A court-appointed monitor of Cook County patronage is asking a federal judge to release her from her oversight duties, saying she believes the county’s government has undergone “profound transformation” in its employment practices and has a culture in place to keep politics from unduly influencing who gets county jobs and who doesn’t.
On Aug. 31, Shakman Compliance Administrator Mary Robinson put the request, through her attorney, Matthew Pryor, to Magistrate Judge Sidney Schenkier, of U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.
Robinson was appointed through the 1972 federal Shakman Decree, which bars Illinois agencies from letting politics improperly control government jobs. The decree is named after lawyers Michael Shakman and Paul Lurie, who lodged a class action suit in 1969 against the Democratic Organization of Cook County, the city of Chicago and various officeholders in an attempt to root out political favoritism.
Mary Robinson
| Robinson Law Group
There have been various court-appointed watchdogs since. Robinson and her compliance offices have been in place as part of a 2006 court order, supplementing the original decree because of continuing violations. Her offices are to keep an eye on the county board, as well as the affiliated agencies of Cook County Public Defender, the Cook County Health and Hospital Systems and Office of the Independent Inspector General. These three entities manage their own hiring outside the county board’s control, so are overseen separately from the board.
Robinson said that in the past dozen years, the county turned a corner.
“The County deserves considerable credit for having provided not only sufficient independence, but also adequate funding to allow these watchdog offices to perform their roles. Just as importantly, the individuals chosen to fill each role deserve considerable credit for constructing respected and effective operations,” Robinson observed.
Robinson went on to say she believes the county and the other agencies have implemented “robust policies and enforcement mechanisms” and “acted in good faith” to eradicate politically based employment decisions. Robinson added she has “full confidence” in the county’s ability to prevent “political discrimination.”
Robinson noted that although it is not possible to eliminate all questionable employment practices, the county is in “substantial compliance” with the 2006 order.
Cook County also filed a memorandum in support of Robinson’s request.
“Much work has been undertaken to change the mindset regarding political influence and
ongoing training is essential to maintaining this mindset and to achieve long-term success,” said Daniel Brennan Jr., of the Cook County State’s Attorney’s Office, in the memorandum.
As an example, Brennan pointed to an employment plan, which he said will remain in place after federal oversight is removed, to maintain “long-term prevention of unlawful political discrimination.”
Public notice of the proposal to end the oversight is to be published in the Chicago Tribune and Chicago Sun-Times on or before Sept. 21, with any objections to be filed by Oct. 12. The parties are asking for a court hearing Oct. 31.
The Shakman suit remains an open case, with Shakman’s interests represented by the Chicago firms of Locke Lord LLP and Miller, Shakman & Beem.