was filed, Contegra filed identical claims against AIW in an adversary proceeding in AIW’s bankruptcy case on Dec. 18, 2012. He says Counts I and II in this action are identical to Counts III and IV of the bankruptcy case, the only difference being the defendants named in the claims.

Because Sutphen was an officer, director and majority shareholder of AIW, he says he is in privity with AIW for purposes of res judicata.

On April 19, 2013, the counts at issue in the bankruptcy case were nonsuited with prejudice.

Therefore, Sutphen argues that dismissal is proper here.

Contegra seeks a judgment of no less than $50,000 for each of the two counts of fraudulent misrepresentation.

Madison County Circuit Court case number 13-L-82

A national organization that seeks to promote limited government, lower taxes and more freedom has weighed in on an upcoming ballot initiative in the small, yet lately controversial, village of Cahokia.

Americans for Prosperity (AFP) is encouraging residents of the Parkfield Terrace neighborhood in unincorporated Cahokia to vote "no" on an annexation proposal that will appear as a referendum item on the March 15 ballot.

Andrew Nelms, deputy director for the Illinois division of AFP, said that if residents approve annexation, it would increase their property tax by approximately 38 percent.

The move to annex Parkfield Terrace has been criticized as being purely political in order to regain Democrat votes believed to be defecting to the Republican party, following a change in village administration last year.

Nelms said his organization analyzes all tax-related referenda that go before voters so that it can offer an opinion. In the upcoming primary election, the Cahokia annexation proposal is one of 120 facing Illinois voters.

But when Nelms went looking for answers from Cahokia, he said that he "never before, after reviewing some 700 tax referenda" ran into as much resistance getting "basic public information" as when he asked questions about the Parkfield Terrace annexation.

Nelms said that he called the village to ask for a per-household calculation of the tax impact, but would not get his calls returned.

He said he often doesn't need to place calls to entities seeking tax increases because searches can be done on their websites, which sometimes provide tax impact calculators.

"I couldn't do it (for Cahokia)," he said. "They took down their website."

Nelms was told he had to submit a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, he said, which he called "highly irregular."

In the FOIA request he submitted, he also asked for any communication between village staff, elected or appointed officials regarding the proposed annexation.

The eventual response - that the village "has no such documents" other than his email to Clerk Duncan and no information about the tax impact - came from an attorney from another firm other than village attorney Robert Sprague.

He said that he was also told that if he wanted to know the financial impact of the referendum, he would need to ask the county Assessor's office.

"I called a gal and she said, 'I have no idea why they would refer you to me,'" he said.

Nelms said it was the County Clerk's office which helped him determine that the average market equalized assessed valuation (EAV) in the proposed annexation area was $33,000.

"Those folks currently pay about $745 in total property tax," he said. "With the addition of the village levy their tax would go up $281.38 per year, a 38 percent increase."

Nelms said that if he was a "regular person" who did not have time to make phone calls during the work day, "I'd have no shot" at finding out how much it was going to cost.

Village clerk Richard Duncan was contacted for comment, but he had not returned a call by press time.

Voters in the five-county Twentieth Judicial Circuit have another judicial candidate scorecard to consider - one that runs counter to a poll released last week by the state bar organization.

The Illinois Civil Justice League (ICJL) says it is not recommending Judges John Baricevic, Robert LeChien and Robert Haida who seek election to their self-created vacancies, as they have "purposefully gamed the system."

The judges opted not to run for retention which requires 60 percent voter approval on a non-partisan ballot in the general election. Instead, the judges resigned their seats which they now seek election to on a partisan ballot - Democratic - that only requires a simple majority to win. Their candidacies are being challenged in court.

John Pastuovic, president of the ICJL, stated that the judges knew they faced an "uphill battle" in a retention race.

"Instead of running for retention, they subverted the process by turning in their resignations effective Dec. 4 and filed as candidates in the March 15 primary, where they would only need a simple majority to win,” stated Pastuovic in a press release issued today announcing results of its evaluation.

"While none of these three judges have primaries, it is critical that voters in St. Clair County are aware that with this maneuver, these judges ignored the intent and spirit of the Illinois Constitution and are deemed Not Recommended," he said. "Moreover, their behavior is just another example of why Illinois must reform its civil justice system."

The ICJL states that its review process for judges and judicial candidates running in the March 15 primary, is "the most complete and comprehensive voter education initiative of its kind, designed to assist voters in making informed decisions about the judicial candidates on their ballot."

The review included evaluating answers to questionnaires sent to candidates, as well as examining their judicial and career records, media accounts, bar ratings, campaign contributions, and other sources of information about each judge and judicial candidate to establish individual ratings.

None of the judicial candidates seeking seats at the Twentieth Judicial Circuit responded to the ICJL's questionnaire, Pastuovic said, including two Republican challengers to the seats being sought by Baricevic and LeChien.

If the court challenge to the candidacies of Baricevic, LeChien and Haida does not succeed in removing their names from the ballot, Ron Duebbert of Belleville will face Baricevic and Laninya Cason of East St. Louis will face LeChien in the general election.

Baricevic is running for the Haida vacancy, rather than his own, which is a circuit wide seat. The Twentieth Judicial Circuit includes St. Clair, Monroe, Perry, Randolph and Washington counties.

Lechien is seeking election to the seat he vacated - a resident circuit seat, which means only voters in St. Clair County will vote. Had LeChien run for retention, though, his name would have appeared on the general election ballot in all counties in the circuit.

The ICJL's review of candidates is an initiative it calls, "Judges: Good and Bad-You Can’t Afford to be Indifferent."

Its review stands in sharp contrast to the Illinois State Bar Association advisory poll released on Feb. 26, which recommends Baricevic, Haida and LeChien. The poll gave "not recommended" ratings for Duebbert and Cason.

The ISBA advisory poll is conducted by mail with ballots sent to all ISBA members in the circuit or district from which a candidate seeks election (except Cook County). Licensed attorneys who are not members of the ISBA, or any attorney outside the circuit or district, may request a ballot. Attorneys are asked to respond only if they have sufficient knowledge about the candidate’s qualifications for judicial office to give a fair, informed opinion.

Critics of the ISBA judicial evaluation process have said it favors Democrat candidates.

Madison County Circuit Judge John Barberis, a candidate for the Fifth District Appellate Court who was rated "not qualified" by a panel of ISBA members, said the review process is a "tool the Democratic party uses to undermine respect for Republican candidates."

In its release, the ICJL’s ratings focused primarily on judges and judicial candidates for Cook County circuits and subcircuits.

Pastuovic said party affiliation had nothing to do with its evaluations. All of the candidates and judges it endorsed in its press release are Democrats.

He said they were "quality candidates with really good records."

For Cook County Circuit Judge

Biebel Vacancy: Fitzgerald Lyke (D) – Recommended

Elrod Vacancy: Rossana Patricia Fernandez (D) – Highly Recommended

Hogan Vacancy: Alison Conlon (D) – Highly Recommended

Johnson Vacancy: Carolyn Gallagher (D) – Highly Recommended

Karnezis Vacancy: Devlin Schoop (D) – Highly Recommended

O’Brien Vacancy: Maureen O’Donoghue Hannon (D) – Recommended

Palmer Vacancy: Pat Heneghan (D) – Recommended

Ruscitti Grussel Vacancy: Daniel Patrick Duffy (D) – Highly Recommended

Walsh Vacancy: Frederick Bates (D) – Recommended

Walsh Vacancy: Patrick Powers (D) – Recommended

For Cook County Subcircuit Judge

Brim Vacancy – 1st Subcircuit: Maryam Ahmad (D) – Recommended

Savage Vacancy – 2nd Subcircuit: Chelsey Robinson (D) – Recommended

Eadie-Daniels Vacancy – 5th Subcircuit: Leonard Murray (D) – Recommended

Santiago Vacancy – 6th Subcircuit: Richard Cooke (D) – No Position

Rivkin-Carothers Vacancy – 7th Subcircuit: Rose Silva (D) – Recommended

Rivkin-Carothers Vacancy – 7th Subcircuit: Mable Taylor (D) – Recommended

Howard Vacancy – 10th Subcircuit: Colleen Reardon Daly (D) – Recommended

Howard Vacancy – 10th Subcircuit: Rick Cenar (D) – Highly Recommended

Kazmierski Vacancy – 12th Subcircuit: Louis Apostol (D) – Recommended

For Downstate Circuit Judge

14th Circuit (Rock Island County): Kathleen Mesich (D) – Recommended

20th Circuit (Circuitwide): John Baricevic (D) – Not Recommended

20th Circuit (Circuitwide): Robert Haida (D) – Not Recommended

20th Circuit (St. Clair County): Robert LeChien (D) – Not Recommended

Former O'Fallon Township High School Superintendent Russell Clover who earns $185,465 in retirement is among the highest paid beneficiaries of the Teachers Retirement System (TRS), according to the Taxpayers United of America (TUA).

The TUA on Wednesday released results of its updated analysis of the state's educator pension system, including the top 200 pension payees.

Clover, who lands near the bottom of the list in the 197th spot, retired in 2006. So far he has collected $1,387,769 in pension benefits, according to the TUA.

He contributed $189,621 into TRS over the course of his 35-year career, and earned $192,369 as his final salary.

If he lives to age 85, he will have collected $4,556,681 in tax-payer funded benefits, says the TUA.

“In forty years of fighting government fraud, waste and abuse, nothing compares to the Illinois Teachers’ Retirement System (TRS),” stated Jim Tobin, TUA president.

“This group of government employees use our children as pawns in their demand for higher wages and benefits and yet there is no accountability, no measure of what makes a good teacher, and no way to get rid of the bad ones."

Tobin said that all of the annual pensions on the TRS top 200 list are greater than $185,000.

“Illinois overpays its teachers in the classroom and in retirement," he said. "80 percent of all of those property tax increases, home rule taxes, and burdensome local fines go to fund government employee salaries and benefits. Clearly, it is not for the children."

The TUA analyzes all Illinois public pension funds. Late last month, it pointed to conflicts of interest in its harsh criticism of the Judicial Retirement System.

Regarding the teachers retirement program, the TUA found:

· The total number of TRS pension beneficiaries is approximately 114,434

· 8,507 collect pensions in excess of $100,000

· 56,717 collect pensions in excess of $50,000

· The average annual TRS pension is $52,752

· The average amount that employees contributed to their own pension fund is $74,470, or 4.1 percent of estimated lifetime pension payout

· The average estimated lifetime payout is $1.5 million (based on life expectancy of age 85)

· The average age at retirement is 58

· The average years of employment are 27

· In fiscal year 2015, taxpayer contributions to the fund were $3,523,256,530

· In fiscal year 2015, teachers’ contribution to their own pension fund was $935,451,049

· The net return on investment for TRS was only 4 percent, or $1,770,549,533

· As of the end of fiscal year 2015, TRS had a 42 percent funded ratio with a $62 billion unfunded liability

“These are not poor civil servants," Tobin stated.

He said the average Illinois government teacher salary is $69,538, an average which includes part-time teachers.

Tobin also said that nearly half of the top 200 TRS pensioners collect more in retirement than their final salary while employed.

“Consistent with our findings of JRS and GARS (General Assembly Retirement System), taxpayers have already paid more than their fair share of retirement benefits for these government teachers," he said.

"Taxpayers made their payments on time and in good faith and yet these government employees expect us to pay again, and again.”

According to TRS data analyzed by the Chicago Tribune in May 2015, O'Fallon Township High School District 203 has been assessed $69,389.92 in penalties for violating a 2005 law intended to restrict salary increases above 6 percent to retiring educators.

The Belleville News-Democrat later reported in June 2015 that about half of the penalty amount - or nearly $35,000 - was due to Clover's retirement. He was paid for unused vacation time, which in effect raised his salary above 6 percent, the paper reported.